Theometer or Sectometer

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Theometer or Sectometer

(First conducted on the participants of my lectures at Oxford University in November 3-5, 2008)

© Edip Yuksel

Name: _________________________________________________

Email Address: __________________________________________

Phone: ______________________________________ Age: ______

Occupation: _____________________________________________

Nationality: _____________________________________________

Have you read the Manifesto for Islamic Reform? ______________

Favorite Books/Authors: ___________________________________

Your Sect: (a) Sunni (b) Shiite (c) Salafi (d) Another sect (d) No sect

Please put a CIRCLE around the letter of your choice:

1. According to the Quran, which one of these is not and cannot be idolized by people?

  1. Prophet Muhammad
  2. Desires or Wishful thinking (Hawa)
  3. Crowds or peers
  4. Ancestors or children
  5. Reasoning (Aql)

2. Which one of these is a true statement?

  1. The Quran is not sufficient to guide us; in addition we need Hadith and Sunna.
  2. The Quran is not sufficient to guide us; we need Hadith, Sunna and follow the teaching of a Sunni sect.
  3. The Quran is not sufficient to guide us; we need Hadith, Sunna and follow the teaching of a Shiite sect.
  4. The Quran is not sufficient to guide us; we need Hadith, Sunna, follow the teaching of a sect and join a religious order.
  5. The Quran is sufficient to guide us when we understand and follow it through the light of reason.

3. Which one of these hadiths narrated by Bukhari, Muslim and other “authentic” hadith books, do you think are fabricated?

  1. Muhammad was illiterate until he died.
  2. Muhammad married Aisha at age 54 while she was only 9 or 13 years-old.
  3. Muhammad dispatched a gang of fighters (sariyya) to kill a woman poet secretly during night in her home, for criticizing him publicly through her poems.
  4. Muhammad slaughtered 400 to 900 Jews belonging to Ben Qurayza for violating the treaty.
  5. All of the above.

4. Which one of these laws or rules does not exist in the Quran?

  1. Stone the married adulterers to death
  2. Do not play guitar
  3. Men should not wear silk and gold
  4. Men are superior to women
  5. All of the above

5. The Quran instructs us to follow the messengers. Following the messenger means:

  1. Follow Hadith and Sunna; Bukhari, Muslim, Ibn Hanbal, etc.
  2. Follow his Ahl-al-Bayt.
  3. Follow hadith, sunna, consensus of sahaba, ijtihad of imams and fatwas of ulama.
  4. Follow Muhammad.
  5. Follow the message he was sent with, which was Quran alone.

6. The Quran is God’s word, because:

  1. There are verses of the Quran stating that it is God’s word.
  2. The Quran is a literary miracle. None can bring a sura like it surpassing its literary qualities.
  3. I do not need to have a reason. Reason is not reliable. I have faith in the Quran.
  4. The moral teaching of the Quran is the best for individual and humanity.
  5. The Quranic signs (aya) do not have internal contradiction nor does it contradict the signs in nature. Besides, it is numerically coded book with an extraordinary mathematical structure integrated with its composition and Arabic language.

7. Which one of the following is correct for Muhammad:

  1. Muhammad was the final messenger and prophet.
  2. Muhammad had the highest rank above all humans.
  3. Muhammad demonstrated many miracles such as splitting the moon, healing the sick, and crippling a child
  4. All of the above´
  5. Muhammad was a human messenger like other messengers.

8. In what year he Bukhari started collecting hadith for his hadith collection known as the Sahih Bukhari, the most trusted Sunni hadith collection?

  1. During the life of Muhammad inMedina
  2. Ten years after Muhammad’s death.
  3. 130 years after Muhammad’s death.
  4. 200 years after Muhammad’s death
  5. 230 years after Muhammad’s death.

9. According to Bukhari himself, he collected the 7,275 hadith among the 600,000 hadiths he collected. If each hadith, together with its isnad (the chain of reporters) and sanad (the text that was attributed to Muhammad) took about half a book page, how many volumes of books with 500 pages would they take to record all those 600,000 hadith allegedly collected by Bukhari?

  1. 7 volumes
  2. 10 volumes
  3. 70 volumes
  4. 100 volumes
  5. 700 volumes

10. What are the last statements in the Farewell Sermon (Khutba al-Wada) which was reportedly witnessed by more than 100,000 sahaba, making it by far the most authentic hadith among the thousands of hadiths?

  1. I leave you Abu Bakr; you should follow him.
  2. I leave you my sahaba; you may follow any of them.
  3. I leave you the Quran and Sunna; you should follow both.
  4. I leave you the Quran and Ahl-al- Bayt (my family); you should follow them.
  5. I leave you the Quran, you should follow it.

11. According to some “authentic hadith” found in Bukhari and other hadith books, there was a verse instructing muslims to stone the married adulterers to death: “Al-shayhu wal-shayhatu iza zanaya farjumuhuma nakalan…” According to hadith reports, what happened to those verses?

  1. After the Prophet Muhammad’s death, Umayyad governor Marwan burned the pages where those verses were written.
  2. Angle Gebrail came down and deleted it from the scripture.
  3. Ibni Abbas forgot it yet Abu Hurayra never forgot it.
  4. There is no reference to such a verse in any authentic hadith books.
  5. After the Prophet Muhammad’s death, the skin which the verse was written on was protected under Aisha’s bed. A hungry goat ate it. Thus, it was abrogated literally yet kept legally.

12. According to both Bukhari and Muslim, when Muhammad was in his death bed, he asked his comrades around to bring him a paper and pen to write something for them so that they would not divert from the right path. According to the same “authentic” Sunni hadith books, Omar bin Khattab stopped a sahaba who was hurrying for a paper and pen and said the following: “The prophet is sick and has fever. He does not know what he is saying. God’s book is sufficient for us.” According to the hadith, all the prominent comrades (sahaba) agreed with Omar and Muhammad passed away without writing down his advice. What do you think about this hadith?

  1. If it is narrated by both Bukhari and Muslim, then it must be true
  2. If it is true, then, Omar and all other Sahaba must have betrayed Muhammad and committed blasphemy.
  3. If it is true, then, Omar and all prominent Sahaba were followers of the Quran alone.
  4. If it is false then all other hadith too should be rejected.
  5. C and D must be true

13. Do we need to SAY “sallallahu alayhi wasallam” after Muhammad’s name?

  1. Yes, every time Muhammad is mentioned we have to praise his name.
  2. Yes, but we need to say only once in our lifetime.
  3. Yes, the more we say the better.
  4. Yes, and those who do not say it after Muhammad’s name disrespect him and they will not receive his intercession.
  5. No, the Quran does not ask us to say anything after Muhammad’s name; muslims were asked (salli ala) to support him, as he was also asked to support them (salli alayhim).

14. What is the correct Testimony (shahada) according to the Quran:

  1. I bear witness that there is no god but the God and the Quran is God’s word.
  2. I bear witness that there is no god but the God and Muhammad is His messenger.
  3. I bear witness that there is no god but the God and Muhammad is His messenger and His servant.
  4. I bear witness that there is no god but the God and Abraham, Jesus, Moses and Muhammad are His messengers.
  5. I bear witness that there is no god but the God.

15. Should Muslims who do not observe daily prayers be beaten in public?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

16. Should Muslims who are caught for consuming alcohol for the fourth time be killed?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

17. Did the prophet give permission to kill women and children in the war?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

18. According to the Quran, are women banned from reading Quran and pray during their menstruation periods?

  1. Yes
  2. No.

19. In the daily Sala prayers, do you recite “attahiyyatu lillahi wassalawatu …. as salamu alayka ayyuhannabiyyu wa rahmatullahi wa barakatuhu”?

  1. Yes
  2. No

20. Does the Quran justify taxing Jewish and Christian population under Muslim authority with extra or different taxation called Jizya?

  1. Yes
  2. No.

21. Does the Quran instruct women to cover their hair?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

22. Are woman restricted from leading congregational prayers?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

23. Are women mentally and spiritually inferior to men?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

24. Does the Quran restrict women from initiating divorce?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

25. Is polygamy with previously unmarried women allowed?

  1. Yes, up to four women.
  2. No, polygamy is allowed only with the widows who have orphans.

26. Do pilgrims need to cast real stones at the devil?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

27. Is the black stone near Kaba holy?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

28. May a muslim own slaves?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

29. Is circumcision a required or encouraged practice in Islam?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

30. Should converts change their names to Arabic names?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

31. How much zaka charity one should give away?

  1. 2.5%
  2. As much as one can afford, without making themselves needy.

32. Are those who break their fast during Ramadan before the sunset required to fast 60 consecutive days as a punishment for not completing the day?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

33. Is leadership the right of Quraish tribe?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

34. Is drawing pictures or making three dimensional statutes a sin?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

35. Are there more dietary prohibitions besides pork, carcass, running blood, and animal dedicated to idolized names?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

36. Is displaying Muhammad’s name and the names of his closest companions next to God’s name in the mosques idol-worship?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

37. Did Muhammad advise some sick people to drink camel urine?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

38. Did Muhammad gauge people’s eyes with hot nails?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

39. After following the advice of Moses, did Muhammad, bargain with God about the number of prayers, lowering down from the impossible-to-observe 50 times a day to 5 times a day?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

40. Does Muhammad have the power of intercession?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

41. Was Muhammad sinless?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

42. Did God create the universe for the sake of Muhammad?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

43. Did Muhammad have sexual power of 30 males?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

44. Was Muhammad bewitched by a Jew?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

45. Do some verses of the Quran abrogate other verses?

  1. Yes.
  2. No.

Here is the story and the answer of this test:

Between November 3 and 10 of 2008, I traveled to UK and Turkey to deliver four lectures; first two at Oxford University, the third at Muslim Institute in London and the fourth one in Istanbul Book Fair. I had prepared a test containing 45 multiple choice questions just the night before my travel. I duplicated them on both sides of a single sheet and I distributed to the audience before the lecture… They were asked to write their name, age, occupation, email address, favorite authors, and their sectarian affiliation. It was a bit awkward to test an audience that consisted of students and professors at one of the world’s top universities. The multiple-choice test proved to be a powerful instrument to deliver the message of Islamic Reform under the light of the Quran. The correct answer for each multiple choice question was the E option, and for the Yes or No questions was the B option. So, it would take me a few seconds to evaluate the tests after they were returned to me.

The Sunni or Shiite test-takers found themselves in quagmire of contradiction with their own sectarian teachings. They learned that they were thirty, forty or even more than fifty percent infidels or heretics. Some of those who marked Sunni as their sectarian affiliation contradicted the Sunni teachings on most of the issues. According to their own confessed sects, their lives were worthless; they deserved to be killed! I did not let this mirror or sect-o-meter remain an individual experience; I publicly declared the overall results. Many got all answers correct, including Eric, a monotheist from Unitarian church who already had a copy of the Quran: a Reformist Translation in his possession. Eric knew the original message of islam better than all the mullahs and the so-called “ulama” combined.

If you have chosen the wrong option for any of the questions and you are wondering why you have contradicted the Quran, please visit and read the full version of the Manifesto for Islamic Reform. If you prefer to have it in a book form, you may order it by visiting

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Edip Yuksel’s Speech at European Parliament

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Edip Yuksel’s Speech
at European Parliament

7 June 2012

Below you will find the text and video of my speech at European Parliament in June 7, 2012. First time in my life, I made an obscene or insult gesture by showing my middle finger to the warmongers towards the end of the end of my speech:

“We are now using drones to assassinate people without trial, poor people who stand against our aggression and hegemony. The list of wars, covert operations and countries bombed by the USA-Inc, printed in 9 points Times Roman, single space, one line for each country, is five times longer than my middle finger. With Cognitive Dissonance every bloody list is possible!” 

The link to the youtube video is in the bottom of the text. I recommend you reading the submitted text to the conference before watching the video. I did not have sufficient time to share all in my speech. I received a few more minutes to list the solutions in the end of the panel, which is not in the video clip I posted on youtube.


Dear sisters and brothers, peace, salam, shalom, aşiti!

During my research on the Constitution of countries for a legal article I witnessed that the Turkish Constitution was the only constitution that contained an article, banning a language, the Kurdish language. The 1982 Turkish Constitution, ironically, referred to the “banned language” under the subtitle “Freedom of Expression.” Some resisted to this cultural genocide and some yielded and were assimilated. Unfortunately, I belong to the second group. I know, more or less 5 languages, and thanks to my Turkish brothers, my mother tongue is the poorest of all.

I know the evil of racism firsthand. I lost my brother, Metin Yüksel, to the cowardly bullets of Turkish nationalists. While in Turkish prison, I was put in the same ward with the murderers of my brother. And, one of them is now an elected member of Turkish National Congress.

I teach and lecture without reading from papers. It is boring, I know. But, knowing that I tend to wonder in details while talking, and knowing the time limitations I decided to share with you my thoughts and feelings by reading from the paper. Please bear with me and listen to me carefully.

I am not going to talk just about a massacre happened some years ago… I am not a good story teller and I think there is another way besides discussing the details of past atrocities followed by finger-pointing, since we are all criminals, we all contribute to the unfair, myopic, diabolic echo system that is doomed to generate this sorts of tragedies and even more. As long as we do not focus on the main causes, yes plural, of all conflicts, fights, and atrocities that is committed by our ancestors we will never be able to break the cycle. Remember we are the children of Cain, the children of the killers who survived, the children of winners, bullies.

But, I believe that we are in a threshold point in history, in which we cannot go beyond without destroying everyone including ourselves. We need to give support to the peacemaker gene of Abel and try our best to suppress the barbaric genetic code we have inherited from a portion of our bloody ancestors. It is time to use the software, the 19 rules of inference embedded in our brain, to do some reformation in our nature, in our-selves. We have to look at ourselves before pointing at the other.

I am not talking as a Kurd, or a Turk or an American or as a Lawyer here. I have decided to talk like my hero, Socrates. I know that I am far being in caliber of that great man, and also I know that the European Parliament is much better than the 501 jury members of the Athenian senate. Of course, I am not on trial, but I want to put myself as a member of humanity on a short trial here.

I will have a bad news first, which I will harp on it not to annoy you, like a gadfly, but to tickle your brain, your heart, and your consciousness. But I promise that it will follow with a few good news, very good ones, which might create a butterfly effect for a new era in global politics, starting from you, from this room.

In 1948 the United Nations issued Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide with19 articles. In the 2nd article it defines genocide as:

In the present Convention, genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:

  1. (a) Killing members of the group;
  2. (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
  3. (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
  4. (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group;
  5. (e) Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

Declaration of Human Rights, UN resolutions, International law…


Who cares about the laws? Not even those who drafted, dictated and passed the laws care about those laws!


Who cares about the laws?

Most countries are ruled by the children of Thrasymachus.

Long live Thrasymachus!

“Might makes it right”!

If we are the Exceptional Americans or the Chosen Ones in the Middle of Trouble of our own creation, why should we care about the laws? Neither the International Criminal Court can reach our exceptional people, nor can the UN resolutions stop our crimes. What happened to the war criminals of our decadent decade, such as Sharon, Bush, and his cabal, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Feith, Bolton, Perle?

Who cares about the laws?

Perhaps, only the poor, the weak has to follow the laws! No wonder, our justice system is designed to absolve and respect the biggest thieves while punishes mercilessly the hungry who steals bread to feed himself and his children.

WE HUMANS are HYPOCRITES and Suffer from Cognitive dissonance. Unless we ACCEPT THE TRUTH we will not be free from hypocrisy and tragedies.

What goes around comes around and the entire humanity suffers as in the case of global warming, gang terrorism, wars, etc. And what is going around is coming around much faster and with vengeance.

Let me confess my sin as a human being. I am confessing our sins not to ask forgiveness from those few bullies who arrogate themselves to be the world’s leaders, or the representatives of God on earth. No. I will confess to unite us, to remind us our aggressions and hypocrisy, and also our common bond as humans, our common destiny as travelers on this crowded and troubled spaceship called Earth!

A massacre, a war or a human rights violation is not an isolated incident. They are part of a much bigger system, ideology and lifestyle that we choose. It is connected to how we treat women, how we treat the poor, the working people, how we treat the animals, how we treat the earth, how we value family, humanity… A massacre, a war or a human rights violation is the symptom of our way of life, our system, our paradigm.

  • We are oppressors, ignorant and self-righteous. We expect Bulgaria or Germany to give Turkish minority cultural rights while we first deny the existence, than we ban the language and culture, including the Holydays, of Kurdish minority and then we subject them to assassinations and massacres.
  • We are oppressors, ignorant and self-righteous. We blame Kurdish minority of treason for demanding and fighting for their lives, human rights and dignity and we adopt a policy of cultural genocide and then assassinations, imprisonment, burning towns, torture and massacres, against the Kurds, indigenous population of Turkey. And at the same time, we go to war on behalf of a Turkish minority in Cyprus to DIVIDE Cyprus. Ironically, the Turkish minority in Cyprus did not suffer even a fraction of fascist policies and actions we imposed on Kurds. Costing 60 thousand dead in recent years, 80 percent of them being Kurds.
  • We take it lightly of being the only country that has banned the language of a minority, comprising about 20 percent of its population. Ironically, we claim to be Muslims while Islam condemns racism and considers every language to be God’s signs deserving respect and appreciation.
  • We are oppressors, ignorant and self-righteous. We expect Europeans to cherish our mosques, to enjoy our minarets punching holes in their skies, and if they convert an old mosque into a church we protest with loud noises, yet we are not ashamed of trying to convert Hagia Sophia into a Mosque, as if we were in desperate need for another empty mosque.
  • We are criminals and in denial. We turned minorities against minorities and in 1995 we let the Turks and Kurds commit genocide against Armenians, exterminating more than a million Armenians. About a quarter million Assyrians became the victims of our spree of genocide.
  • We are oppressors, self-centered and self-righteous. We protest and condemn American and European atrocities and neo-colonialism, invasions and wars in the Middle East, while we shamelessly glorify the same aggression of our ancestors by celebrating Fatih and other Ottoman tyrants whose major contribution to humanity was to invade other people’s countries, plunder their riches, levy on them taxes, kidnap and draft their children to the imperial military for more wars, invasions, and plunder.
  • We are oppressors, ignorant and self-righteous. We condemn the genocides, atrocities of the past, big or small, especially if they were against our tribe, but we enjoy doing exactly the same thing even now while we are talking this issue.
  • We are oppressors, ignorant and self-righteous. We declare about a quarter of human population to be terrorists while our quarter itself is the biggest terrorist, even 666 times more violent, supported with the most sophisticated armies, monstrous killing machines and unending imperial wars that is cunningly presented to be promoting freedom, democracy and human rights.
  • We are oppressors, delusional and self-righteous. We fool ourselves to be Davids while we are the Goliaths. We have the audacity of depicting our fascist and well-nourished invaders and murderers-in-uniform inside a tank to be the victim and the poor teenager with a rock in his hand standing for his life, freedom, home and dignity against our tank to be the terrorist.
  • We are shameless in praising our former enemies, such as Gandhi, Martin Luther, Mandela as great moral leaders, yet we did not stop our crimes just because they were nice people singing peaceful songs. We hide from even ourselves that we were forced to stop our crimes because of logistics, the rising cost of committing those crimes and the violent groups and elements among our victims. By making a deal with the peaceful group among our victims, we wanted save face, and negotiate new terms and try to keep our advantages as much as we could.
  • We are cunning, delusional and self-righteous. We preach human rights to the people of poor countries which suffer under our SOB tyrants or friendly puppet regimes, while we had committed and still continue to commit the biggest atrocities in known human history: Holocaust, Carpet bombing, Use of nukes, Napalm bombs, Mines, Drones… So, it is not a surprise when we become the Geert Wilders, Robert Spencers, David Horowitzes, Neocons, Zionists, Rapture-freak crusaders and the 1 percent capitalists of the world and try every means and propaganda to escalate the conflict between the East and West. Our grandchildren should not be surprised if we repeat our bloody history by committing another major genocide, this time against Muslims, here in the West. With Cognitive Dissonance every evil is possible!
  • We are oppressors, ignorant and self-righteous. We preach the world about nuclear weapons, declare war against terrorism, but we do not even apologize for committing much greater state terror and atrocities around the world, including the biggest terrorism (targeting civilians) in known human history: Nagasaki and Hiroshima. With Cognitive Dissonance every atrocity is possible!
  • We talk about truth and justice, yet we are addicted with lies and we allocate multi-billion dollar funds to generate lies and propaganda through secret agencies and their puppets in the media and academia. No wonder we did not even regret for killing more than 1 million Iraqis while delivering our great democracy through bombs and bullets. We give Nobel Peace prize to the commander of the world’s biggest bloody military power that has killed tens of thousands of innocent people through euphemistic words such as surge, forward leaning, collateral damage, enhanced interrogation techniques.
  • We are now using drones to assassinate people without trial, poor people who stand against our aggression and hegemony. The list of wars, covert operations and countries bombed by the USA-Inc, printed in 9 points Times Roman, single space, one line for each country, is five times longer than my middle finger. With Cognitive Dissonance every bloody list is possible!
  • We brag with our civilization and technological advances, yet the Bosnian Muslims were massacred and raped in our midst for years. But our powerful military stood idle and perhaps we were busy pushing small countries around to plunder their natural resources and dictate our terms to continue our hedonistic consumerist life style. With Cognitive Dissonance all sorts of genocides are possible!
  • We brag to be nice and civilized people, yet we feed our children all sorts of violence and atrocities through video games and films, desensitizing them against human life.
  • We brag to have deserved our mansions and luxuries life style, while in fact, we made laws by legalizing usury, speculations, printing money out of hot air, crony capitalism, plutocracy and we stole most of our wealth from the services and products of those who worked hard day and night.
  • While at it, we also polluted our land, our oceans and our atmosphere. With Cognitive Dissonance every disaster is possible!
  • We brag with our technology and high-tech toys that come in fancy packages, we create mountains of trash from plastic bottles. A massive plastic garbage patch twice the size of the state of Texas circling in the North Pacific is growing faster than the power of big corporations over our so-called democracies.
  • We complain about not having enough to feed the poor, yet just several weeks ago we saw the picture of millions of tons of grain, a mountain of food without exaggeration, left to rot by the Indian government following the dogmas preached by the high-priests of capitalism.  Every year millions of tons of food are deliberately wasted by the capitalists while millions of people starve to death.
  • Besides greedy capitalism, detached governments, the world population is posing one of the greatest threat to the future of humanity, yet, our political and religious clowns among Catholics, Sunnis, Mormons and many other manmade religions are competing with each other in turning every mother to octomoms.
  • We brag to be Muslim (peacefully submitting to God and peacemakers) to be the followers of Muhammed, one of the most peaceful men in history, yet centuries after his death we make up volumes of lies about him thereby depicting him a warmonger, a torturer, a sexual maniac, a misogynist, a tyrant, an illiterate and superstitious medieval Arab. We demonstrate respect to the physical mediums where the Quran is recorded, yet we betray almost all its universal principles and instructions by promoting anti-rationalism, blind faith, intercession, by giving religious charlatans the power of making up rules in the name of God, by promoting violence, suicide bombing, antisemitism, the killing of apostates, oppressing our women, ignoring the plight of the hungry, homeless and jobless, stoning people to death, and many other appalling criminal acts. With Cognitive Dissonance every evil is possible!
  • We brag to be Christians, to be the followers of Jesus, one of the most peaceful and just men in history, yet soon after his death we became soldiers of Roman empire, we became slave owners, we burned “witches” and “heretics” on stakes, waged bloody Crusades, invented various torture machines, condemned thinkers through inquisition, fought two world wars, killed millions in holocaust, worked day and night to make bigger and even bigger bombs, invaded and destroyed numerous countries, killed millions around the world, and replaced the golden rule with the iron rule called “pre-emptive strike.”

Should we become CYNICAL? NO

  1. We cannot afford it. No more. With the increase in population and popularity of Internet and communication technology, what is going around is coming around much faster and bigger. The imperialist powers, which have mutated their skin and predatory method of sucking other’s blood, yet remain the same with all its greed, arrogance and delusions, can no more shed blood in the so-called third world countries and get away with it. The world cannot sustain our wars, our lies, our delusions, our robber banks, our Zionist propaganda, our capitalist-consumerist BS that wastes limited resources and pollutes and poisons this precious Blue Planet, God’s free gift to us.
  2. We cannot afford being cynical. There are some pockets of hope and examples of promises such as Sweden, Norway, and Finland…

We have proposals for solution:

First, we should diagnose the disease, which demonstrate the symptoms of aggression, arrogance, delusions and cognitive dissonance. We have to recognize the cancer tumors in our body that causes wars and genocide:

  • We should teach tolerance and respect to other people’s ideas as long as they are not used to harm others. We should question and reject the religious dogmas glorifying conquests, salvation through death and shedding blood.
  • We should require critical thinking and philosophy classes as a required curriculum in our elementary, middle and high schools.
  • We have to establish real democracy and ban lobbies from influencing our elected officials.
  • We must stand against warmongers and it must be the priority of every human on this planet, be it poor or rich, be it religious or atheist, black or blue, purple or pink, man or woman. Military Industrial Complex. Weapon merchants. These bloodsuckers (s)elect and bribe politicians to constantly create conflicts and ugly enemies with highly exaggerated powers, and declare wars here and there. We should make a list of top 10 war profiteers globally and locally, and declare them to be the enemies of humanity, and demand our politicians to dramatically reduce the military spending. “The only thing we have to fear is fear itself” (FDR). We should listen to this historical warning, “… we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.” (Eisenhower).
  • To eliminate corruption, capitalistic exploitation and guarantee food, home, education and a reasonable health care for every human being, we should design a fair economic system without creating a totalitarian regime. We should bury capitalism and consumerism in the same graveyard that we buried authoritarian communism. Multinational big corporations through their news media, film industry, internet sites, lobbies, politicians and academia promote capitalistic dogmas, glorifies greed, usury, and the consumerism that is destroying the fragile echo system.
  • We should treat nationalism as a virus causing a mild disease that feigns as patriotism when in hibernation. But certain conditions, such as economic crisis or some provocations could trigger the virus to mutate into demonstrating the symptoms of jingoism and racism that may cause uncontrollable fatal complications and tragedies. These viruses are nourished and manipulated by inapt and evil politicians, weapon merchants, bigots and occasionally by global finance. Flags are used as idols. Waving flags triggers hormones of the subject thereby leading otherwise nice people to commit atrocities and genocides.


FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Edip Yuksel’s Channel at Youtube

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

First, if you want to keep in touch with our activities, please subscribe to my English Twitter @19org

I have recently (2011) started uploading some video clips at Youtube… I will be posting many more, inshallah… You may find some of my live TV debates in Turkish uploaded by other people. You may search Youtube by my name “Edip Yuksel” or “Edip Yüksel” to find my videos.

Or, may find the English videos posted by me at my Youtube channel by searching for: “Edip Yuksel (E)”, in which letter E in paranthesis indicates the Language.

God willing, the upcoming two documentaries will be available online and also in high definition DVDs. Here is a sample:

Running Like Zebras

Interview with Noam Chomsky

Speech at European Parliament

Last Statement at the European Parliament

Debating the President of American Atheists Organization)

Challenging Americans at Ground Zero

Why Quran Alone 1/2

Why Quran Alone 2/2

Islamic Reform (introduction)

Code 19

And Many More at Edip Yüksel’s Channel. See the PLAYLIST

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Your uncle or the sniveling shit-faced stranger rummaging the rubbish

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Which one is more important?
Your uncle or
the sniveling shit-faced stranger
rummaging through rubbish to find his greenback?

Edip Yüksel
22 September 2015

2013-11-29 Edip face

English language is rich in many ways. You may cry in so many tones and ways, such as: bawl, sob, keen, wail, weep, whimper, snivel, sniffle, howl, yowl, bellow, sulk, brood, pout, bewail, croon…

You can describe a drunk in dozens of words, such as, befuddled, besotted, blotto, boiled-as-an-owl, crapulous, dipso, drunk, high, hooched-up, inebriated, in-one’s-cups, intoxicated, liquored-up, looped, pickled, pie-eyed, plotzed, pot-valiant, ripped, shit-faced, slopped-up, sloshed, soused, sozzled, spaced, stewed, stiff, stinking, stinko, stoned, tanked, tied-one-on, three-sheets-to-the-wind, tipsy, toasted, tweaked, under-the-influence, under-the-table, wasted, wiped-out, woozy, zoned, zonked…

In English you can cause disorder in many ways, such as, tout, hoopla, ferment, frenzy, vociferous, bustle, furor, ruction, pother, raucous, bedlam, chaos, pandemonium, mayhem, fracas, melee…

You can also search for something in many ways, such as: delve, ferret, grope, plumb, probe, inspect, rake, ransack, rummage, scour, scrutinize.

You may exercise bravery too in many ways, such as, courageous, fearless, dauntless, intrepid, plucky, daring, heroic, valorous, audacious, bold, gallant, valiant, doughty, mettlesome…

For money? For garbage? Well, let’s not go there; I will need much space for these two.

But, in English we do not have enough words for relationship. In fact, not a single word to describe some of our relatives. The word UNCLE is used for both mother’s brother and father’s brother. The same is true with AUNT who is used for both mother’s sister and father’s sister.

As it seems, extended family members among English-speakers are not as important as the sniveling shit-faced stranger rummaging through rubbish to find his greenback.

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Warning to YouTube Turkish Team

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Edip Yuksel’s Open Warning to

YouTube’s Turkish Team

24 February 2015

My rights protected both by the First Amendment of the USA constitution, and Article 19 of the Declaration of Human Rights have been violated. If your Turkish team does not stop censoring my videos promoting Islamic Reform via critical thinking, I may be forced to launch both LEGAL ACTION and SOCIAL MEDIA CAMPAIGN against you.

I am a Kurdish/Turkish/American author and philosophy professor who have received numerous death fatwas because of my criticism of Sunni, Salafi and Shiite religions. I immigrated to the USA in 1989 just to be free. I a grateful to God for enjoying such a freedom. Yet, I am under constant attack and frequently receive death threats from the followers of various religious leaders in Turkey. They use local political machine and intimidation to censor my appearance on mainstream TV stations and media. No problem. I do not need them. I am using YouTube to promote critical thinking, justice, liberty, human rights and peace.

Unfortunately, a great majority of Sunni/Salafi/Shiite preachers teach bigotry, misogyny, violence and utter ignorance in the name of God, Muhammad, and the saints of their choice. The impact of their false teachings is immense, and they have contributed to horrible events, oppression, repression, misery, backwardness and bloody conflicts around the world.

My main focus is to promote Islamic Reform by inviting people to reason, and providing powerful theological and philosophical arguments for rejecting all fabricated religious sources besides the Quran. By translating the Quran into Turkish and English, I expose the distortions made by clergymen in the interpretations of key verses related to freedom, reasoning, women’s rights, peace and justice. It is a daring and daunting task; but it is worth it.

Currently, my YouTube channel, which is under my name, has about 19 thousand subscribers and it is growing daily. It has more than 500 educational videos, both in Turkish (T) and English (E). Thousands of people have experienced paradigm change after watching those videos. I receive hundreds of emails/messages daily thanking me for changing their lives from religious bigotry and ignorance to critical thinking and desire for peaceful co-existence. Some even gave up joining terrorist groups after watching those videos; they were convinced through my theological, political and philosophical arguments.

I have been receiving FALSE copyright and privacy complaints from some public figures whose public speeches/lectures I have been criticizing. However, recently the number of complaints from Fethullah Gülen, Cübbeli Ahmet, Alpaslan Kuytul, Ebubekir Sifil and other religious/cult leaders have increased dramatically. They reached to the level of harassment. I command YouTube for rejecting those frivolous complaints after evaluating my defenses; but recently, I was surprised to learn that a few of my videos were blocked by YouTube Team in Turkey (See the list below).

These religious charlatans and political demagogues should not be able to escape from intellectual scrutiny by falsely claiming copyrights (for the fair use of their public speeches) or privacy rights (for the fair use of their public speeches). Copyrights or Privacy rights are not recognized by laws to protect the rights of professional religious class fooling masses with false and harmful teachings. I am a lawyer and I teach philosophy; I appreciate legal and ethical concerns regarding privacy and copyrights, but I also stand for my right of free speech if it is taken away through the abuse of such rights, and if YouTube staff is inclined to side with the rich and powerful.

I am concerned that the YouTube office staff dealing with Turkey is not abiding by the First Amendment of the USA Constitution nor by the 19th Article of Human Rights Declaration. So, I would like to receive a phone call or a non-generic email containing a direct phone number and name of a lawyer representing Youtube in the USA to discuss this issue before it reaches to another phase.

PS: The list of my videos currently blocked in Turkey in violation of Article 19.

  1. F-tipi Kuran düşmanı: Fethullah Gülen (120K)

  1. Fethullah Gülen’in Başına Kimler İşiyormuş? (32K)

  1. Peygamber düşmanı salya sümük ağlıyor (6K)

  1. Kuran düşmanı risaleci şimdi F-tipi takla atıyor (31K)

  1. Türkçe olimpiyatları aldatmacası (31K)

  1. Fethullah Yetim, Köpeği Öldü Fethullah’ın 1/2 (21K)

  1. Fethullah Yetim, Köpeği Öldü Fethullah’ın 2/2 (8K)

  1. F-Tipi SANSÜRLE engellenen bir videom (11K)

  1. Sevimli bir risalecinin ilkel Allah algısı (81K)

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

A Bloody Lie: Massacre of Banu Qurayza Jews

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

The Sunni and Shiite translations of the Quran is filled with distortions.
They follow volumes of hadith and sectarian fabrications and distort the meaning of the verses according to those lies.
Compare other translations of the Quran with Quran: a Reformist Translation by Edip Yuksel, et al.

New Light on the Story of


And the Jews of Medina

From Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland,
(1976), pp. 100-107.

The story about Banu Qurayza massacre was the fabrication of Jews, which was later promoted by the likes of ISIS psychopaths among Sunnis.

The story about Banu Qurayza massacre was the fabrication of Jews, which was later promoted by the likes of ISIS psychopaths among Sunnis.

IT IS WELL KNOWN THAT at the advent of Islam there were three Jewish tribes who lived in Yathrib (later Medina), as well as other Jewish settlements further to the north, the most important of which were Khaybar and Fadak. It is also generally accepted that at first the Prophet Muhammad hoped that the Jews of Yathrib, as followers of a divine religion, would show understanding of the new monotheistic religion, Islam. However, as soon as these tribes realized that Islam was being firmly established and gaining power, they adopted an actively hostile attitude, and the final result of the struggle was the disappearance of these Jewish communities from Arabia proper.

The biographers of the Prophet, followed by later historians, tell us that Banu Qaynuqa.,1 and later Banu al-Nadir,2 provoked the Muslims, were besieged, and in turn agreed to surrender and were allowed to depart, taking with them all their transportable possessions. Later on Khaybar3 and Fadak4 were evacuated. According to Ibn Ishaq in the Sira,5 the third of the Jewish tribes, Banu Qurayza, sided with the Qurashites and their allies, who made an unsuccessful attack on Medina in an attempt to destroy Islam. This, the most serious challenge to Islam, failed, and the Banu Qurayza were in turn besieged by the Prophet. Like Banu al-Nadir, in time they surrendered, but unlike the Banu al-Nadir, they were subjected to the arbitration of Sa’d b. Mu’adh, a member of the Aws tribe, allies of Qurayza. He ruled that the grown-up males should be put to death and the women and children subjected to slavery. Consequentiy, trenches were dug in the market-place in Medina, and the men of Qurayza were brought out in groups and their necks were struck.6 Estimates of those killed vary from 400 to 900.

On examination, details of the story can he challenged. It can be demonstrated that the assertion that 600 or 800 or 9007 men of Banu Qurayza were put to death in cold blood can not be true; that it is a later invention; and that it has its source in Jewish traditions. Indeed the source of the details in earlier Jewish history can be pointed out with surprising accuracy.

The Arabic sources will now be surveyed, and the contribution of their Jewish informants will be discussed. The credibility of the details will then be assessed, and the prototype in earlier Jewish history pin-pointed.

The earliest work that we have, with the widest range of details, is Ibn Ishaq’s Sira, his biography of the Prophet. It is also the longest and the most widely quoted. Later historians draw, and in most cases depend on him.8 But Ibn Ishaq died in 151 A.H., i.e. 145 years after the event in question. Later historians simply take his version of the story, omitting more or less of the detail, and overlooking his uncertain list of authorities. They generally abbreviate the story, which appears just as one more event to report. In most cases their interest seems to end there. Some of them indicate that they are not really convinced, but they are not prepared to take further trouble. One authority, Ibn Hajar, however, denounces this story and the other related ones as “odd tales”.9 A contemporary of Ibn Ishaq, Malik,10 the jurist, denounces Ibn Ishaq outright as “a liar”11 and “an impostor”12 just for transmitting such stories.

It must be remembered that historians and authors of the Prophet’s biography did not apply the strict rules of the “traditionists”. They did not always provide a chain of authorities, each of whom had to be verified as trustworthy and as certain or likely to have transmitted his report directly from his informant, and so on. The attitude towards biographical details and towards the early events of Islam was far less meticulous than their attitude to the Prophet’s traditions, or indeed to any material relevant to jurisprudence. Indeed Ibn Ishaq’s account of the siege of Medina and the fall of the Banu Qurayza is pieced together by him from information given by a variety of persons he names, including Muslim descendants of the Jews of Qurayza.

Against these late and uncertain sources must be placed the only contemporary and entirely authentic source, the Qur’an. There, the reference in Sura XXXIII, 26 is very brief:

“He caused those of the People of the Book who helped them (i.e. the Quraysh) to come out of their forts. Some you killed, some you took prisoner.” There is no reference to numbers.

Ibn Ishaq sets out his direct sources as he opens the relevant chapter on the siege of Medina. These were: a client of the family of al-Zubayr and others whom he “did not suspect”. They told parts of the story on the authority of ‘Abdullah b. Ka’b b. Malik, al Zuhri, ‘Asim b. ‘Umar b. Qatada, ‘Abdullab b. Abi Bakr, Muhammad b. Ka’b of Qurayza, and “others among our men of learning”, as he put it. Each of these contributed to the story, so that Ibn Ishaq’s version is the sum total of the collective reports, pieced together. At a later stage Ibn Ishaq quotes another descendant of Qurayza, ‘Attiyya13 by name, who had been spared, and, directly, a certain descendant of al-Zabir b. Bata, a prominent member of the tribe of Qurayza who figures in the narrative.

The story opens with a description of the effort of named Jewish leaders to organize against the Muslims an alliance of the hostile forces. The leaders named included three from the Banu al-Nadir and two of the tribe of Wa’il, another Jewish tribe; together with other Jewish fellow-tribesmen unnamed. Having persuaded the neighbouring Bedouin tribes of Ghatafan, Murra, Fazara, Sulaym, and Ashja’ to take up arms, they now proceeded to Mecca where they succeeded in persuading the Quraysh. Having gathered together a besieging force, one of the Nadir leaders, Huyayy b. Akhtab, in effect forced himself on the third Jewish tribe still in Medina, the Banu Qurayza, and, against the better judgement of their leader, Ka’b b. Asad, he persuaded them to break faith with the Prophet in the hope, presented as a certainty, that the Muslims would not stand up to the combined attacking forces and that Qurayza and the other Jews would be restored to independent supremacy. The siege of Medina failed and the Jewish tribes suffered for their part in the whole operation.

The attitude of scholars and historians to Ibn lshaq’s version of the story has been either one of complacency, sometimes mingled with uncertainty, or at least in two important cases, one of condemnatlon and outright rejection.

The complacent attitude is one of accepting the biography of the Prophet and the stories of the campaigns at they were received by later generations without the meticulous care or the application of the critical criteria which collectors of traditions or jurists employed. It was not necessary to check the veracity of authorities when transmitting or recording parts of the story of the Prophet’s life.14 It was not essential to provide a continuous chain of authorities or even to give authorities at all. That is obvious in Ibn Ishaq’s Sira. On the other hand reliable authority and a continuous line of transmission were essential when law was the issue. That is why Malik the jurist had no regard for Ibn Ishaq.15

One finds, therefore, that later historians and even exegetes either repeat the very words of Ibn Ishaq or else abbreviate the whole story. Historians gave it, as it were, a cold reception. Even Tabari, nearly 150 years after Ibn Ishaq, does not try to find other versions of the story as he usually does. He casts doubt by his use of the words, “Waqidi alleged (za’ama) that the Prophet caused trenches to be dug.” Ibn ai-Qayyim in Zad al-ma’ad makes only the briefest reference and he ignores altogether the crucial question of numbers. Ibn Kathir even seems to have general doubt in his mind because he takes the trouble to point out that the story was told on such “good authority” as that of ‘A’isha.16

Apart from mild complacency or doubtful acceptance of the story itself, Ibn Ishaq as an author was in fact subjected to devastating attacks by scholars, contemporary or later, on two particular accounts. One was his uncritical inclusion in his Sira of so much spurious or forged poetry;17 the other his unquestioning acceptance of just such a story as that of the slaughter of Banu Qurayza.

His contemporary, the early traditionist and jurist Malik, called him unequivocally “a liar” and “an impostor”18 “who transmits his stories from the Jews”.19 In other words, applying his own criteria, Malik impugned the veracity of Ibn Ishaq’s sources and rejected his approach. Indeed, neither Ibn Ishaq’s list of informants nor his method of collecting and piecing together such a story would he acceptable to Malik the jurist.

In a later age Ibn Hajar further explained the point of Malik’s condemnation of Ibn Ishaq. Malik, he said,20 condemned Ibn Ishaq because he made a point of seeking out descendants of the Jews of Medina in order to obtain from them accounts of the Prophet’s campaigns as handed down by their forefathers. Ibn Hajar21 then rejected the stories in question in the strongest terms: “such odd tales as the story of Qurayza and al-Nadir”. Nothing could be more damning than this outright rejection.

Against the late and uncertain sources on the one hand, and the condemning authorities on the other, must be set the only contemporary and entirely authentic source, the Qur’an. There the reference in Sura XXXIII, 26 is very brief: “He caused those of the People of the Book who helped them (i.e. the Quraysh) to come out of their forts. Some you killed, some you took prisoner.”

Exegetes and traditionists tend simply to repeat Ibn Ishaq’s tale, but in the Qur’an the reference can only be to those who were actually in the fighting. This is a statement about the battle. It concerns those who fought. Some of these were killed. others were taken prisoner.

One would think that if 600 or 900 people were killed in this manner the significance of the event would have been greater. There would have been a clearer reference in the Qur’an, a conclusion to be drawn, and a lesson to be learnt. But when only the guilty leaders were executed, it would be normal to expect only a brief reference.

So much for the sources: they were neither uninterested nor trustworthy; and the report was very late in time. Now for the story. The reasons for rejecting the story are the following:

(i) As already stated above, the reference to the story in the Qur’an is extremely brief, and there is no indication whatever of the killing of a large number. In a battle context the reference is to those who were actually fighting. The Qur’an is the only authority which the historian would accept without hesitation or doubt. It is a contemporary text, and, for the most cogent reasons, what we have is the authentic version.

(ii) The rule in Islam is to punish only those who were responsible for the sedition.

(iii) To kill such a large number is diametrically opposed to the Islamic sense of justice and to the basic principles laid down in the Qur’an – particularly the verse. “No soul shall bear another’s burden.”22 It is obvious in the story that the leaders were numbered and were well known. They were named.

(iv) It it also against the Qur’anic rule regarding prisoners of war, which is: either they are to be granted their freedom or else they are to be allowed to be ransomed.23

(v) It is unlikely that the Banu Qurayza should be slaughtered when the other Jewish groups who surrendered before Banu Qurayza and after them were treated leniently and allowed to go. Indeed Abu ‘Ubayd b. Sallam relates in his Kitab al-amwal24 that when Khaybar felt to the Muslims there were among the residents a particular family or clan who had distinguished themselves by execesive unseemly abuse of the Prophet. Yet in that hour the Prophet addressed them in words which are no more than a rebuke: “Sons of Abu al-Huqayq (he said to them) I have known the extent of your hostility to God and to His apostle, yet that does not prevent me from treating you as I treated your brethren.” That was after the surrender of Banu Qurayza.

(vi) If indeed so many hundreds of people had actually been put to death in the market-place, and trenches were dug for the operation, it is very strange that there should be no trace whatever of all that – no sign or word to point to the place, and no reference to a visible mark.25

(vii) Had this slaughter actually happened, jurists would have adopted it as a precedent. In fact exactly the opposite has been the case. The attitude of jurists, and their rulings, have been more according to the Qur’anic rule in the verse, “No soul shall bear another’s burden.”

Indeed, Abu ‘Ubayd b. Sallam relates a very significant incident in his book Kifab al-amwal,26 which, it must be noted, is a book of jurisprudence, of law, not a siraor a biography. He tells us that in the time of the Imam al-Awza’i27 there was a case of trouble among a group of the People of the Book in the Lebanon when ‘Abdullab b. ‘All was regional governor. He put down the sedition and ordered the community in question to be moved elsewhere. Al-Awza’i in his capacity as the leading jurist immediately objected. His argument was that the incident was not the result of the cormmunity’s unanimous agreement. “At far as I know (he argued) it is not a rule of God that God should punish the many for the fault of the few but punish the few for the fault of the many.”

Now, had the Imam al-Awza’i accepted the story of the slaughter of Banu Qurayza, he would have treated it as a precedent, and would not have come out with an argument against Authority, represented in ‘Abdullah b. ‘Ali. Al-Awza’i, it should be remembered, was a younger contemporary of Ibn Ishaq.

(viii) In the story of Qurayza a few specific persons were named as having been put to death, some of whom were described as particularly active in their hostility. It is the reasonable conclusion that those were the ones who led the sedition and who were consequently punished – not the whole tribe.

(ix) The details given in the story clearly and of necessity imply inside knowledge, i.e. from among the Jews themselves. Such are the details of their consultation when they were besieged, the harangue of Ka’b b. Asad as their leader; and the suggestion that they should kill their women and children and then make a last desperate attack against the Muslims.

(x) Just as the descendants of Qurayza would want to glorify their ancestors, so did the descendants of the Madanese connected with the event. One notices that that part of the story which concerned the judgement of Sa’d b. Mu’adh against Qurayza, was transmitted from one of his direct descendants. According to this part the Prophet said to Mu’adh: “You have pronounced God’s judgement upon them [as inspired] through Seven Veils.”28

Now it is well known that for the purposes of glorifying their ancestors or white washing those who were inimical to Islam at the beginning, many stories were invented by later generations and a vast amount of verse was forged, much of which was transmitted by Ibn Ishaq. The story and the statement concerning Sa’d are one such detail.

(xi) Other details are difficult to accept. How could so many hundreds of persons he incarcerated in the house belonging to a woman of Banu al-Najjar?29

(xii) The history of the Jewish tribes after the establishment of Islam is not really clear at all. The idea that they all departed on the spot seems to be in need of revision, as can be seen on examining the sources. For example, in his Jamharat al-ansab,30 Ibn Hazm occasionally refers to Jews still living in Medina. In two places al-Waqidi31 mentions Jews who were still in Medina when the Prophet prepared to march against Khaybar – i.e. after the supposed liquidation of all three tribes, including Qurayza. In one case ten Madanese Jews actually joined the Prophet in an excursion to Khaybar, and in the other the Jews who had made their peace with him in Medina were extremely worried when he prepared to attack Khaybar. Al-Waqadi explains that they tried to prevent the departure of any Muslim who owed them money.

Indeed Ibn Kathir32 takes the trouble to point out that ‘Umar expelled only those Jews of Khaybar who had not made a peace agreement with the Prophet. Ibn Kathir then proceeds to explain that at a much later date, i.e. after the year 300 A.H., the Jews of Khaybar claimed that they had in their possession a document allegedly given them by the Prophet which exempted them from poll-tax. He said that some scholars were taken in by this document so that they ruled that the Jews of Khaybar should be exempted. However, that was a forged letter and had been refuted in detail. It quoted persons who were already dead, it used technical terms which came into being at a later time, it claimed that Mu’awiya b. Abi Sufyan witnessed it, when in fact he had not even been converted to Islam at that time, and so on.

So then the real source of this unacceptable story of slaughter was the descendants of the Jews of Medina, from whom Ibn Ishaq took these “odd tales”. For doing so Ibn Ishaq was severely criticized by other scholars and historians and was called by Malik an impostor.

The sources of the story are, therefore, extremely doubtful and the details are diametrically opposed to the spirit of Islam and the rules of the Qur’an to make the story credible. Credible authority is lacking, and circumstantial evidence does not support it. This means that the story is more than doubtful.

However, the story, in my view, has its origins in earlier events. Is can be shown that it reproduces similar stories which survived from the account of the Jewish rebellion against the Romans, which ended in the destruction of the temple in the year AD. 73, the night of the Jewish zealots and sicarii to the rock fortress of Masada, and the final liquidation of the besieged. Stories of their experience were naturally transmitted by Jewish survivors who fled south. Indeed one of the more plausible theories of the origin of the Jews of Medina is that they came after the Jewish wars. This was the theory preferred by the late Professor Guillaume.33

As is well known, the source of the details of the Jewish wars is Flavius Josephus, himself a Jew and a contemporary witness who held office under the Romans, who disapproved of certain actions which some of the rebels committed, but who nevertheless never ceased to be a Jew at heart. It is in his writings that we read of details which are closely similar to those transmitted to us in the Sira about the actions and the resistance of the Jews, except that now we see the responsibility for the actions placed on the Muslims.

In considering details of the story of Banu Qurayza as told by the descendants of that tribe, we may note the following similar details in the account of Josephus:

(i) According to Josephus,34 Alexander, who ruled in Jerusalem before Herod the Great, hung upon crosses 800 Jewish captives, and slaughtered their wives and children before their eyes.

(ii) Similarly, large numbers were killed by others.

(iii) Important details of the two stories are remarkably similar, particularly the numbers of those killed. At Masada the number of those who died at the end was 960.35 The hot-headed sicarii who were eventually also killed numbered 600.36 We also read that when they reached the point of despair they were addressed by their leader Eleazar (precisely as Ka’b b. Asad addressed the Banu Qurayza),37 who suggested to them the killing of their women and children. At the ultimate point of complete despair the plan of killing each other to the last man was proposed.

Clearly the similarity of details is most striking. Not only are the suggestions of mass suicide similar but even the numbers are almost the same. Even the same names occur in both accounts. There is Phineas, and Azar b. Azar,38 just as Eleazar addressed the Jews besieged in Masada.

There is, indeed, more than a mere similarity. Here we have the prototype – indeed, I would suggest, the origin of the story of Banu Qurayza, preserved by descendants of the Jews who fled south to Arabia after the Jewish Wars, just as Josephus recorded the same story for the Classical world. A later generation of these descendants superimposed details of the siege of Masada on the story of the siege of Banu Qurayza, perhaps by confusing a tradition of their distant past with one from their less remote history. The mixture provided Ibn Ishaq’s story. When Muslim historians ignored it or transmitted it without comment or with cold lack of interest, they only expressed lack of enthusiasm for a strange tale, as Ibn Hajar called it.

One last point. Since the above was first written, I have seen reports39 of a paper given in August 1973 at the World Congress of Jewish Studies by Dr. Trude Weiss-Rosmarin, in which she challenges Josephus’ assertion that 960 besieged Jews committed suicide at Masada. This is highly interesting since in the story of Qurayza the 960 or so Jews refused to commit suicide. Who knows, perhaps the Story of Banu Qurayza is an even more accurate form of the original version.


1. Ibn Ishaq, Sira (ed. Wustenfeld, Gottingen, 1860), 545-7; (ed. Saqqa et al., Cairo, 1955), II, 47-9. See also al-Waqidi, Kitab al-maghazi (ed. M. Jones, London, 1966), II, 440 ff.; Suhayl, al-Rawd al-unuf (Cairo, 1914), I, 187 et passim; Ibn Kathir, al-Sira al-Nabawiya (ed. Mustafa `Abd al-Wahid, Cairo, 1384-5/1964-6), II, 5,et passim.

2. Sira, 545-56, 652-61/II, 51-7, 190-202; Ibn Kathir, oop. cit., III, 145 ff.

3. Sira, 755-76, 779/II, 328-53, 356, etc. More on Khaybar follows below.

4. ibid., 776/II, 353-4.

5. ibid., 668-84/II, 214-33.

6. ibid., 684-700/II, 233-54.

7. ibid., 689/II, 240; `Uyun al-athar (Cairo, 1356 A.H.), II, 73; Ibn Kathir, II, 239.

8. In his introduction to `Uyun al-athar, I, 7, Ibn Sayyid al-Nas (d. 734 A.H.), having explained his plan for his biography of the Prophet, expressly states that his main source was Ibn Ishaq, who indeed was the chief source for everyone.

9. Tahdhib al-tahdhib, IX, 45. See also `Uyun al-athar, I, 17, where the author uses the same words, without giving a reference, in his introduction on the veracity of Ibn Ishaq and the criteria he applied.

10. d. 179.

11. `Uyun al-athar, I, 12.

12. ibid, I, 16.

13. Sira, 691-2/II, 242, 244; `Uyun al-athar, II, 74, 75.

14. Ibn Sayyid al-Nas (op. cit., I, 121) makes precisely this point in relation to the story of the Banu Qaynuqa’ and the spurious verse which was said to have appeared in Sura LIII of the Qur’an and at the time was taken by polytheist Meccans as a recognition of their deities. The author explains how various scholars disposed of the problem and then sums up by stating that in his view, this story is to be treated on the same level as tales of the maghazi and accounts of the Sira (i.e. not to be accorded unqualified acceptance). Most scholars, he asserts, usually treated more liberally questions of minor importance and any material which did not involve a point of law, such as stories of the maghazi and similar reports. In such cases data would be accepted which would not be acceptable as a basis of deciding what is lawful or unlawful.

15. See n. 18 below.

16. Tabari, Tarikh, I, 1499 (where the reference is to al-Waqidi, Maghazi, II, 513); Zad al-ma`ad (ed. T. A. Taha, Cairo, 1970), II, 82; Ibn Kathir, op. cit., IV, 118.

17. On this see W. Arafat, “Early critics of the poetry of the Sira”, BSOAS, XXI, 3, 1958, 453-63.

18. Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila.

19. `Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7. In his valuable introduction Ibn Sayyid al-Nas provides a wide-ranging survey of the controversial views on Ibn Ishaq. In his full introduction to the Gottingen edition of the Sira, Wustenfeld in turn draws extensively on Ibn Sayyid al-Nas.

20. Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, IX, 45. See also `Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7.

21. ibid.

22. Qur’an, XXXV, 18.

23. Qur’an, XLI, 4.

24. ed. Khalil Muhammad Harras, Cairo, 1388/1968, 241.

25. Significantly, little or no information is to be found in general or special geographical dictionaries, such as al-Bakri’s, Mu`jam ma’sta`jam; al-Fairuzabadi’s al-Maghanim al-mutaba fi ma`alim taba (ed. Hamad al-Jasir, Dar al-Yamama, 1389/1969); Six treatises (Rasa’il fi tarikh al-Madina ed. Hamad al-Jasir, Dar al-Yamama, 1392/1972); al-Samhudi, Wafa’ al-wafa’ bi-akhbar dar al-Mustafa (Cairo, 1326), etc. Even al-Samhudi seems to regard a mention of the market-place in question as a mere historical reference, for in his extensive historical topography of Medina he identifies the market-place (p. 544) almost casually in the course of explaining the change in nomenclature which had overtaken adjacent landmarks. That market-place, he says, is the one referred to in the report (sic) that the Prophet brought out the prisoners of Banu Qurayza to the market-place of Medina, etc.

26. p. 247. I am indebted to my friend Professor Mahmud Ghul of the American University, Beirut, for bringing this reference to my attention.

27. d. 157/774. See EI2, sub nomine.

28. Sira, 689/II, 240; al-Waqidi, op. cit., 512.

29. Sira, 689/II, 240; Ibn Kathir, op. cit., III, 238.

30. e.g., Nasab Quraysh (ed. A. S. Harun, Cairo, 1962), 340.

31. op. cit., II, 634, 684.

32. op. cit., III, 415.

33. A. Guillaume, Islam (Harmondsworth, 1956), 10-11.

34. De bello Judaico, I, 4, 6.

35. ibid., VII, 9, 1.

36. ibid., VII, 10, 1.

37. Sira, 685-6/II, 235-6.

38. Sira, 352, 396/I, 514, 567.

39. The Times, 18 August 1973; and The Guardian, 20 August 1973.

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Free Flying Elephant

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

The Art of Passing a Free Flying Elephant

through the Eye of a Needle 

Edip Yuksel

“Like views in the classical liberal tradition, however, market democracy affirms the economic liberties of capitalism as basic rights. These include weighty rights of working, transacting, holding and using. Many libertarians ground their concern for economic liberty on some principle of self-ownership; classical liberal thinkers typically defend economic liberties because of their (hoped-for) positive effect on the economy over time. Market democracy, by contrast, sees a moral ideal of society and personhood as the most appropriate foundation for rights. According to market democracy, a thick conception of economic liberty is needed for citizens to exercise and develop the moral capacities they have as responsible self-authors. This is the core idea of market democracy, and we shall examine the moral case for it in a moment. For now, note that market democracy affirms a thick conception of economic liberty as a requirement of democratic citizenship.”
~ John Tomasi, from the draft of his upcoming book Free Market Fairness, Chapter 4, p. 78

AdamZyglis Rich Santa

I enjoyed Professor John Tomasi’s (Brown University) presentation and discussion in front of a room-full audience specializing in political philosophy, in which the University of Arizona is ranked first in the USA.[1] Compared to laser-focused graduate students in the audience, I had hard time following the angels dancing on the cracks of the details of issues discussed by modern Political philosophers. I am even more an outsider regarding the further details among the sub-branches of a particular branch. Thus, I benefited from the comparative table put on the board, which will be published in the fourth chapter of Tomasi’s upcoming book, Free Market Fairness:

School Politics Reasoning Person
Classical Liberal(Milton Freedman, Hayek, Epstein) Economic Liberty Ends directed Utility Seeker/ Maximizer
Libertarian(Nozick, Eric Mack) Economic Liberty Naturalistic Self-Owner
High Liberal(Freeman, Rawls) Social Justice Deliberative/Justificatory Democratic Citizen
Market Democracy(Tomasi) Econ-Lib + Soc-Just Deliberative/Justificatory Democratic Citizen

I was also impressed by Tomasi’s humility and appreciation of criticisms directed by students and professors in the audience. Tomasi’s response to my sharp criticism was also calm and gracious. I know, in this short paper, I have to ignore all the great points and arguments raised by him. I will ignore his sleepless nights and deep thoughts trying to construct his arguments. I may also ignore his vested interest in this book, and perhaps his potential interest working for the Koch Brothers for more deregulation.[2] So, please do not consider my criticism as an assessment on the merits of his whole work; I mostly focused on chapter four. I ended up with semi-philosophical and semi-political reaction.

In this paper, I occasionally let the emotions run in my reaction, since I do not have intention to submit it to a journal. As long as our emotions are led and controlled by reason, I think they are an important ingredient of being a moral agent. Morality cannot exist without empathy. However, even if I do not agree with many of his arguments, I would still respect Tomasi’s work since it helps me and others to clarify further our positions and sharpen our swords against the wolves under sheep clothing, this time under “market democracy.”

I think that depicting Free Market as one of the basic rights of “democratic citizens,” in par with other basic rights requiring strict scrutiny is like trying to push a camel through the eye of a needle. Here is why.

Minimum Taxation and Minimum regulation

I concede that Tomasi’s position is less extreme than of the Libertarians who consider ownership as the most important and an absolute right that should not be encumbered by taxation to promote the welfare of the society. After referring to Kant’s political philosophy, which justifies taxation of property to help those who cannot provide for natural needs, Tomasi is forced to peel a thin layer from his “thick conception” of property rights:

“Market democracy’s affirmation of a tax-funded social safety net programs follows this pattern. This very status of people as responsible self-authors may be threatened by conditions of extreme need. The state must be empowered to act to protect people’s moral status as self-authors. But, unlike many traditional classical liberals, market democracy’s justification of the safety net is thoroughly principled. After all, the same reasons that market democracy uses to justify the social safety net also justify the market democratic position against the pervasive encroachments on economic liberty allowed by high liberals such as Rawls. Without constitutional guarantees protecting the independent economic decision-making, people cannot fully executrices their moral powers of self-authorship.” (Ibid, p. 84)

Tomasi is proposing a system whose default rule is freedom of market. Let the free market work miracles! “But the tendency of market democratic regimes is to look to market-based solutions before turning to simple regulatory ones.” (p. 89) He welcomes anti-discriminatory regulations, albeit more for the public sector, and regulations aiming to prevent deception and fraud and setting monetary policy (p. 89). He thinks that the government should have “some ability to regulate work hours/wages/conditions” (p. 90), but he also hopes that those regulations to be kept in minimum, since he thinks that economic growth is “an antidote to the problem of worker vulnerability in post-industrial societies.” (p. 90).

The perpetual money-making machine!

As for the major concern of our times, environmental issues, Tomasi is utopist and comes up with a very thin conception that contradicts our experience with the free market in the last century. Regarding consumerism, he assures us that “It is fundamental to market democracy to see people not only as consumers of goods but as producers and innovators too.” (p. 91). I would like to believe this assurance, but knowing how greed has been the engine of private markets and how they would prefer hiring robots to humans if they could make more profits, I am not that optimistic. As for environmental sustainability, Tomasi wants us to believe that “market democracy advocates growth only within the boundaries of long term environmental sustainability (p. 91). Somehow, through his binocular he sees “capitalism and environmentalism as standing in a potentially positive relationship to each other.” (p. 91).

And that’s it. Sustainability, environmental protection, global warming, pollution, imperial wars, yes all these major and vital problems caused by even semi-regulated markets is dealt with through appealing to our trust in the positive powers of free markets. Though the author visits the issue again in chapter 8, he avoids dealing with the real issue:

“Along with securing the civil and political liberties of citizens, market democratic regime-types rely upon the state to refine and protect property rights, protect the environment, and to provide for a small number of genuinely public goods.” (p. 182)

Let’s see how the market democracy protects the environment:

“As Garret Hardin himself noted, when a good yields itself to private ownership, the structure of the incentives can change in a way that makes the economic agents better stewards.[3] If a common field is privatized, the owner of the field has reason to protect that resource from the ruin of overgrazing. Economic liberties of private ownership can prevent the negative externalities from the use of a particular resource from being spread across society. David Schmidtz writes: “Private property is the preeminent vehicle for turning negative commons into positive-sum property regimes.”[4] Ownership breeds responsibility. Market democracies therefore seek the thicken ownership, in part by expanding to range of things that are made subject to legal ownership by private individuals and groups. Property rights can [be] crafted and extended so as to make economic agents responsible not just for the quality of fields but also waterways and even the atmosphere itself.” (p. 189)

You have a problem with the fox? Then make the fox the owner of the chicken farm, and lo and behold: the problems are solved. I understand the argument made by the example of “tragedy of commons,” but in that example there is no government to regulate, manage, and enforce the rules. The tragedy of commons is not necessarily an argument against social democracies, it is against anarchism. Besides, let’s accept for the moment that private corporations in Tomasi’s market democracies would indeed work miracles in preventing negative externalities. Then what should we do to accomplish it? “Give them ownership,” suggests Tomasi. Ownership of what? National parks? Granted. Cities? Granted. Landfills? Granted. Forests? Rivers? Lakes? Seas? Oceans? Skies? You may not believe it, but Tomasi hopes that we grant all of them to the highest bidder.

The author’s magic formula of free market is a modified version of nick-knack store’s rule, “if you break it, you own it.” According to Tomasi, if lands, seas and skies are polluted by private companies, then they should be owned by the private companies. They will no more pollute. But, perhaps he ignores the little difference between the goods in the knickknack store and the food, the water, the air. The first one is reproducible and trivial, while the latter is limited and priceless! You own the broken china, you simply own a broken plate; but you own the water, you own the people!

A fantastic circle, a perpetual money-making machine! Let the private companies poison all rivers, lakes, and underground water by dumping their toxic chemicals as they wish. Then, let them own the rivers, the lakes, and underground water, and watch how they would keep them clean. For free? No, there is no free “free market”! Don’t be silly. These are democratic citizens with high moral values exercising their economic rights; they are not a bunch of tree-hugging bums. Private companies make profits when they pollute or vice versa; and they will surely make profits again if they clean them up. For each step they will charge the rest of the democratic citizens who own very little or nothing. Isn’t that fantastic?

You will end up running out of drinking water, which is a horrible news for you but a very good news for those citizens who are well-endowed and eager to exercise their authorship rights: they will sell you water in bottles and you will work damn hard to afford the price of bottled drinking water and similar products. Of course, the millions of discarded plastic bottles will not be teleported to a plastic heaven in another universe. They will end up filling your land, the seas, and the oceans. No problem! Market democrats will ask you to let them have the ownership of the land, the seas and the oceans so that the citizens exercising their economic rights could clean up the mess. Well, do not tell anyone that those few who end up exercising their economic rights do not really do the cleaning; they will hire you and your children to clean up their mess, and they will pay you as little as they wish. Of course, Tomasi will tell you that you are too equally free to buy the land and the sea; but you know that he knows that none other than those mass-producers and mass-polluters can afford buying them from the government of corporations, by corporations, for corporations.

If water is your concern, you don’t know the whole story. It is thicker then you imagine. It is beyond water. Tomasi will not have any problem if the “free citizens” (with thick conception of wallets) who have polluted and poisoned our atmosphere decide to exercise their “economic rights” by selling us clean air in bottles! Welcome to unregulated free market!

Markets declare their ultimate freedom, freedom from democracy!

In the following paragraph, Tomasi let his (fat) cats out of the bag:

“Market democracy also attends to public choice concerns about the regulatory approach to environmental protection favored by social democracies. Information is costly not only in the private sector but in the political one as well. The regulatory approach rests ultimately on political processes that in turn rely upon b[l]ocks of voters. For reasons discussed earlier, such voters typically do not have the information they need to make rational decisions about the environment. Further, environmental damage typically occurs when people lack accountability. But this applies to political actors no less than to economic ones: the farmer is more accountable with respect to his field than is the politician in whose general jurisdiction that field lies. What’s more, when political actors do not directly share the opportunity costs, such as higher energy prices, less technological innovation, or a weaker economy with less growth, over-protection can occur.” (p. 190) [5]

A clever argument, but an inconsistent one. Throughout the book, Professor Tomasi repeatedly accuses social democrats and high liberals of committing the cardinal sin of capitalism, “economic paternalism”, by trying to redistribute wealth or regulate their economic freedoms, yet here he does not hesitate to promote “political paternalism,” to save the environment from over-protection and corporations from under-protection. He considers democratic citizens and their elected officials incapable of learning the truth to protect their environment and demand for clean food, clean water, and clean air, and the same for their grand children. When the vital interests of democratic citizens contradict the interests of corporations, we are expected to cheer for the “market” in the “market democracy” to shoot the “democracy” into irrelevancy!

And, despite our experience with the reckless and avaricious acts of corporations over and over, all around the world, we are again asked to be optimistic. We must be pessimistic about the capacity of citizens who cannot breath because of the smog, or suffer from diseases caused by chemicals put in their food and environment, or cannot eat sea food because of ocean-size industrial poisons, but we should put our full trust in corporations, and even in bigger corporations of the ideal political system: market democracy! We should not regulate the market; but we should delegate most of our powers to the mercy of corporations and they will come up with a solution for our pollution.

“By contrast, market democracy is optimistic about the capacity of markets to track subtle changes in people’s concerns about environmental issues, and about the ability of markets to generate diverse avenues by which people can act on those concerns for themselves. At the turn of the 20th century, for example, the global market for fair trade products was expanding at over 10 percent a year; that for organic products, at 20 percent per year. These international movements are examples of the emergent, bottom-up approach to environmental sustainability favored by market democratic regimes. As with the other aspects of justice, there can be no guarantee that the property-rights based approach of market democracies will actually satisfy the requirements of environmental justice. But here again, we are examining the institutions of market democracy at the level of ideal theory. If we grant that the institutional arrangements of social democratic regimes pass the ideal theoretic test of “realistic utopianism,” we must recognize the arrangements of market democracies as passing that test too.” (p. 190-191)

We all witnessed how the semi-regulated markets have consumed us and harmed the planet earth. They wasted the limited resources of earth through reckless promotion of consumption, raked havoc on environment, poked holes in the precious ozone layer, filled the North Pacific Gyre with tons of Texas-size floating toxic plastic island, filled our cities with smog, filled the market with unhealthy food loaded with hormones and artificial additives, killed public transportation initiatives, fought public desire to support alternative energy, contributed to climate change, poisoned our air and water with toxic materials, exploited the working class through robber-banks, doomed millions in prisons, bombarded us with lies and propaganda through their TV channels, used the children of the poor to kill the children of other poor people in wars for bloody profits, designed complex financial tricks and derivatives, and recently committed the biggest financial heist in history by transferring billions of our money into their private banks and companies as bonus for destroying the economy and having become too big to fail… and on top of that they pick and choose political candidates for us, control political parties (which they limit our choices with only two identical twins), and they manufacture public consent. And they want us to swallow this as “democracy,” with the line, hook and sinker.

This tragedy becomes surreal when we hear capitalist liberals and conservatives telling us that we need to give corporations even more power and freedom! After witnessing all of the malfeasance listed above and even more, now imagine the “potentially positive” effect of little-regulated or “hopefully and potentially” unregulated free markets envisioned by Tomasi! By the end of reading his book, if you are a “democratic citizen” you should accept the so-called Market Democracy as the “fairest of them all!” and “the most highly evolved form of liberalism” (p. 195) With the presumably democratic government’s economic powers limited or totally castrated, big multinational corporations is expected to “pursue policies of free trade, free migration and peace.” (p. 91).

Dreaming, as it appears, is not exclusive to communists who once believed that the “dictatorship of proletariat” would bring justice and peace! We are expected to believe that unregulated foxes and vultures would foster freedom, justice and peace in the chicken farm! Edip don’t be unfair; foxes and vultures are animals too! Or, Edip don’t be paternalistic by likening people to chickens; each democratic citizen is a potential fox and vulture! All animals are equal and some (less than 1 percent) are more equal. All should have right to pursue their economic liberties, so that some (less than 1 percent) could own the 90 percent of the wealth! What is wrong with that?

Freedom for Cells

The salt that rubs the wound comes in the following statement: “Market democracy rejects the contention of the early 20th century progressives that the best way for a liberal state to respect its citizens is by systematically insulating them from individual economic decision-making.” (p. 91). As the pro-abortion crowd prefers calling themselves pro-choice, and the anti-abortion crowd prefers the euphemistic pro-life, the pro-corporate intellectuals call the Forbes 500 elite “citizens,” poor citizens whose right to grow even more is limited and regulated by big bad government! Ironically, the so-called democratic government is also mostly owned by those elite citizens! The great majority of citizens are doomed to lose either way, since they are left with only two options: big government or big corporations, where the first is the disguised form of the latter wearing the Uncle Sam mask.

It is a clever hiding scheme. First, liken the multi-billionaires citizens to Joe and Jane who work hard to make the ends meet, and then make us feel pity for them regarding their “moral right” to pursue unlimited freedom as citizens! I will call them the One Percent Club. Indeed the One Percent members are citizens, but when they are unregulated by people’s government, their greed transforms them into cancer cells, betraying the rest of the citizens, their country, and even the planet they live on. Here are a few statements so that you can appreciate how lofty and how “fairest of them all” is the free market:

“A reciprocity-based conception of social justice requires that we reject the temptation to trade-off the political autonomy of individual citizens for other goods and values –however attractive or pleasant those other values might seem. Liberal justice requires that we ask of any regime: does the regime create the social conditions in which all citizens, viewed as individuals, can exercise and develop the moral powers they have as citizens: the capacity for responsible self-authorship, and the capacity to respect the self-authoring capacity of their fellow citizens too?” (p. 92)

“Free market fairness pursues a different, and more lofty [sic], moral ideal. Market democracy challenges the high liberal suggestion that we respect people as free and equal self-governing agents by restricting the range of choices they are allowed to make in the economic areas of their lives. Market democracy rejects economic paternalism, however well motivated it might originally have been. Instead, market democracy insists that economic activity and decision-making are essential aspects of responsible self-authorship: protection of economic liberty is a requirement of democratic legitimacy itself.” (p. 194-195).

“Instead, these free market regimes are the fairest of them all. Evaluated by the quality of its moral intentions, market democracy is the highly evolved form of liberalism.” (p. 195).

Greed and vice is good for you!

I am surprised not only because of what I read in the book, but also because of what is missing from the book.  This book, which presents a new moral political and economic system and yet do not even discuss the most relevant moral concept, greed. The book briefly mentions the issues without satisfactory argument and dismisses our justified concern regarding the damage of greed on the well-fare of the society. Here are the few words taken from three paragraphs:

“Naturally, these facts can read in different ways: perhaps these people are greedy, ignorant, and easily misled (as well as vain). Another reading …” (p. 16). “Cynics have an easy answer: as people’s incomes rise, they become increasingly greedy and self-interested. They resist taxes for that reason. No doubt some people resist taxes simply because they are greedy, but there also seem to be other, more complex moral factors at play” (p. 60). “Bernard Mandeville is best known for his disquieting suggestion that even the most vicious forms of vice and greed could result in positive cooperative outcomes, if only those vices would be properly channeled. (p. 104)

Indeed Bernard Mandeville is disquieting. Let the tobacco companies sell more cigarettes to our kids. Otherwise poor people working in cigarette companies will lose their jobs, and hospitals will lose revenue from people with lung cancer. Let the banks charge as much interest and fees they deem right; let the speculators play with the currency and economy. Otherwise the poor and idiot citizens will never learn arithmetic and learn how to work according to the rules.

Those who do not accept the economic reality imposed on them by banks and corporations will still have options in our free-market economy: (1) they could enroll to military service and serve the interest of free market there and strive to get medals of heroism for their “volunteer” service; or (2) become homeless and escalate the “natural selection” process; or (3) try alternative markets (steal, sell drugs, etc) and join the prison population and become invisible! Ironically, the world’s biggest capitalist and champion of freedom, has also the biggest prison population per capita, a sure product of a very free market producing not-so free people![6]

After this highly charged reaction, I suggest that Professor Tomasi should address the following points when he revises his book:

Why is it immoral to impose limitations on economic liberties? Why should we treat the right of a billionaire citizen to make more billions the same with the right of another citizen with small business? If one does not wish to live in the jungle as a Tarzan or Jane, he or she should accept that we have to compromise, and our every right and freedom is weighed against the right and welfare of others we live together.

When the rights of millions of people struggling to provide for the basic necessities of life (food, shelter and health care) clash with the rights of a few people wishing to add many more millions and billions in their bank account, the latter class have no moral high ground in demanding more freedom to make bigger profits, to build bigger mansions, and throw more ostentatious parties, while bragging about the benefits of few crumbs and drops trickled down on their servants.

The unregulated and unlimited rights for the few wealthy will only increase the gap between the rich and poor, and will lead to major revolutions around the world. We recently witnessed the decline and collapse of the one extreme, the authoritarian socialism, and there are signs that the decline and collapse of the other extreme, with its several flavors, is not too far. Bad timing for Tomasi’s book!

Accumulation and concentration of wealth is not necessarily related to hard work; many inherit their wealth, which in turn provides them with much greater advantage against the great majority of citizens. Admittedly, during the last two decades, we have seen more self-made millionaires and billionaires, but that is an anomaly and overly publicized by the propaganda machine of the capitalist system.

Recent economic data shows that the gap between two classes of citizens has been growing bigger and bigger. Furthermore, the trend is global.

World’s rich got richer amid ’09 recession: report (Reuters) – The rich grew richer last year, even as the world endured the worst recession in decades. A stock market rebound helped the world’s ranks of millionaires climb 17 percent to 10 million, while their collective wealth surged 19 percent to $39 trillion, nearly recouping losses from the financial crisis, according to the latest Merrill Lynch-Capgemini world wealth report.”[7]

Due to the economic and political system designed by the wealthy elite, increase in wealth is not linear but geometric. Such a growth usually occurs at the cost of others. There is no free lunch! In other words, the wealth is astronomically increased by astronomically decreasing the wealth and opportunities of others. In the USA, almost in every industry we now have oligopolies and they collude and fix-prices. The owners of Wal-Mart are role models for Tomasi. Perhaps, Tomasi wishes less regulation imposed on Wal-Mart. Not because Wal-Mart sells some items a few cents cheaper. Tomasi is not primarily defending free-market for its over-exaggerated utilitarian advantage, but based on an idealistic concept of individual’s “economic rights.”  Wal-Mart might be praised for their management and sound business model, but do we really want having a system that rewards a few that a little better with astronomical awards? Do we really want to live in a world where life is like the TV’s Survivor, in which one takes all, or monopoly game, or any other games produced by corporations to condition us to their maxim “Life is not fair. One person or one team must win and the rest must loose!” In the world of Wal-Marts there could be only few citizens who would exercise their economic rights. Does Tomasi know how many small businesses went bankrupt and lost chance of exercising their “economic rights” because of the giant fish in the sea?[8]

The wealth accumulated in the USA is not just generated by hard working capitalists, but partially is gained and sustained by overt and covert military aggression and imposition against other nations with rich natural resources.

I would like to finish this draft article with the remarks of Chris Hedge in April 15, 2011, in Union Square in New York City during a protest across Bank of America.

“We stand today before the gates of one of our temples of finance. It is a temple where greed and profit are the highest good, where self-worth is determined by the ability to amass wealth and power at the expense of others, where laws are manipulated, rewritten and broken, where the endless treadmill of consumption defines human progress, where fraud and crimes are the tools of business.

“The two most destructive forces of human nature—greed and envy—drive the financiers, the bankers, the corporate mandarins and the leaders of our two major political parties, all of whom profit from this system. They place themselves at the center of creation. They disdain or ignore the cries of those below them. They take from us our rights, our dignity and thwart our capacity for resistance. They seek to make us prisoners in our own land. They view human beings and the natural world as mere commodities to exploit until exhaustion or collapse. Human suffering, wars, climate change, poverty, it is all the price of business. Nothing is sacred. The Lord of Profit is the Lord of Death.” [9]

I know that this article has become too long and polemical, yet I cannot ignore the voice of a famous consumer advocate, Ralph Nader, whose fight against big car companies have perhaps saved the lives of someone you know:

Meanwhile, the inequality, gouging, political exclusions and overall gaps between the top one percent and the rest tighten the grip of the oligarchy and its draining, violent militarized empire.

Loss of control over almost everything that matters, including their children to daily direct corporate marketing of junk food and violent programming, is rampant. Over seventy percent of those polled told Business Week that they believed corporations had “too much control over their lives”—and that was in 2000 before conditions and controls—viz, the Wall Street collapse, severe recession and taxpayer bailouts—worsened.

The American people don’t see much they can do to counter the pressures of greed and power that tracks them daily from debt to debt, from lower standards of living to outright penury, from denial of critical healthcare to the iron collar of the cruel credit score, from inscrutable, computerized bills to fine-print contracts trapping their sense of unfairness into waves of frustrations, from being put on hold by the companies until they’re told no, no, no or penalty, penalty, penalty!

How do we break the cycle of despair, exclusion, powerlessness, and endless betrayal by those given the authority to bring down the exploiters and oppressors to lawful accountability?

The Empire rips up the Constitution and takes the reserve army of the young unemployed to kill and die in aggressive wars of the White House’s choice, with Congress watching from the sidelines; its only role to funnel trillions of tax dollars into the insatiable war machine’s unauditable budgets. President Eisenhower wanted us to control the “military-industrial complex”. Instead it grew much more out of control. Eisenhower’s grave warning as expressed in his farewell address in 1961 was prescient.

The spark can come from a recurrent sequence of abuses that strike a special chord of deeply felt injustice. Or it could be a unique episode or bullying that tolls the feeling “enough already” throughout the land. Such sparks cannot be manufactured; the power to arouse and break people’s routines is spontaneous.

When that moment comes, millions of Americans whose self-respect and keen sense of wrong will remind them precisely why our Constitution begins with “We the People” and not “We the Corporations”. They will realize the necessity for a Jeffersonian revolution. [10]


[1]       UA Philosophy Department Ranks 13th in the World; Political Philosophy Specialty Ranks 1st. See:

[2]      David and Charles Koch made billions from refining oil and they have recently poured their money to kill social projects, financial and environmental regulation and the laws protecting consumers. They have been donating millions to numerous conservative and libertarian think tanks, organizations, scholars. It is now evident that the so-called ultra conservative Tea Party was not a grass root organization, but was the product of Koch brothers. Many people living in poverty were manipulated through jingoistic and deceptive propaganda leading them to vote against their own interest.

[3]        Ibid, 1245.

[4]        David Schmidtz, “The Institution of Property” in The Common Law and the Environment: Rethinking Statutory Basis of Modern Environmental Law (Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2000), 177. See also David Schmidtz “When is Original Appropriation ‘Required’?” The Monist, 73 (1990): 504-18.

[5]        Terry Anderson and Donald Leal Free Market Environmentalism (San Francisco: Pacific Research Institute for Public Policy, 1991).

[6]         Pierre Thomas and Jason Ryan, U.S. Prison Population Hits All-Time High: 2.3 Million Incarcerated, ABC News, June 6, 2008. Accessed On May 5th, 2011. Http://Abcnews.Go.Com/Thelaw/Story?Id=5009270&Page=1

[7]        World’s rich got richer amid ’09 recession: report, By Joseph A. Giannone, New York, Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:55pm, Reuter. com

[8]       Sean Gregory and West Deptford, Walmart’s Latest Move to Crush the Competition, Time Magazine, Sep. 09, 2009 , Accessed on May 5, 2011,8599,1920698,00.html#ixzz1LVDHOJEp

[9]        Chris Hedge, Throw Out the Money Changers, Published on Monday, April 18, 2011 by (Accessed on April 26, 2011)

[10]       Ralph Nader, Waiting for the Spark, Published on Tuesday, April 19, 2011 by

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Muhammad Wrote and Compiled the Quran

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

The Quran was Compiled in

a Book by Prophet Muhammad

Tuna Ulaş
Kodex Wetzstein II 1913 13v16
Dear Edip,
Because it is not so possible to contact you via e-mail possibly due to the hundreds of messages that you receive on daily basis, I wanted to try here, The Facebook’s comments section. Actually I would love to share my story with you but here I will keep it short and only share a view on a very little part of an issue: the integrity of Quran. Maybe you have already been aware of what I will say. If so, I am sorry. But this is something that I have realized and been able to relate very recently.
Sunnis claim-at least in a few hadiths-that in the time of the prophet, Quran had been written on the feathers and bones of animals, stones so on, but not compiled as a book. This attribution is also used and supported by some other opposing views claiming that the Quran couldn’t have stood up as preserved. However in the Quran (21:104), we encounter to a reference which I think is very thought-provoking and a very strong denial to the aforementioned attribution.  Verse 21:104 likens the end of the universe to the collapsing pages of an open book.*  This reference is to nothing but to ‘the book’, to its archetypal structure so as to help the hearers of the holy message envision metaphorically how the universe will end.
What I have inferred from that is, if the books were so much common enough to be given as references in the Quran in the time that it was revealed, how could Quran itself not be transferred to papers and not be compiled as a book immediately? To make my point clearer, in accordance with its very basic aim-guiding people in the way of the truth-, Quran wouldn’t expect people to envisage a case through an object that they were not familiar with. Therefore, we can readily comprehend that the people of every level had already known, observed and grasped how a book was like up until that time.
In the time that the Quran revealed, books were not rare as much as many people conceive as if so today. We can support this with many evidences. For example, a type of book which is the product of the Roman world, called ‘Codex’ was available at least in the first century CE., as some sources indicate. I don’t even mention another type of book, Scroll which is the preceding one of the Codex and was probably so much easier to provide. (To see some sources please follow the link I know that the Wikipedia should strictly be avoided sometimes, but the references to the dates in the page are from some solid sources.) We can also infer that these two type of books-mostly the latter one which I have mentioned, scroll) resemble the type told and described by the verb “roll up” in the aforementioned ayah. (Also, as far as I remember in one of your podcasts you have mentioned the very comprehensible possibility of bringing papyrus to Arabia from Egypt)
What sects claim in hadiths or various sectarian books seems more obscure, if we consider the fact that writing had already begun becoming a common practice in the Near East-though Arabia not included in- in the second millennium BCE. (At least, in that time, it had no longer been a mysterious practice.)** Additionally considering the fact that Quran refers to ‘the writing’ ‘to pen (kalem)’ in 96:4 saying “Who taught by the pen”, these claims come out even more obscure. I think we are being warned in the ayah against such kind of later fabrications denying the holy book compiled in the time of the prophet. The ayah is very clear: Your God taught you to write, that is, you know how to write, how to use a pen.
All in all, with the help of the two before-mentioned ayahs (21:104 and 96:4) which direct us to contemplate on the issue painstakingly, we can infer that the Quran had already been written and compiled as a book in the time of the prophet. It was the book sent by God, and its receivers and believers would later be obliged to pay some big prices just because of their loyalty to the message of the God. For instance, they would later be forced to leave their lands, be threatened with their lives. So then, is it something reasonable to think that those people acted such negligently and did not compiled the message for which they ventured to be killed?
* The Quran contains accurate information about cosmology, such as, the big bang, expansion of the universe and close universe. See: Quran: a Reformist Translation.
** C. Warren Hollister, Roots of the Western Tradition, (USA: McGraw-Hill, Inc., 1996) p. 45
FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

حوريان‏ نارپستان همسال

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

نگاه تازه به سوره نباء

سونیا جهانگیر
 February 2014 

Sonia - behesht

در این نوشتار می خواهیم کاربران محترم توجه داشته باشند که شاید آن معنی و ترجمه ای که تا حالا از سوره نباء در ذهن داشتید درست نباشد. برای واضحتر شدن مطلب چند تا از نمونه ترجمه های مختلف می آوریم و بعد آن ترجمه که به نظر ما صحیح است را حضورتان تقدیم می کنیم. آیه  مورد نیاز شماره 33 است. اما برای روشن شدن مطلب از آیه 31 شروع می کنیم.

إِنَّ لِلْمُتَّقِينَ مَفَازًا ﴿۳۱﴾

براي پرهيزگاران مسلما پيروزي بزرگي است.

حَدَائِقَ وَأَعْنَابًا ﴿۳۲﴾

باغهايي سرسبز، و انواعي از انگورها. (در این 2 آیه اختلاف چنینی به چشم نمی خورد)

وَكَوَاعِبَ أَتْرَابًا ﴿۳۳﴾

این آیه مورد بحث است. الآن چند تا نمونه می آوریم

–        و دخترانى همسال با سينه‏هاى برجسته (فولادوند)

–        و حورياني بسيار جوان و هم سن و سال (مکارم شیرازی)

–        و [حوريان‏] نارپستان همسال‏ (خرمشاهی)

–        و دختران زیبا که همه در نیکی و خوبرویی مانندیکدیگرند (تفسیر المیزان)

–        و دخترانى نارپستان و هم سال (تفسیر راهنما)

–        کنیزکان نارپستان و همسال (تفسیرهدایت)

–        و نیز براى پرواپیشگان حوریانى است بسیار جوان و همسال، که سینه هاى آنان تازه برآمده و برجسته شده است (مجمع البیان)

یعنی همان طوری که در تفاسیر و ترجمه های که بالا مشاهده نمودید،  همه مفسران اتفاق نظر دارند که “کواعب” یعنی زنان یا دختران هستند. اما اگر به لغت مراجعه کرده بیشتر دقت کنیم، خواهیم دید که این واژه دارای معانی مختلف هست که مناسبتر آن معنی “تو پر”، “سرشار”، “مملو” است:

كَعَبَ الإِنَاءَ ” : مَلَأَهُ[1] یعنی فعل کعب به معنی “پر کردن ” است.

.   کواعب –  جمع کعیب و آن در وزن فعیل است. فعیل می تواند فاعل و یا مفعول باشد. مثل واژه “جریح” و یا “رحیم”. این جا  کعیب مفعول است و معنی آن “تو پر”، “سرشار”، “مملو” است. و این مفعول صفتی است برای انگوری که در آیه قبل آمده.

اما واژه “اترابا”:  «أتراب»، جمع «ترب» بر وزن «مصر» است. به معنی ” همسالان”، “همزادان” و یا “همزمان رسیدگان” است. از آنجا که این صفت دوم برای انگور است، همزمان رسیدگان به آن بیشتر می خورد. با این حال ترجمه آیه 33 چنین خواهد بود:

–   و (انگورهای) سرشار و همزمان رسیده

الآن آیات ما قبل و ما بعد را با هم پیوند بزنیم و با هم بخوانیم تا موافقت بودن آن با قاعده “وحدة السیاق” را به وضوح ببنیم:

براي پرهيزگاران مسلما پيروزي بزرگي است* باغهايي سرسبز، و انواعي از انگورها* و (انگورهای) سرشار و همزمان رسیده* و جامهايي لبريز و پياپي

به این شکل هم پیوند بین آیات حفظ خواهد شد و هم یک اشکال دیگری هم حل می شود. اما اشکالی که در این جا وارد است: اگر متقینی که قرار است در بهشت لذت ببرند شامل زنان و مردان باشند (که مسلما این طور است)، اهل جنت لذتی که در بهشت ببرند، باید برای هر دو جنسهم جذاب و لذت بخش باشد. اما اگر آن معنی که مفسرین کردند را بپذیریم، برای خانم های بهشتی چندان جالب نباشد که دختران نارپستان آنجا حضور پیدا کنند (چه بسا ناراحت هم می شوند).

سونیا جهانگیر


Özet tercüme

Naba süresındeki / kevaib/   arap dili sözlüğünde birkaç anlama gele bilir. Bunlardan en uygun olduğu bence budur

كَعَبَ الإِنَاءَ ” : مَلَأَهُ[1]

Yani kaabal ina – kabı doldurdu anlamını verir.   کواعب =  جمع کعیب  ve bu feiyl فعیل    veznınde olup مفعول  ‘’dolu , doldurulmuş’’

dolu sözu bir sıfat tır. O da bir önce zikir edildiği üzüm’e aittir.

اترابا  ise

Aynı zamanda pişmiş anlamındadır öyleyse ayettin meali şöyle olacak:

32. bahçeler ve üzümler

33.Sulu (dolu) ve aynı zamanda pişmiş

34. dolu- dolu kadehler onlarındır

Böyle oldukça ‘’vehdetu siyak’’ kuralıya da daha uygun olacak


Sonia Cihangir

[1] المعجم: الرائد و المعجم: الغني  ماده: ک ع ب:

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Speech at Princeton University

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Speech at Princeton University on

Peacemakers Constitution

Draft by Edip Yuksel, J.D. and Layth Saleh al-Shaiban

(The following is outline of the PowerPoint presentation by Edip Yüksel at the conference titled
Constitution and Islam, organized by NAAIMS and Princeton University)

Edip Yuksel at Princeton University

Prof. Jon Mandaville (Portland State University), Prof. Aisha Musa (Colgate University) and Edip Yuksel at the conference on Constitution and Islam, Princeton University, September 28, 2013.

The Origins of Sectarian Teachings

After the death of the prophet Muhammad, a diabolic event happened. In direct contradiction to the teachings of the Quran, male clerics dedicated the religion not to God alone, but to a “holy” corporation consisting of:

  • God +
  • Muhammad +
  • Muhammad’s companions +
  • The companions of Muhammad’s companions +
  • Early sect leaders +
  • Late sect leaders +
  • Early scholars of a particular sect +
  • Late scholars of a particular sect, and so on.

The product of this corporation was the hadith (teachings attributed to Muhammad), the sunna (actions attributed to Muhammad), the ijma (consensus of a select group of early scholars), and the sharia (religious decrees by early scholars). The result was numerous hostile factions that afflicted a great amount of division and atrocities in the land about thirty years after the departure of Muhammad (6:159; 23:52-56). This concoction of medieval Arab/Christian/Jewish cultures was introduced to the masses as God’s infallible religion, as delivered by the last prophet. The only thing actually delivered by God to Muhammad, however, was the text of the Holy Quran, which is set out as the final and authoritative divine message to humankind.

Soon after Muhammad’s death, thousands of hadiths (words attributed to Muhammad) were fabricated and two centuries later collected, and centuries later compiled and written in the so-called “authentic” hadith books.

  • to support the teaching of a particular sect against another (such as what nullifies ablution; which sea food is prohibited);
  • to flatter or justify the authority and practice of a particular king against dissidents (such as stories about Mahdy and Dajjal);
  • to promote the interest of a particular tribe or family (such as favoring the Quraysh tribe or Muhammad’s family);
  • to justify sexual abuse and misogyny (such as Aisha’s age; barring women from leading Sala prayers);
  • to justify violence, oppression and tyranny (such as torturing members of Urayna and Uqayla tribes; massacring the Jewish population in Medina; assassinating a female poet for her critical poems);
  • to exhort more rituals and righteousness (such as nawafil prayers);
  • to validate superstitions (such as, magic; worshiping the black stone and the Kaba);
  • to prohibit certain things and actions (such as, prohibiting drawing animal and human figures; playing musical instruments; chess);
  • to import Jewish and Christian beliefs and practices (such as, death by stoning; circumcision; head scarf; hermitism; rosary);
  • to resurrect pre-Islamic beliefs and practices common among Meccans (such as intercession; slavery; tribalism; misogyny);
  • to please crowds with stories (such as the story of Miraj, that is ascension to heaven and bargaining for prayers);
  • to idolize Muhammad and claim his superiority to other messengers (such as numerous miracles, including splitting the moon);
  • to defend hadith fabrications against monotheists (such as condemning those who find the Quran alone sufficient); and even
  • to advertise products of a particular farm (such as, the benefits of dates grown in a town called Ajwa).

Federal Secular Constitution
Quranic foundation

The Quran REMINDS us universal laws governing human societies, the right balance between the rights and duties of a society and its individual members.

They are not just utopic ideas, but realistic laws that reflect reason and respect nature, which when applied during the era of last prophet, worked like a miracle. Not Sword, but Mind and Heart!

Islam: a Natural System

The Peacemakers Constitution is drafted under the light of hundreds of Quranic verses. Of course, we are not devoid our cultural biases as every generation was. But, we argue that an Islamic constitution based on God’s signs (ayaat) in scripture and nature, provides the most advanced map for the best possible society.

Islamic System can be summed up in a few words. Let’s call them the 5 Principles of Islam:

  • Use your Mind. Use your reasoning faculties
  • Seek Freedom. Search for truth and submit to the truth alone
  • Care about others and stand for Justice. Protect the poor, weak, children, needy, and the oppressed.
  • Be a Peacemaker. Peace with self, God, people, nature.
  • Be Appreciative. Don’t waste God’s blessing; protect the environment.

Few Examples of Quranic Signs

Before sharing with you some of the features of Peacemakers Constitution, I would like to remind you some signs (verses) of the Quran that provides basis for it.

Question! Think for yourself!

ولا تقف ما ليس لك به علم ان السمع والبصر والفواد كل اوليك كان عنه مسولا

Do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these are held responsible for that. (17:36)

ويجعل الرجس علي الذين لا يعقلون

He casts the affliction upon those who do not reason. (10:100)

وما لهم به من علم ان يتبعون الا الظن وان الظن لا يغني من الحق شيا

While they had no knowledge about this; they only followed conjecture. Conjecture is no substitute for the truth. (53:28)

Be Free! Seek and serve the truth!

We are all Equal. No intermediary between God and us! God is Haq (truth). Thus, submit to the Truth alone!

انما الهكم اله واحد

You have only ONE lord. (6:19; 41:6 …)

لا اله الا الله

There is no god but the god. (3:18; 37:35…)

ولا يتخذ بعضنا بعضا اربابا من دون الله

… do not accept each other as lords besides Him.
(3:64; 12:39; 3:80; 9:31…)

Be Equal! You are all brethren.
Each is created with honor

يايها الناس انا خلقنكم من ذكر وانثي وجعلنكم شعوبا وقبايل لتعارفوا ان اكرمكم عند الله اتقيكم ان الله عليم خبير

O people, We created you from a male and female, and We made you into nations and tribes, that you may know one another. Surely, the most honorable among you in the sight of God is the most righteous. God is Knowledgeable, Ever-aware. (49:13)

ولقد كرمنا بني ادم

We have honored the Children of Adam … (17:70)

Be a Peacemaker!
Fight only against the aggressors

يايها الذين امنوا ادخلوا في السلم كافه ولا تتبعوا خطوت الشيطن انه لكم عدو مبين

O you who acknowledge, join in peace, all of you, and do not follow the footsteps of the devil. He is to you a clear enemy. (2:208)

ان الدين عند الله الاسلم

God’s system is peacemaking and peaceful surrendering (islam). (3.19)

لا اكراه في الدين

There is no compulsion in the system (2:256)

Freedom of Expression

اذا سمعتم ايت الله يكفر بها ويستهزا بها فلا تقعدوا معهم حتي يخوضوا في حديث غيره انكم اذا مثلهم

… when you hear God‘s signs being rejected and ridiculed in, then do not sit with them until they move on to a different subject; if not, then you are like them… (4:140)

Distribute wealth

ما افا الله علي رسوله من اهل القري فلله وللرسول ولذي القربي واليتمي والمسكين وابن السبيل كي لا يكون دوله بين الاغنيا منكم

Whatever God provided to His messenger from the people of the townships, then it shall be to God and His messenger; for the relatives, the orphans, the poor, and the wayfarer… (59:7)

Election, consultation, justice

ان الله يامركم ان تودوا الامنت الي اهلها واذا حكمتم بين الناس ان تحكموا بالعدل

God orders you to delegate the responsibilities to those who are qualified. If you judge between the people, then you shall judge with justice. (4.58)

والذين استجابوا لربهم واقاموا الصلوه وامرهم شوري بينهم ومما رزقنهم ينفقون

Those who have responded to their Lord, and they hold the contact prayer, and their affairs are conducted by mutual consultation among themselves, and from Our provisions to them they give. (42:38)


يايها الذين امنوا كونوا قومين لله شهدا بالقسط ولا يجرمنكم شنان قوم علي الا تعدلوا اعدلوا هو اقرب للتقوي واتقوا الله ان الله خبير بما تعملون

O you who acknowledge, stand for God as witnesses for justice, and let not the hatred towards a people make you avoid being just. Be just, for it is closer to awareness, and be aware of God. God is Expert over what you do. (5:8)

Rule of Law

يهاجروا وان استنصروكم في الدين فعليكم النصر الا علي قوم بينكم وبينهم ميثق والله بما تعملون بصير

… if they seek your help in the system, then you must support them, except if it is against a people with whom there is a treaty between you… (8:72)

واوفوا بعهد الله اذا عهدتم ولا تنقضوا الايمن بعد توكيدها وقد جعلتم الله عليكم كفيلا ان الله يعلم ما تفعلون

You shall fulfill your pledge to God when you pledge so, and do not break your oath after making it, for you have made God a sponsor over you. God is aware of what you do. (16:91)

Some Features of
the Proposed Draft Constitution

The following is a progressive constitution for peacemakers. It is not a utopia. Let’s discuss it, improve it, promote it, and work hard to make it the constitution of our countries!

The proposed Peacemakers Constitution:

  • Balances modern powers, such as media and corporations, to create the government of people by people and for people.
  • Aims to eliminate the role and influence of money in political system through separation of government from corporations. As Jesus expelled the money-changers from the temple, we should also expel the corporate lobbyists, the hoarders and greedy pigs from bribing public servants and spreading their disease in public offices.
  • Bans the privatization of military industrial complex to promote domestic and global peace, to eliminate the wars-for-profit.
  • Proposes federal secularism and allows more room for reflection of cultural and religious differences within the limits of the constitution. Provides protection for atheists and heretics.
  • Creates three houses through three different election processes. National Congress will consist of National House of Elected Politicians (EP), National House of Elected Experts (EE), and National House of Semi-Random Citizens (EE) with equal number of members. First house will be elected through national votes, the second through academia, the third will be determined through lottery election to monitor the financial transactions of the members of both houses and other high ranking public officers.
  • Introduces automatic expiration date for the constitution so that each generation will be given the opportunity to live under their own constitution.
  • Guarantees for each citizen the necessities of life, such as food, shelter, education and primary health care through work or social programs.
  • Reduces the power and profits of banks, speculators, and financial institutions. As the government is for the people, not vice versa, the corporations will be for the people, not vice versa.
  • Promotes competition and excellence, yet at the same time promotes cooperation and sharing among citizens.
  • Requires critical thinking and philosophy among the core curriculum in education.
  • Rejects the capitalistic dogmas, propaganda and consumerism that allowed big corporations to recklessly exploit workers, manipulate consumers, waste limited natural resources and pollute the environment.
  • Provides maximum protection for individual freedoms and rights.
  • Emphasizes the importance of human life, compassion and respect to nature and reflects those values in the proposed design of the new flag.

 For the full text of the Peacemakers Constitution click here:

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare


FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare


20 August 20013

Women veil

SUBHAN ALLAH: Salam, I am familiar with the argument that khimar (24:31) is anything that covers. What do you understand by the word jilbab (33:59)? Does it refer to a “wrapping” garment or can it refer to any kind of garment/covering?

EDİP: Jilbab is outer garment. It is any type of cloth that people normally wear outside; which is not their underwear or night clothes.

As it seems, some people are approaching this simple issue like the Jewish Rabbis approached to the issue of heifer; as they asked the color and age of the heifer. The more you ask questions regarding certain practices the more it will become difficult for you (5:101). Why? Because of the cause-and-effect relationship between “demand and supply”… Religious scholars will provide volumes of stupid details for you to turn yours and everyone else’s lives into hell. In the end the women will be buried alive in black sacks, sometimes covering even their faces, thereby destroying their identity in society and turning them to slaves of ignorant and arrogant men.

I will no more respond to any question on clothes and fabric. If they wish, let them walk naked. It is much better than fabricating dress codes in the name of God. The best attire is righteousness (7:26).


FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Women in hell

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare
Buhari: 29, 304, 1052, 1462, 3241, 5197, 5198, 6449, 6546. Muslim: 80, 885, 907, 2737, 2738. Tirmizi: 635, 2602, 2603, 2613. Nesei: 1493, 1575. İbni Maje: 4003. Malik: 445. Darimi: 1007. İbni Hanbel: 2087, 2706, 3364, 3376, 3559, 4009, 4027, 4111, 4140, 5321, 6574, 7891, 8645, 14386, 27562, 27567, 19336, 19351, 19415, 19425, 19480, 19484, 20743, 21729, 26508.

Buhari: 29, 304, 1052, 1462, 3241, 5197, 5198, 6449, 6546. Muslim: 80, 885, 907, 2737, 2738. Tirmizi: 635, 2602, 2603, 2613. Nesei: 1493, 1575. İbni Maje: 4003. Malik: 445. Darimi: 1007. İbni Hanbel: 2087, 2706, 3364, 3376, 3559, 4009, 4027, 4111, 4140, 5321, 6574, 7891, 8645, 14386, 27562, 27567, 19336, 19351, 19415, 19425, 19480, 19484, 20743, 21729, 26508.

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

37 Books

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

37 Books Recommended

49 Fantastic And Funtastic Books
Recommended by Edip Yüksel, in no Particular Order, Except the Obvious One

1.   Language and Symbolic Power, Pierre Bourdieu

2.   Innumeracy, John Alles Paulos

3.   Genius, Harold Bloom

4.   Philosophical Investigations, L. Wittgenstein

5.   Intelligent Design, William A. Dembsky

6.   Losing Faith in Faith, Dan Barker

7.   Exploring Islam in a New Light, Abdur Rab

8.   Universal History of Numbers, Georges Ifrah

9.   Jesus, Interrupted, Bart D. Ehrman

10. Islamic Theory of Evolution, T.O. Shanavas

11. Hegemony or Survival, Noam Chomsky

12. God & The New Physics, Paul Davies

13. The Blind Watchmaker, Richard Dawkins

14. Allah, Liberty and Love, Irshad Manji

15. Professor Stewart’s Cabinet of Mathematical Curiosities, Ian Stewart

16. Introduction to Logic, Copi and Cohen

17. Discipline & Punish, Michel Foucault

18. 101 Ethical Dilemmas, Martin Cohen

19. NINETEEN: God’s Signature in Nature and Scripture, Edip Yuksel

20. Human Body: a Family Reference, Parragon

21. 101 Philosophy Problems, Martin Cohen

22. Power of Logical Thinking, Marilyn Vos Savant

23. Quran, Hadith and Islam, Rashad Khalifa

24. The Philosophy Gym, Stephen Law

25. Is God a Mathematician, Mario Livio

26. The Demon-Haunted World, Carl Sagan

27. Flim-Flam, James Randi

28. Why People Believe Weird Things, Michael Shermer

29. Euphemism & Dysphemism, Keith Allan & Kate Burridge

30. Understanding Islamic Law (Shari’a), Raj Bhala

31. The Copernican Revolution, Thomas S. Kuhn

32. The Mathematical Experience, Philip J. Davis

33. Unsolved Problems in Number Theory, Richard K. Guy

34. Losing My Religion, Jeffrey Lang

35. The Math Book, Clifford A. Pickover

36. Perspectives from the Past: Primary Sources in Western Civ. (2 vol), James M. Brophy, et al.

37. Quran: a Reformist Translation, Edip Yuksel, Layth al-Shaiban, Martha Schulte-Nafeh

38. The End of Science, John Horgan

39. 501 Things You Shoulhd Have Learned about Philosophy, Metro Books

40. The Most Beautiful Mathematical Formulas; Salem, Testard, Salem

41. Critical Thinkers for Islamic Reform, Editor: Edip Yuksel et al.

42. The Quran: Unchallengeable Miracle, Caner Taslaman

43. The Big Bang, Philosophy and God, Caner Taslaman

44. Eureka: 81 Key Ideas Explained, Michael Macrone

45. The World’s Best Puzzles, Charles Barry Townsend

46. Running Like Zebras, Edip Yuksel

47. The 100 Greatest Most Influential Persons in History, Michael H. Hart

48. Manifesto for Islamic Reform, Edip Yuksel




FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Polycentric community

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

The Concept and Structure of
Polycentric community

Abdun Nur
31 March 2012

“We are all creatures of one world; we are all of one blood. To hate a man because he was born in another country, because he speaks a different language, or because he takes a different view on this subject or that, is a great folly. Desist, I implore you, for we are all equally created… let us have but one end in view, the welfare of mankind.” Johann Amos Comenius (slight edited)

The outline of the polycentric community is given in the essay polycentric community linked here. Community originates from Latin ‘communitas’ (cum, “with/together” + munus, “gift”)

“There is something about modern society which persistently denies mankind’s nature. People are separated from the natural conditions in which they might be happy and fulfilled and as a consequence social problems develop.” Community is the solution.


The concept of community is in direct opposition to that of the concept of State; a State holds control over the individual, regulating, licensing, monopolizing, and bureaucratising, as a master over a slave; while a community is common unity of interaction between individuals; the inherent tendency of the State is to concentrate, to narrow, and monopolize all social activities; the nature of community is, on the contrary, to grow, to broaden, and disseminate community and individual interactions in ever-wider circles, founded on social activity. In other words, the State is institutional and static; community is fluent, and dynamic. These two tendencies are incompatible and mutually destructive. The corporate system is based in the stagnance of the corpse, a dead systems of control through ownership, practically holding the living in a state of living death, a state they seldom even recognise as they have known no other state, as a result this commonly engenders feelings of depression, apathy, worthlessness and futility in life itself; in contrast community is the natural state of social life, a living state, a place few in the corporate dominated world have ever enjoyed.

The concept of community is not well understood, as the corporate system is a powerful force against it, working to suppress or removing it completely, it drains the resources, so opportunities for the individual, and squanders their time on the treadmill of predominantly pointless industry for the attainment of the delusion of accumulating wealth.

A community is a group of men, women and children living and interacting with one another in a particular environment for the benefit of both themselves and those around them. The individuals in a community affect each other’s abundance, distribution, and evolutionary adaptation in production, innovation and development. Depending on how broadly one views the interaction between individuals, a community can be small as in a family or group of friends, or local, as in a village or town community, or regional as the collective of communities that grow out from the individual community groups, where individuals interact regionally becoming wider then it’s a global community of individual interactions between distant communities, so manifesting diversity, creativity and common unity; like Russian dolls community hides within itself community, all from the common unity between living souls.

“We must do away with the absolutely specious notion that everybody has to earn a living….We keep inventing jobs because of this false idea that everybody has to be employed at some kind of drudgery because, according to Malthusian-Darwinian theory, he must justify his ‘right’ to exist….The true business of people should be to go back to school and think….” Richard Buckminster Fuller (1895-1983)

There are many structures that can be created as a basis of community; I will give a few examples to present the concept clearly.

A Technology Based Community

Technology is using knowledge and tools to solve existing problems, advance solutions of potential problems, or developing new avenues of creativity.

The corporate system functions on monopoly, either by State sanctioned privilege or economic State regulation, these globalised monopolies manifest in the retardation or complete suppression of new technological developments that would threaten an existing monopoly.

To a community based system that situation is a gifted which avails opportunity, this retardation of technology has existed for a least a 100 years. The State institutions of media, education and bureaucracy have worked to discredit these technological developments, marginalise the scientist responsible, through creating disinformation to confuse, deceive and mislead the common man.

“We’ll know our disinformation program is complete when everything the American public believes is false.” William Casey, CIA director (from Staff meeting 1981)

“The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge” Stephen Hawking

A community based on the development of technology is by nature one of selective inclusion, as dictated by three elements, knowledge, skills and imagination. In many ways this community empowers all others; it is a potential engine of creation that lifts society out of scarcity and exclusion, therefore is the most important to develop. Technological communities are not limited to energy generating system, but all aspects of scientific knowledge.

If suppressed or ignored technologies are developed, this will make viable the creation of communities based on the allodial cooperative model, founded on the production, implementation or dissemination of these technological developments.

If the disinformation generated by the State is removed through the practical application and physical evidence of the creation of advanced technological products, it exposes the States disinformation for exactly what it is, both demonstrating the State, their universities and corporations as liars, but also making those in the community based model of society the most advanced and technological based system.

A Trivium Based University Community

Originally education was in social codes and manners within a systematic schooling and training for the benefit of performing work.

With the creation of the trivium this evolved into the developing of the powers of reasoning and judgment, and the general preparation of the intellectual faculties of the individual.

The State has worked diligently to remove the trivium from the State education system, leaving that method of the development of reason available only to those lucky enough to be in the private schools of the elite, a trivium based education is called a ‘classical education’. To understand the trivium method of reasoning please read this link ‘The Trivium’.

All State systems of education are based upon the Prussian school of education, which is based on memorisation and regurgitation of authoritative knowledge, this form of knowledge based on the logical fallacy of an appeal to authority without investigation of evidence or comprehension of the basis, structure or true nature of what is taught, the true form of knowledge is comprehended knowledge. This perversion from true education is a result of the Napoleonic War, which demonstrated to the elite a population able to reason through the methods of the trivium cannot be easily controlled, indoctrinated or confused.

The States further attacks the reasoning abilities of the population through chemical poisoning of water supply and food, and the promotion of misrepresented pharmaceutical medicines; this is compounded by the media system and bureaucratic system.

In the modern world education has fallen more and more into the manipulations and confusions of the elite sovereigns who dictate upon the people, this has inevitably lead to a situation where, what is taught is not what is useful, true or evolving.

For an example, within physics, nothing has truly advanced in theoretical physics since the 1930’s, the abstract mathematical theories are no longer held up purely through experimentation or the observation of physical phenomenon, but by the invention of new theories or forces invented to maintain the failures in practical application of the central theories, all founded on the extensively disproven big bang theory.

The desire of all States to maintain ignorance and propagate disinformation has led to the long standing situation of stagnation, in many areas of scientific investigation. Within physics it can be traced back to the modern banking system, which required the charging of energy to maintain its control of the world, hence our continued use of the combustion engine, a technology that has not fundamentally changed very much since its first development a 150 years ago.

“Today’s scientists have substituted mathematics for experiments, and they wander off through equation after equation, and eventually build a structure which has no relation to reality.” Nikola Tesla

The University of the Trivium as a basis of a community is by its nature one of selective inclusion, as dictated by three elements, knowledge, skills and imagination.

As the State corporate system has worked to corrupt or hide knowledge and has a corporate university system based upon profit and graduating in degree, as an attainment of memorised authoritative knowledge, knowledge widely consider wholly worthless in real life application such as industry, with the vast majority of graduates failing to gain any true benefit from the years spent attaining their very expensive certification.

Detractors may argue a community based university that granted qualifications would not have them recognised, however  a system based on comprehended knowledge that can truly be applied in the real world would afford the individual achieving such an education a vast and powerful advantage over the authoritative model of soon forgot memorisation.

A document signifying an understanding of the highest level of a subject would stand on its own merits, in physics for example you may not get the grants of the sovereign state but you will most certainly be sort out by anyone who wished to truly develop technologies utilising knowledge the conventional universities refuse or are prevented from having known.

A community based upon the University of the Trivium would have a huge potential of growth in symbiotic service communities around it, accommodating the endless influx of students, in temporary living accommodation, shops and restaurants, social facilities and entertainment.

The cost of attending a community based university would be a fraction of the cost of attending a conventional one, as would the cost of accommodation and services. This would also increase the appeal and open up greater opportunities for the less affluent. In theory it may even be free, in a system without taxation or profits, altruistic support would be the common and healthy reality, as the affluence of those who had gained benefit from the community contributed towards the education of others, and the allodial cooperatives who reaped the benefits of the knowledge and skills of graduates showed their appreciation and investment in potential future cooperative members.

Finding experts in the fields of study that would be taught within the university is also yet another gift of the corporate system, as those individuals that do not accept the conventional views, these conventional views standing against the physical evidence, are marginalized, often refused grants, job opportunities within state or lesser corporations, due directly to the control of the banking elite, wishing to make the truth an expensive career move. The true cream of all the intellectual minds, are the ones pushed out of the sovereign system. They are also the altruistic, the seekers of truth, the brave and the honest, intellectuals, pioneers and innovators as all these attributes are needed to stand up for the truth.

The creation of a university community would be the most advanced and would quickly become both sort after and highly regarded place of learning. The education provided would lift students up to genius levels of competence making them the true cream of intellectual, philosophical, technical and creative fields of every area of knowledge and development.

An Allodial Industrial Based Community

Industry is the physical production of goods or services diligently created.

An industrial community based upon allodial cooperatives are created based on production of goods or services; there are major advantages over the corporate model. A corporation is the organisation of a group of men and women who work together for their own advantage, to gain ‘profit’ through capital advantage, granted monopoly, and the protection of corporate legislation to remove accountability and limit liability for those involved.

The concept of ‘Profit’ is not well understood, it is an invented amount added to the selling price above all the cost of production. Profit has many logical fallacies applied to give it some justification; a common claim is as a pecuniary gain resulting from the employment of capital, please read the ‘Fraud of Capitalism’. The profit of the corporate system has many layers; each external element of production adds profit, as does the granting State corporation which adds its own profit, extracted through taxation, this applies to every aspect of production, fuel, transport, capital advances, rent (rates) from the State Corporation, etc. This profit is considered part of production costs, the producing corporation then adds it profit as does the granting State corporation as tax, as do all retailers who sell on the products and as does, again, the State corporation which adds its profit of taxation. The end result of this profit based system is, the end consumer of a product pays on average over 90% more for goods and services than the true value.

This corporate profit once removed gives enormous benefit to an allodial cooperative system, allowing the creation of products free of profit, but increasing the earnings of those who are producing significantly while reducing the cost to the end user by a vast amount.

The corporate system commonly produces goods with limited application through engineered redundancy, intentionally manufacturing goods to fail after limited use, in the view of the producing corporation as close to the end of the warranty as possible. The production of goods which are energy greedy and inefficiently designed, that do not take advantage of advances in technology that would weaken or remove the existing monopolies of the producing corporation.

For example: a washing machine created by the consumer products giants Unilever (who along with Procter & Gamble (P&G) in October 2012 have been fined 315m euros (£280m, $456m) for fixing washing powder prices in eight European countries) was developed that used no chemicals at all to clean clothes, and cleaned clothes considerably better than any chemical based cleaning additive, but instead of using washing powder it used oxygen in the form of ozone within the water, ozone generated by the washing machine. This technology would be easy to develop and produce within a cooperative model, further a machine could be designed to last a life time, being over engineered, designed easy to maintain and to repair. The adding of State taxation and corporate profit that inflates the cost of a washing machine, would not be applicable, an allodial cooperative could manufacture with cheaper costs than the corporate model, while being constructed from much higher quality components, attention to detail, workmanship and technology, while providing considerably more benefit financially to those actually labouring in its creation.

The truth is, an imposed monopoly, always creates an opportunity for those who it cannot be imposed upon, the media whore of the corporate system attempts to convince the masses that the existing system is the very best that can be offered, when it is the opposite.

Air Field Travel Based Community

At present the corporate system holds people within Corporate States, making a living man, woman or child a corporate entity, with a certified berth in the ship of citizen (birth certificate). When the State acts against or in benefit it is through the Citizen-ship, hence in court you are in a dock, a place to harbour a ship, or if you want to leave one Corporate State for another, you use a Port, a sea port, or an airport.

In reality a State is a fiction to enslave those within its control, but a living man or woman is not a fiction, and are not the property of a state, these fictions are imposed through the founding fiction of ownership, explained here ‘The Onion of Ownership’.

Within the corporate system the costs of flights are inflated by as much as 90% by State imposed taxation, in addition States impose a system of visas which are endorsements of certification to restrict or gain revenue from those wishing to pass from one port to another.

“A DEA helicopter was used to gun down two pregnant women and two 14-yr-old boys in Honduras because they were “suspected” of being drug dealers? Well, those same tactics are now being used in America.

After being pulled over for having a suspect “covered truck bed,” a vehicle which fled from Texas game wardens was shot at by Texas “Department of Public Safety” agents with a sniper rifle from a helicopter. While the police claim they were intending to disable the car, they instead killed two passengers, and sent another to the hospital. No drugs were found, and the DPS says their shooting was “within policy.” From a news report in San Antonio from 1 November 2012.

The agents of the Corporate States around the world murder many innocent people annually to prevent them from passing across their invented fictional borders, and their acts of cold blooded murder go without account, if in the corporate system you murder for the State, those murderers believe they have immunity from any accountability, this insanity cannot be allowed to continue, people must begin to wake up and remove themselves from these invented fictions. Those guilty of murder must be tried in a court of the living and if found guilty executed, their resources going to their victims’ families.

The allodial cooperative has many advantages over the corporate structure, with the creation of an airfield and facilities for the landing, take-off, shelter, supply, and repair of aircraft, and facilities used for receiving or discharging passengers and cargo at regularly scheduled times, the basics of an air field would be in place, this would be a large community project requiring many skilled members.

With no involvement of the Corporation of State the cost of transport would be a fraction of the corporate cost. Technology could be quickly improved developing air craft based on the Hutchison Effect, discovered by the Canadian John Hutchison, which allows anti-gravity systems that are far safer, cost effective, none polluting and quiet.

An Agricultural based community (hemp)

The corporate State prohibits the growing of hemp, as this single plant genus is the most important to agriculture. Under the lie of drug use, they have prevented the cultivation of this group of plants, it has no damaging side effects even as a recreational drug, in studies it has been shown to improve the health and capacity of the lungs, it aids the body in healing, it relaxes and calms the user, it is impossible to over dose on hemp, no one has ever died from using it as a drug.

“Whose property is my body? Probably mine, I so regard it. If I experiment with it, to who must I be answerable? I, not the State.” Mark Twain

Hemp is one of the most useful plants on Earth. For thousands of years, humans have used parts of the hemp plant for food, textiles, paper, fabric, and fuel oil. It grows quickly, naturally resists plant diseases, requires little weeding, thrives in most climates, and enriches the soil it grows in.

Hempseeds and hemp oil are highly nutritious and delicious. Hempseeds are an excellent source of protein, minerals, and dietary fibre. Hemp is the only plant that contains all of the essential fatty acids and amino acids required by the human body.

It is a natural emollient so is ideal for lotions and many other skin, hair, and cosmetic products.

Hemp has been used to make paper for thousands of years. It regenerates in the field in months, unlike trees which can take 30 years or more to become harvestable after planting.

It can be used to make a variety of fabrics, similar to but more durable than cotton. Hemp is also excellent for making rugs and other textiles. The word canvas comes from the Latin word for hemp.

Standard plastic is made from fossil fuels using toxic chemicals. Almost everything we buy is wrapped in cellophane and our landfills are full of it. A variety of alternatives to plastic can be made from hemp.

In 1941, Henry Ford held a media event where he swung an axe at a prototype car body made of hemp and other plant material to prove its strength, proven to be 10 times stronger than steel. The technology was never put into mass production, cars continued to be made of steel, and plastics made from petrochemicals became the norm.

Hemp based materials can replace wood and other materials used to build homes and other structures including foundations, walls, shingles, panelling, pipes, and paint. The modern hemp building materials Hempcrete and Isochanvre are lightweight, waterproof, fireproof, self-insulating, and resistant to pests.

As a base of a community hemp would provide the raw material of production endlessly, in diverse and sustainable areas.

These are just a few examples of what a cooperative based community could organise around, in fact the possibilities are limitless.


The structure of community can be varied, the main constraint being maintaining the inherent power of the individual, and the prevention of hierarchical structures being imposed upon any other.

The idea of a leader, boss, or superior authority is widely propagated by corporate society, it being founded on hierarchies; this creates inequity, a superior over an inferior man, who is driven, compelled to labour, is made dependent through the scarcity of monopoly, who lives in fear, taught wilful ignorance and subjugation. This leads to many who are made to feel inferiority themselves having a desire to dominate those weaker in society, so using others for their own advantage.

“There is nothing noble in being superior to your fellow man; true nobility is being superior to your former self.” Ernest Hemingway

Community is based on education, so the most valued members are not leaders, bosses, etc., but teachers; coaching and guiding others, generating trust and instilling passion, enthusiasm and security. Knowledge is the endless spring of transformation.

“Mighty little force is needed to control a man whose mind has been hoodwinked; contrariwise, no amount of force can control a free man, a man whose mind is free. No, not the rack, not fission bombs, not anything, you can’t conquer a free man; the most you can do is kill him.” Robert Heinlein

The central element of community is trade, people create and people require this is the nature of mankind. This means the central component of a community is the establishment of an allodial labour repository. Please read the essay ‘Repository Finance’.

Trading is done under the protection of the surety bond system, a surety bond is a written agreement between two living men or women that creates a reciprocal bond, an individual can have up to 23 bondsmen, if one bondsmen defaults on any trading obligation the other bondsmen will step in and fulfil that obligation to the best of their ability, this protects agreements in trade, providing security and certitude. Please read the essay ‘Surety Bond’.

As trade is central, and for the most part unique to mankind, the need for a market to exchange goods is also central, in the original system of market towns and village satellites, each village had easy access to several market towns, with each market opening on different days of the week, this allowed traders to move from one market to another to sell their goods. This was often refined to have different traders on different days; grocers and food goods market on one day, a clothes and furnishings market on another for example.

In the simple diagram below is graphic views of the idea of communities building outward, all variations of community are both independent and interdependent.

Polytechnic community


Community by definition must be tight knit, a group of strangers can only exist in a locality not in common unity. Group size varies according to what type of community is involved, for example within an allodial cooperative the group size should ideally never get above 15 members as it can generate conflicts within the group, when the group reaches or surpasses 15 it would be wise to split the group into two separate cooperatives.

Likewise in social community too great a number of members can remove the unity that is the foundation of community. Therefore ideally as a community grows too large it gradually and organically divides, what the ideal number is for a community would depend on that group of individuals.

Permaculture Common

The old system of a Common within a village community, where all could share the land for grazing, can be extended to a Permaculture Common; this is in addition to independent market gardens around a home, or the green house farming of out of season fruits and vegetables, or a cooperative based farm. If an area is designated for the purpose of a Common anyone who wished to contribute their time or resources into its creation and maintenance could do so.

Once established a permaculture system would require minimal maintenance, harvesting of food would be the main activity and that its self would be for the individual who wished to take what they needed in fruits and vegetables from that common source, the only constraint being it is free and not to take more than you require.

Permaculture design emphasizes patterns of landscape, function, and species assemblies, maximizing useful connections between components and synergy of the final design.

This would allow anyone requiring fresh and organic fruit and vegetables a seasonal supply with minimal labour and effort. Although all could share the resource of the permaculture Common not all would be involved in its creation and development, this does not matter as in a community many common elements are involved, common roads are created by some and used by all, common parks are created by some and used by all, everyone contributes as their nature allows some in labour others with the donation of resources, others through teaching, others through helping, all benefit.

Communal Agreement

Democracy is a fraud and is not the basis of community; see the essay ‘The Fraud of Democracy’. All decisions of a common nature, not decisions of an individual nature that do not need the consent of any others, are based on consensus, not majority dictate, and are always bound by the innate duty of care each has for those around them.

For example if a bridge is suggested over a river, at a location, the first thing to establish is if those who dwell directly around the site of the bridge have any objection. If they do another location would have to be found.

After this it must be supported by 23 members of the community.

Then the community must be informed of the proposal, and all suggestions, additional proposals and objections put forward for rebuttal or agreement. If objections are raised that cannot be settled between those for, and those against, then the dispute could be taken to arbitration, where a group of 23 peers randomly selected and unconnected to the case or any in dispute listen to the arguments for and against, and establish a conclusion that is binding in consensus.

If all are then satisfied and the bridge is to be built, those who wish its creation must either provide the resources and labour needed, or seek donations as unadulterated gifts of resources and labour to achieve their objective from community members, they must also seek or provide the competence to achieve the task technically, sustainably and harmoniously with its surroundings.

If a suggested project involves more than one community, for example a road between two communities, then a similar process is undertaken.

Communal Services

Enforced monopoly stagnates innovation, initiative, and engagement, and is not healthy for the community or the individual. States function upon the imposed monopoly of services, and rob the population through force or the threat of force to pay for these imposed services whether you want them or not.

If a service is truly required then people will create it locally for local use, for example children need education, in the corporate system parents do not have time to educate their children, but a parent is an important teacher in life, and would be the best early educator. If within a community a school is required it would be funded through the community repository as it is the foundation of the innate condition of mankind, we are created to learn, to reason, to imagine.

Those who wished could give the resources and labours towards the creation of the school, and any short fall would be provided by the repository which would advance the labour required to establish the school, and fund the teachers, and learning materials. The school would be a cooperative of all the teachers within it, the advanced labour would be repayable by the teachers but would be held in surety by every member of the community whose child was a student of the school, the teachers would not be bound to repay the advance it would fall straight to the surety.

The advance of labour would be repaid to the repository by donations from members of the community and through fund raising events.

The resources donated as unadulterated gifts that form the school, are held as the possession of nature, having been returned to nature, and so are held in the allodium of nature itself; no man or woman can make selfish use of shared elements of nature.

A community school would not teach based on the Prussian school of education, of memorisation and regurgitation of authoritative knowledge, but would teach based on the trivium so teaching and learning comprehended knowledge, as detailed in the essay ‘The Trivium’. This is known as a classical education.

Some services are open to two options, payment on utilisation or bonded assurance; these services include the multitude of medical services, and dental services. Please read the essay ‘Bonded Cooperative Assurance System’ to understand this further.

The vast majority of imposed services of the State are rendered redundant when theft, monopoly, subjugation and exploitation no long function through invented authority to dominate the people. The police for example are not required, as the surety bond system establishes order within the community, and those who champion the cause of the weak establish relief through the court of the living.

Court of the Living

Please read the essay ‘The Court System’



“To disarm the people… was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.” George Mason

An armed population is not dangerous, in fact educated and community based individuals are quiet capable of possessing a gun safely, just as they are of possessing a car, which can be used with equal destructive force if in the wrong hands. What is proven incredibly dangerous is a Corporate State holding a monopoly on gun possession.

We feed off of its industry, we bury its seed in the dust, we burn up its resources, we maintain its condition of indigence, what is it, the flesh of our neighbour.

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Turkey’s False Nostalgia

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Turkey’s False Nostalgia

New York Times, June 16, 2013

Gezi Parkı

ISTANBUL — THE demonstrators who have filled the streets of Istanbul and other Turkish cities for nearly three weeks complain that Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party, known as the A.K.P., has adopted an increasingly authoritarian attitude that threatens basic freedoms. They also resent his tendency to meddle in the personal lives of citizens — by condemning abortion or trying to control the sale and consumption of alcohol.

But Mr. Erdogan isn’t the first Turkish leader to have flirted with authoritarianism and social engineering. This is important to remember, since many of his opponents tend to hark back to a nostalgic past, best illustrated by the profusion of Turkish flags and images of the republic’s founder, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk.

Before claiming that Mr. Erdogan’s moves can be countered by returning to the foundations of the secular republic, we should recall that Turkey was not a democracy until 1950; that it was ruled consecutively from 1923 to 1946 by two unchallenged leaders, Ataturk and Ismet Inonu, each invested with dictatorial powers; and that its democracy was “interrupted” three times by military coups or interventions, in 1960, 1971 and 1980, not to mention a failed one in 1997. Moreover, Turkish “secularism” often marginalized and oppressed those who openly displayed their beliefs; head-scarf-wearing women were banned from universities, and few protections were given to religious minorities.

Turkey’s past has little to offer in terms of democratic inspiration. Ironically, there is hardly any difference between the nostalgia for Ataturk-era secularism and the A.K.P.’s glorification of the Ottoman imperial past. Both rest on the reinvention of an imagined golden age — the former with a secularist emphasis, and the latter with a focus on Islamic identity. And both look back fondly on authoritarian regimes, which makes them all the less credible as political models for a democratic present and future.

The current protest movement isn’t about the past; it is about today and tomorrow. It started because a new generation wanted to defend Gezi Park, a public green space, against the violent, abusive manner in which the government sought to sacrifice it to the gods of neo-liberalism and neo-Ottomanism with a plan to build a replica of Ottoman barracks, a shopping mall and apartments.

The real challenge for the protesters, therefore, is to ensure that this movement is not hijacked by a Kemalist backlash that seeks to reduce Turkey’s complex social problems to a simplistic dichotomy between Islam and secularism.

What Mr. Erdogan is currently undermining and destroying isn’t an imagined golden age of a secular and democratic Turkey, which never really existed, but rather the “état de grâce” that followed his party’s first electoral victory in 2002. For five or six years, the A.K.P. used democracy as its only defense against the authoritarian ways of the old guard — the coalition formed by the secular political parties and the army, long considered the guarantor of secularism.

It is disturbing that Mr. Erdogan, after years of successfully fighting the legacy of military control, has now chosen to revive precisely the same methods and strategies that characterized his predecessors’ rule. Banking on the combined power of religion and nationalism in a country whose population is known for its conservative attitudes on both counts, he is seeking to do with the help of the police what previous governments did with the help of the army.

Just as it seemed that the protesters had sealed their victory and forced the government to recognize their legitimacy, another brutal police crackdown began on Saturday evening. To make matters worse, Mr. Erdogan is now inciting and mobilizing his own supporters in a dangerous game of intimidation and escalation. Unless moderates in his own party abandon their unquestioning submission to his leadership and speak out, the situation could deteriorate further.

Turkey has come to a point where the government, setting aside timid attempts at conciliation, seems intent on waging all-out war against any opposition to its policies. A crisis that could have been managed through a democratic process has now escalated to a frightening level of polarization and violence.

A.K.P. leaders need to understand that true secular democracy is the only viable way to guarantee the rights and freedoms of all citizens, including Muslims. And Mr. Erdogan’s opponents must grasp that true secularism, contrary to its earlier Kemalist incarnation, requires that the principles of democracy be applied to all members of society. Unfortunately, the new egalitarian discourses rising from Gezi Park risk being drowned out in the clamor of an outdated political struggle.

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

The Terrible Terrorist Test

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

The Terrible Terrorist Test

Edip Yuksel
1 May 2013

Stop terrorism

Angry Sunni Protest

‘Muslims are evil. Let’s kill them all’ — Twitter by US Fox TV commentator Erik Rush, reacting to Boston bombing, April 15, 2013

“Boston Marathon bombing suspect Dzhokhar Tsarnaev left a note claiming responsibility for the April attack, describing it as retribution for U.S. wars in Afghanistan and Iraq… In the note, Tsarnaev described the bombing victims as “collateral damage,” CBS reports. “When you attack one Muslim, you attack all Muslims,” Tsarnaev wrote. He described his brother Tamerlan, who died in a shootout with police, as a martyr.” — John Miller, CBS, 16 May 2013

1. Which is the best definition of “terrorism”?

a. Foreigners killing Americans
b. Radical Muslims killing Americans
c. Radical Christians killing Muslims
d. Targeting and killing civilians for political and military gain

2. Before organizing the biggest terrorist act against the United States, Ben Laden was trained by:

a. SAVAK of Iran
b. MOSSAD of Israel
c. KGB of Russia
d. CIA of the USA

3. The first terrorist act of al-Qaida in the United States was committed against:

a. A Jewish Rabi
b. A Catholic Bishop
c. A Christian Scientist
d. A Muslim Scientist

4. Which one of these statements has not yet been made by the Bush government and American mainstream media to justify the invasion of Iraq?

a. Saddam helped al-Qaida.
b. Iraq has weapons of mass destruction.
c. Will bring democracy to Iraq and they will welcome us with flowers.
d. Our oil companies, contractors and Military Industry Complex need to make bloody profit.

5. In 22 July 2011, Anders Behring Breivik, a then 32-year-old Norwegian right-wing extremist, attacked the government, the civilian population and

a Workers’ Youth League (AUF)-run summer camp claiming a total of 77 lives and injuring more than 300, mostly teenagers. Which one of these descriptions was NOT used by the American mainstream media for the culprit of the 2011 Norway Attacks?
a. Lone-Wolf Terrorist
b. Right-wing extremist
c. Mass murderer
d. Christian Terrorist

6. In September 11, 2001 approximately 3000 Americans were killed by terrorists. But many Americans are killed every year. There have been an estimated how many gun deaths in the United States, a figure that includes homicides, suicides, and unintentional shooting deaths?

a. About 1000
b. About 5000
c. About 10000
d. About 30,000

7. On July 1995, Bosnian Serbs killed more than 8,000 Muslim men and boys, as well as the ethnic cleansing of another 25,000–30,000 refugees, in and around the town of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina in what is now referred to as the Srebrenica massacre… Which one of these descriptions was not used by the mainstream American media?

a. Serbian Nationalists
b. Serbian gunman
c. Serb forces
d. Christian Terrorists

8. Which one of these descriptions is never used by the American mainstream media for Jews or Israel?

a. Israeli soldiers, Jewish settlers
b. Our closest ally
c. The only democracy in the Middle East
d. Jewish terrorists, our terrorist ally

9. Which of these corrupt and criminal dictators and terrorists were not supported by the USA?

a. Reza Shah (Iran), Saddam Hussein (Iraq), Mubarak (Egypt), Saud family (Saudi Arabia), Mobutu (Zaire), Menachem Begin (Israel),
b. Ferdinand Marcos (Philippines), Suharto (Indonesia), Kamirov (Uzbekistan)
c. Gen. Augusto Pinochet (Chili), Gen Jorge Rafael Videla (Argentina), Anastasio Somoza (Nicaragua), Col. Hugo Banzer (Bolivia)
d. Col. Qaddafi (Libya), Abdul Nasser (Egypt), Hafiz Assad (Syria)

10. We have witnessed some incidents where those of convicted of adultery were “stoned to death” in Afghanistan and Iran. Which of these “holy books” contain such a law? (You may check more than one).

a. Quran
b. The New Testament
c. The Old Testament
d. Jewish and Arab hearsay books, such as Talmud and Hadith books

11. Which one of these is the biggest terrorist act in last century?

a. 9/11 World Trade Center Attack, 2001
b. Sabra and Shatila massacre, 1982
c. Oklahoma City Bombing by Timothy McVeigh, 1995
d. Bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, 1945.

12. Besides ACLU and many other civil organizations, which one of these politicians and opinion leaders condemned torture and stood against its justification?

a. David Horowitz, Robert Spencer
b. Glenn Beck, Michael Savage, Sean Hannity, Rick Perry
c. Senators Kelly Ayotte (R-N.H.), Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas), Greg Ball (R-N.Y)
d. Senator McCain (R-AZ), congressmen Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Bob Filner (D-CA), Dennis Kucinich (D-CA)

13. The critics of American foreign policy argue that the terrorist gangs are reaction to or by-product of the US long tradition of invasions, wars, covert operations and support for tyrants. They claim that War on Terror is the propaganda tool to keep the wheels of the Military Industrial Complex oily, to intimidate third world countries to favor and grant concessions for American companies, to buy surplus or outdated weapons, etc. They also argue that the American government, which has become subservient to global companies, uses fear and paranoia to force the American citizens to trade their civil liberties, freedoms and privacy rights for more security. In 2012 the US military budget was bigger than the military budget of which of these countries?:

a. Russia and China combined.
b. UK, Japan and France combined.
c. Saudi Arabia, India, Germany, Italy and Brazil combined.
d. All of the above combined.

14. Edip Yüksel, in a speech at European Parliament, strongly condemned the USA’s use of drones to assassinate people around the world without trial. “We are now using drones to assassinate people without trial, poor people who stand against our aggression and hegemony. The list of wars, covert operations and countries bombed by the USA-Inc, printed in 9 points Times Roman, single space, one line for each country, is five times longer than my middle finger. With Cognitive Dissonance every bloody list is possible!” (Edip Yuksel, excerpt from speech made in European Parliament, Brussels, June 7, 2012). The USA and Israeli Drones have been terrorizing millions of people in many Middle and Far East countries. How many civilians do the drones kill for every “terrorist”?

a. 2 civilians for every terrorist.
b. 5 civilians for every terrorist.
c. 10 civilians for every terrorist.
d. 50 civilians for every terrorist.

ANSWERS for The Terrible Terrorist Test

1. The universally accepted definition of terrorism: Targeting and killing civilians for political gain

2. Before organizing the biggest terrorist act against the United States, Ben Laden was trained by: CIA of the USA

3. The first terrorist act of al-Qaida in the United States was committed against: A Muslim Scientist, Dr. Rashad Khalifa, Tucson, Arizona.
“Dr. Rashad Khalifa, was assassinated in 1990 by a terrorist organization organized in Salt Lake city. The members of al-Fuqra, which was later claimed to be affiliated with Ben Laden’s newly founded Al-Qaida, stabbed him to death in our Tucson Mosque. The assassination of my mentor and its aftermath was widely covered by Arizona Daily Star and Tucson Weekly and local radio and TV stations. After September 11, the national media picked up the story. For instance, Newsweek and Dan Rather at CBS Evening News declared this incident to be Al-Qaida’s first terrorist act in the USA. See: CBS Evening News with Dan Rather, on October 26, 2001; cover story of Newsweek, January 14, 2002, p.44. On March 19, 2002, KPHO-TV at Phoenix, a CBS affiliate, in its evening news, broadcast an interview with me under the headline: Traces of Al Qaeda Cell in Tucson. However, despite its importance in revealing the theological vulnerability of Al-Qaida, this first terrorist event did not receive the attention it deserved. Curiously, The 9/11 Commission Report (2002) left out this important first act of terrorism in the US from the report.” (Edip Yuksel, NINETEEN: God’s Signature in Nature and Scripture, BrainbowPrees, 2011, p. 361)

4. “Our oil companies, contractors and Military Industry Complex need to make bloody profit,” was never been said by the Bush administration and American mainstream media to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Associated Press, Iraq Body Count Project, Iraq Family Health Survey, Lancent Survey provides different numbers for war casualties in Iraq. The minimum number given by these sources for Iraqi civilians killed in violence as direct cause of USA invasion of Iraq between 2003-2012 is more than 110,000. Lancent Survey counts more than 600,000 violent deaths from March 2003 to June 2006, while The Opinion Research Business Survey puts the number above 1 Million Iraqis between March 2003 and June 2006.

5. In 22 July 2011, Anders Behring Breivik, a then 32-year-old Norwegian right-wing extremist, attacked the government, the civilian population and a Workers’ Youth League (AUF)-run summer camp claiming a total of 77 lives and injuring more than 300, mostly teenagers. The description that was NOT used by the American main media for the culprit of the 2011 Norway Attacks: Christian Terrorist

Anders Behring Breivik in his statement after the arrest listed some Islamophobes as his major source of inspiration, such as Robert Spencer, Pam Geller and Daniel Pipes. His compendium, according to the news, “contains his militant far-right ideology and xenophobic worldview, which espouses an array of political concepts; including support for varying degrees of cultural conservatism, right-wing populism, ultranationalism, Islamophobia, “far-right Zionism”, and Serbian paramilitarism. It regards Islam and “cultural Marxism” as the enemy and argues for the annihilation of “Eurabia” and multiculturalism, to preserve a Christian Europe.” Anders further urged Europeans to restore the historic crusades against Islam as in the Middle Ages.

6. Every year about 30,000 Americans are killed by gun arms unrelated to the so-called “terrorism”. For instance, on December 14, 2012, Adam Lanza (20) attacked Sandy Hook Elementary school, killing 28 students and staff.

Adam Lanza, who terrorized and killed elementary school children, was not declared as an “American terrorist.”
“Since 9/11, the Brady Campaign tells us, there have been an estimated 334,168 gun deaths* in the United States, a figure that includes homicides, suicides, and unintentional shooting deaths. The total is 100 times larger than the toll of September 11, 2001. Each year, since that day, approximately 30,000 people have been killed by firearms in America.” (Andrew Cohen, Under a Blood Red Sky, The Atlantic Monthly, 21 July 2012).

7. The mainstream American media never referred to the Christian Serbs who slaughtered and raped thousands of Bosnian Muslims as Christian Terrorists.

“The most vocal of the haters are almost always religious Christians. They make excuses for things like the Spanish Inquisition and other massacres saying those were before the Christian church was reformed. Apparently it wasn’t much of a reform. We had Christian terrorist Timothy McVeigh murder 168 people. We’ve had Christian terrorists attack abortion doctors. And of course, the KKK. One of the most brutal acts of Christian terrorism is often overlooked. That is the Bosnian Genocide, which refers to the attempted annihilation of Muslims by Christian Serbs in former Yugoslavia from about 1992-1995. On July 1995, Bosnian Serbs killed more than 8,000 Muslim men and boys, as well as the ethnic cleansing of another 25,000–30,000 refugees, in and around the town of Srebrenica in Bosnia and Herzegovina in what is now referred to as the Srebrenica massacre… Of course, right-wingers have spun all the facts on the U.S. involvement in the Bosnian conflict because, 1) it was an act by a Democratic president, and 2) because the criminals were Christians and the victims were Muslims. Had we intervened sooner, many more lives could have been saved. But at least we did intervene and the region has been peaceful since that time. It was one of America’s more successful foreign interventions.” (Ben Hoffman, Christian Terrorism: The Bosnian Genocide, The Hoffman Post, 18 September 2010).

8. The phrases such as, Jewish terrorists, our terrorist ally are never used by the American mainstream media for Jews or Israeli state.
As of 1st May 2013, according to http://ifamericansknew.orgsite:

  • 129 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 1,516 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000. 
  • 1,097 Israelis and at least 6,638 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000. 
  • 9,081 Israelis and 49,518 Palestinians have been injured since September 29, 2000. 
  • Israel has been targeted by at least 65 UN resolutions and the Palestinians have been targeted by none. 
  • 0 Israelis are being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 4,656 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel. 
  • 0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 27,000 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since 1967. 
  • Israel currently has 269 Jewish-only settlements and ‘outposts’ built on confiscated Palestinian land. Palestinians do not have any settlements on Israeli land.
  • During Fiscal Year 2011, the U.S. is providing Israel with at least $8.5 million per day in military aid and $0 in military aid to the Palestinians.

9. Col. Qaddafi (Libya), Abdul Nasser (Egypt), Hafiz Assad (Syria) are the few corrupt and criminal dictators and terrorists who were not supported by the USA.

“Eric Holder argued that using lethal military force against an American in his home country would be legal and justified in an “extraordinary circumstance” comparable to the September 11 terrorist attacks. “The president could conceivably have no choice but to authorise the military to use such force if necessary to protect the homeland,” Mr Holder said. His statement was described as “more than frightening” by Senator Rand Paul, a Republican from Kentucky, who had demanded to know the Obama administration’s position on the subject. “It is an affront the constitutional due process rights of all Americans,” said Mr Paul, a 50-year-old favourite of the anti-government Tea Party movement, who is expected to run for president in 2016. …. Mr Obama has been sharply criticised for the secrecy surrounding his extension of America’s “targeted killing” campaign against al-Qaeda terrorist suspects using missile strikes by unmanned drones. The secret campaign has killed an estimated 4,700 people in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia. A quarter are estimated to have been civilians prompting anger among human rights campaigners. According to research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism, drone strikes killed between 474 and 881 civilians – including 176 children – in Pakistan between 2004 and last year.” (Johnn Swayne, Washington; Barack Obama ‘has authority to use drone strikes to kill Americans on US soil’, The Telegraph, 6 March 2013)

10. Man-made insertion to The Old Testament and Jewish and Arab hearsay books, such as Talmud and Hadith books contains instructions for “stoning to death” for adultery.

Below is an excerpt from Manifesto for Islamic Reform by Edip Yuksel, BrainbowPress, 2007, pp. 13-14)

Stoning-to-death is never recommended in the Quran as a punishment for any crime. It was a Jewish practice which found its way into the practice of the so-called Muslims centuries after the revelation of the Quran, through hadith and sunna. The God who legislated a hundred lashes for married adulterers who accept the jurisdiction of Islam (24:1-10; 4:25) is the same God who made the Quran clear (24:1), who does not have any shortage of words (31:27), who is the best legislator (5:50), who does not forget (19:64), and who has detailed the Quran (11:1; 6:114; 12:111).

Ironically, the word rajm is used in the Quran not for stoning but for rejecting and excommunicating. This is a common threat used by pagans against monotheists (11:91; 19:46; 36:18; 18:20).

The Old Testament instructs a stoning-to-death penalty for various sins and crimes, including witchcraft; blasphemy, violating the Sabbath, and murder:

“Again, thou shall say to the children of Israel, Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that gives any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones.” (Leviticus 20:2) “A man also or woman that hath a familiar spirit, or that is a wizard, shall surely be put to death: they shall stone them with stones: their blood shall be upon them.” (Leviticus 20:27) “And he that blasphemes the name of the LORD, he shall surely be put to death, and all the congregation shall certainly stone him: as well the stranger, as he that is born in the land, when he blasphemes the name of the LORD, shall be put to death.” (Leviticus 24:16) “And the LORD said unto Moses, The man shall be surely put to death: all the congregation shall stone him with stones without the camp.” (Numbers 15:35) “And if he smite him with throwing a stone, wherewith he may die, and he die, he is a murderer: the murderer shall surely be put to death.” (Numbers 35:17) “But if this thing be true, and the tokens of virginity be not found for the damsel: Then they shall bring out the damsel to the door of her father’s house, and the men of her city shall stone her with stones that she die: because she hath wrought folly in Israel, to play the whore in her father’s house: so shalt thou put evil away from among you.” (Deuteronomy 22:20-21)

Exodus chapter 21 has many more stoning-to-death instructions. Even animals get their share of this stoning penalty:

“If a bull gores a man or a woman to death, the bull must be stoned to death, and its meat must not be eaten.” (Exodus 21:28)

According to the Old Testament, a rapist should be forced to marry the girl he violated. This rule punishes the victim to share the rest of her life with the violent and shameless man who violated her (Deuteronomy 22:28-30). How can this and many other unjust laws be imposed by a Just God?

11. If you define terrorism as the “targeting and killing civilians for political and military gain”, then the biggest terrorist act in last century was the Bombing of Nagasaki and Hiroshima, 1945.

Within 4 months of the bombings, 90,000–166,000 people were killed in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki, about half of the deaths occurring on the first day. In 1982 Christian Phalanjists supported by Israeli military entered Palestinian refugee camps in Beirut, Lebanon and slaughtered about 3,500 Palestinian civilians.

12. Besides ACLU and many other civil organizations, Senator McCain (R-AZ), congressmen Jerrold Nadler (D-NY), Bob Filner (D-CA), Dennis Kucinich (D-CA) condemned torture and stood against its justification.

Thousands of prisoners in Iraqi jails, especially, in Guantanamo Bay and Abu Gharib were subjected to appalling series of systematic tortures, which is called “enhanced interrogation techniques” by the US government. It was the application of the so-called Torture Manuals, which was partially declassified in 1996 by the Pentagon. Thousands of Iraqis and Afghans were raped and sodomized by American soldiers and contractors for years. And knowing the history of imperialism, I am sure that it still continues in many places around the world. No more than 30 of the despicable men and women who committed those atrocities were punished. Compared to their crimes, they received light punishment. They also disserved American people by inflaming the rage and anger against Americans, thereby adding more recruits to the terrorist organizations. The New York Times, on January 12, 2005, reported testimony suggesting that the following actions had taken place at Abu Ghraib:

• Urinating on detainees.
• Jumping on detainee’s leg (a limb already wounded by gunfire) with such force that it could not heal properly afterward.
• Continuing by pounding detainee’s wounded leg with collapsible metal baton.
• Pouring phosphoric acid on detainees.
• Sodomization of detainees with a baton.
• Tying ropes to the detainees’ legs or penises and dragging them across the floor.

Though many Americans were shocked to hear the news of torture, they forgot about it as fast as they were shocked by it!

Knowing the power of state propaganda, jingoism and common hypocrisy, many politicians promote torture based on outlandish scenarios and fear, despite the fact that torture does not help in gathering reliable information.

The table blow is sufficient to indict the USA as the major violator of human rights. It is from my friend Noam Chomsky’s book, The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism.

13. The U.S. spent more on defense in 2012 than did the countries with the next 10 highest defense budgets combined. The 10 countries spent $652 Billion while the USA-Inc spent $682 Billion, which does not include veteran benefits and healthcare costs!

14. Predator Drone strikes: 50 civilians are killed for every 1 “terrorist“.

Torture (Countries With US training) – Post World War II to 1975

Torture Countries identified by Amnesty International


Torture Country



US military Aid in $




















South Korea



South Vietnam






Saudi Arabia

































Dominican Republic



















Source: The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism, Chomsky N, Herman ES, Spokesman (1979), ISBN 0-89608-090-0, pg 361

Israli Soldier and Palestinian child

Israeli soldier targeting a potential terrorist!


Israli Soldier and Palestinian children

Aba Gharib Torture 4



FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Inherent Power

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Inherent Power

Version 11 – 6th May 2013

Abdun Nur


 Abdun Nur - Inherent Power

Inherent power is unalienable and immutable; it is derived from the nature of your creation, and binds all in reciprocation as everything is connected. When the 99% of souls would never even consider being a solider to murder and destroy in the fictional name of liberty; when the 99% of souls would never even consider being a policeman to subjugate and extort their neighbours with corporate policy; when the 99% of soul would never even consider being a lawyer to impose upon the poor and protect the rich in the name of Vatican justice; when the 99% of souls would never even consider being a bureaucrat to regulate, license, permit or control their neighbours in the name of a fiction of govern-mental corporation; only then can a soul be truly free without challenge.

Many confuse the common law with the innate system, but common law is both positive and constructive law, so not founded on inherent power, and it is derived from imposed tradition, and given validity by use and precedent, but tradition does not make a practice valid. For example the Egyptians kept slaves for thousands of years; for centuries it was tradition to bind women’s feet in China; for two thousand years we assumed the whole universe rotated around planet earth; for two centuries we have believed that democratic politics can make corporate government serve its slaves (citizens).

All positive law models are claimed traditional practices or legislated policy, imposed upon those deemed mentally incompetent or children (through the authoring of the straw man of citizen), simply because they have been doing it for so long does not make it valid.

Our innate reciprocal conditions and natural qualities bind us all in conduct towards all around us as living souls, not the dictates of the men of power, who invent authority over others, with imposed sovereignty, which creates and inflicts positive laws, implemented through their invented fictions of government, State, or corporation.

Synchronicity through cause and effect is a foundation of nature, the coincidence of related events that are not obviously interrelated, from a result of everything being connected to everything else, if you do not understand this you may act against that nature. This means a tort against your neighbour binds you to action, as to ignore the suffering of another ripples through creation in negative waves and will impact at some point directly.

This means torts that are given full relief act synchronously in positive effect, this positive actions overwhelm negative ‘A’ symmetrically, just as in nature, darkness cannot drive out darkness, a wrong cannot rectify a wrong, evil cannot be removed by evil, hate cannot eradicate hate, the negative action cannot be the cure, an un-rectified negative act is synchronous and spreads through the reality like ripples upon a still pond, to give like for like negatively creates negative effects, positively gives positive effects, equally to return negative effects for positive gives negative and to give positive to negatives gives positive. The negative is far weaker, it is always the base state so easier to establish than the positive, but a base state is easily overwhelmed by the positive, just as light overwhelms the darkness, equity heals a wrong, altruism removes evil (excess), love eradicates hate, etc. The dichotomies of nature stand evident for all to see, yet most never look.

The true substantive innate axioms function upon the suffering of the mind; such wrongs are known as torts; if there is no mind there is no suffering and therefore no wrong to answer. This is profound and innate because only consciousness tangibly exists; everything else is perception or illusion.

For example trial by jury originated in places and times where there was no state power, centralised authority, martial oppressor, or where these forces if they did exist were violently hostile to due process and the equitable relief of a living soul from torts, but the State or imposed authority was too weak and distant to entirely suppress it. A State (nation, country, kingdom, empire etc.) is a feudal land boundary and the active prevention of tort relief is a requirement in both the initiation and implementation of the feudal model.

Juries investigated torts and determined relief for the victim, this contrasts with the positive law system of feudalism which punishes the guilty and ignores the victim, having no interest in establishing any relief on their behalf.

There is a choice, you may seek society, which is equitable manners of conduct, this has no hierarchy; or you may seek culture, which is the cult of feudalism, where masters dominate the slaves, a hierarchical system.

The feudal system is achieved simply by the removal of the ability of the victim to seek the relief of torts (wrongful acts). When others can inflict torts without accountability, then a soul cannot remain free, they must seek the strongest criminal to protect them from the weaker felons, giving all they have to retain only their life in slavery; a sworn subject in fealty; this is modern citizenship.

When souls encroach upon those around them without accountability you can be sure feudalism is in force; for example when a solider murders another in the employ of his masters; when a doctor’s wilful incompetence or neglect takes a life like a thief, when a soul is kidnapped and imprisoned that poses no danger to those around them; when usury can hold a soul in poverty, servitude, and subjugation, and those suffering such torts cannot seek relief, then you are in the cult of a feudal system, extorted, beyond the perception of relief from your masters or their agents inequitable manners of conduct.

When all resources are hoarded by a few, when the fictional ships of commerce sail upon the land without challenge; ships of ownership, kingship, citizenship, lordship, leadership,  and worship, etc.; all hardship classes of vessel for those slaves who crew them through serfdom and imposed subjugation; you can be sure feudalism is at the root.

In equitable society, tortious arbitration of all disputes to relief is the foundation that holds all souls free, only a slave needs a masters consent, given as rights granted; or the fictions of State, government, corporation or trust that dominate the feudal order, all designed to prevent tortious relief. The Monopoly of Violence

The idea of law, of actions being lawful or unlawful, or even more perversely legal or illegal, has culturally instilled emotional significance, which acts in general, contrary to our innate impulses; this generally prevents the acting out of revenge, the application of equitable reciprocation, and denies the preservation of the equanimity of the mind in exchange for the perception of defencelessness.

The power to act is subverted to the authority that holds the slave in subjugation, that master claims exclusive use of violence, the slave who acts in equitable revenge, or with the equitable reciprocation of violence must answer for their conduct. So for example if an agent of the subjugating authority acts violently against another living soul that violence has no relief, to act in reciprocation of  that violence results in escalation of violence by the imposed authority, ultimately in many cases to the murder of the slave. This transferal of the use of violence from the living soul leaves them open to further extortion through granted privilege; the subjugating authority grants privilege to legal entities to act against the individual, the community or the natural environment for their mutual advantage.

If violence were used to prevent such extortion, or to punish such conduct, then such violence would not indicate a danger to a reasonable soul, but merely a reaction to inequity or the threat or use of violence from agents of a subjugating authority.

Reciprocity- Society without hierarchy

Hierarchy originates from Greek ‘hierarchía’ meaning “the rule or power of the high priest”, and functions upon the removal of reciprocity and the creation of authority, privilege, monopoly and rank, and produces excess for a minority and comparative scarcity for the majority.

Reciprocity is the innate equity of nature, from Latin ‘reciprocus’ meaning “returning the same way, alternating”.

The principle of reciprocity is the highest good encouraging goodness and decency, creating balance and harmony. Reciprocity is a free exchange of the equivalent or balanced action between living souls or living souls and nature, conceptualised as:

Don’t take more than you need.

Give at least as much as you get.

Natural or innate inherent power of the individual can be understood as equitable principles to be applied through axioms, based upon the reasoned innate state of every living inventive, premeditating soul (inventivum anima), which dictates manners of conduct based upon ‘reciprocal’ obligations and responsibilities due to all around you. While manmade codes are regulations imposed upon you through force or the threat of force (positive law- positively enforced through force). Inherent power protects you through the application of the principles of a reciprocal obligation and responsibility binding through the innate nature of the family of living souls. While hierarchy structured in positive law, uses fear and invented authority to rob you through the imposition placed upon that inherent power, coupled with a belief they are powerless to prevent or address such impositions.

Every ‘living souls’ nature, not religion, not universal mechanics, not hedonistic philosophers, establishes the basis of the innate inherent power of the individual, which is unalienable and immutable.

What then constitutes or defines a wrong against another living soul?

A tort is a wrongful act that causes mental distress or discomfort, or tortious injury, against another through a proven intentional action.

No fiction of any sort, such as corporation, State, or government can therefore suffer a tort, as they have no mind to either suffer or inflict distress, this concept equally applies to all invented legal fictions such as trusts, corporations, the public, the country, etc.

In any equitable society nothing other than the living soul’s innate inherent power can form the universal manners of conduct, defined through the examination of torts declared freely by a living soul, the protection from torts that stand as axioms self-evident, and the execution of relief when determined in full.

So to establish an equitable society would be to establish the true innate nature within each of us. What corporate society teaches to the majority from birth, are corruptions, perversions and confusions, deviations from that innate inherent natural state, some travel so far from that natural state they can no longer recognise or understand the state they began life possessing.

Our nature is a condition of birth, as with all created reality, its nature is formed at the moment of its creation, there can be uniqueness in that nature, but all share the fundamental innate nature of like creations. For example I am an inventive, premeditating soul (inventivum anima), like all universal souls I am alive, I breathe the air, I am on the Earth shared by a vast array of life forms; that is innate. The innate nature of existence functions in many areas of life, in society, trade/exchange, manners of conduct, relationships, all have innate natures, the fact these are ignored, perverted, corrupted, or confused does not alter that state, it just means that the innate nature is not applied, unnatural order is then in forced, this is clear from the present miseries souls suffers at the hand of other souls.

An inventive living soul is social in the way that wolves and penguins are social, but not social in the way that bees are social.

The kind of society that is right for bees or ants, a eusocial (truly social) collective, or totalitarian society, is not right for any inventive living soul. In the language of socio-biology, humans are social, but not eusocial. So a social ecosystem of living souls follows from the collective innate nature that exists from birth of those souls.

To understand that innate nature, it should be examined.

As the good is that at which all things aim, the good of a ship builder is to build ships, the good of a squirrel is to be an effective, successful and functioning squirrel, the ultimate good for every living inventive, premeditating soul (inventivum anima) is happiness. It is also our nature to think, the good for inventivum anima must then consist in their functioning in a way consistent with and guided by their rational element, their reason and wisdom. Therefore whatever helps the pursuit of truth is good, whatever hinders it is bad.

It is in our nature to be social creatures, as all life is connected and interdependent, which means the altruism of one has selfish benefit; the inherent ends of the living souls nature must not do what frustrates true fulfilment from indulging vices of perception encroaching externally, but through establishing true society and therefore social harmony allowing personal growth, spiritual evolution and a fertile and fruitful environment for all life.

The innate inherent power of the individual expressed through the equitable axioms of the land are defined by Burlamaqui to be: “A rule which so necessarily agrees with the nature and state of man (every living soul) that, without observing its maxims, the peace and happiness of society can never be preserved. These are called natural laws (manners of conduct) because knowledge of them may be attained merely by the light of reason, from the fact of their essential agreeableness with the constitution of man’s (every living inventive souls) nature.”

Natural axioms of the land are structures as simple principles; therefore these principles do not require the writing down of every application of the axioms in the form of does and don’ts, as these principles are applied through reason, based upon two rules that must always be maintained.

“Reason obeys itself; Ignorance submits to what is dictated to it.” – Thomas Paine

The two rules:

a.       Do not encroach upon another.

b.      Do all you have agreed to do.

Although the term law in itself is incorrect in relation to the axioms binding all through inherent power this is another’s expression of the same concept.

“True law is right reason, consonant with nature, diffused among all men, constant, eternal…..It needs no interpreter or expounder but itself, nor will there be one law in Rome and another in Athens, one in the present and another in time to come, but one law and that eternal and immutable shall embrace all peoples and for all time and there shall be as it were one common master and ruler, the God of all, the author and judge and proposer of this law.” (C.H.McIlwain, The Growth of Political Thought in the west (New York Mac-millian, 1932)pp.111-12, quoting from the De republica)

The axioms are, but not limited to:

  • NO authority can compel; equitable innate inherent power expressed as axioms can only protect. If the manner of conduct of any court does not protect me as a victim or deal equitably with me as one who has been blamed, the conduct of that court does not apply to me. In other words, if there is no victim, one tangible and of substance, there is no wrong to answer, you cannot wrong a legal fiction of public, State, or imposed sovereign parasite.
  • The inherent power of a duty of care is incumbent upon every living soul through a reciprocal obligation and responsibility to those around them.
  • All living souls in sight of the axioms of the land are created equal in dignity, privilege, benefit, nobility, value; and vary only in knowledge and skills.
  • The Protection of the axioms of the land is such as you cannot promise, contract, or make agreement to bind yourself or any other into slavery. Human Slavery – The state of subjugation and control held upon you, of a master owning the fruits of your severe toils, and drudgery in exchange for the ‘benefits’ you receive from your disadvantage. Slavery is a relation founded in force, not in equity, existing, where it does, by force of legal codes (positive law).
  • There is no collective right or rights at all, only individual reciprocal obligations and responsibilities. As there is no superior to grant rights upon an inferior, only a slave has rights, a free living soul needs no rights, they have the innate inherent power each is born with, which demands by the innate nature of “Animas-kind” the family of the living soul’s manners of conduct through reciprocal obligations and responsibilities.
  • Force is ‘just’ to defend ourselves or the weak that are encroached upon, only the initiation of force is prohibited.
  • A wrong does not excuse a wrong.
  • No one is bound to betray themselves. Therefore they have a choice to remain silent.
  • Upon the plaintiff (the complainer) rests the proving
  • Any accused is permitted to face his accuser without fear (No one else can represent you in a court unless you are mentally incompetent or incapacitated or a child).
  • Every living inventive, premeditating soul (inventivum anima) has a natural exclusive possession of their own body; and every living soul has a natural reciprocal choice to freely determine their own destiny.
  • Equity always regards the intention, as the basis of the truth of every action.
  • You can only ‘own’ what you create yourself. (Allodial utilisation)
  • Animals need only one right: the right not to be property.
  • No living inventive, premeditating soul (inventivum anima) is compelled to sell their own resources.
  • Where equity is equal, the equity will prevail equally. (Arbitration of dispute will provide no specific relief where the parties are found equal, or where neither has been wronged.)
  • An agreement must be witnessed to be binding, and written to be detailed.
  • You can only form agreement with other tangible living inventive, premeditating souls (inventivum animas).
  • You have an unlimited ability to form agreement.
  • No living inventive, premeditating soul (inventivum anima) ought to enrich themselves at the expense of (meaning to the detriment of) others.


FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Teoria Islãmica da evolução

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Teoria Islãmica da evolução por
T.O. Shanavas

Resenha do livro: Edip Yuksel

Islamic Theory of evolution
(Traducido por Pedro Miguel)

Darwin Brainbow Press


Concordo com a principal tese do Doutor Shanavas que o suporte anti-evolucionista promovido por sunitas contemporâneos e estudiosos xiitas contradiz os ensinamentos do Alcorao, bem como a evidência científica, de muitos dos estudiosos muçulmanos proeminentes que precederam o Darwin. Como todos os livros, também este deve ser estudado com a mente aberta e com um raciocínio crítico, uma epistemologia natural que o Alcorao nos lembra para usar em 39:18 e 17:36.

Este livro foi publicado anteriormente com o título Evolução e/ou Criação: uma perspectiva islâmica. Decidimos publicar a versão revista sob um novo título, Teoria da Evolução Islâmica: a ligação que faltava entre Darwin e a origem das espécies. A imagem de capa não pretende desvalorizar ou difamar Darwin, mas é destinada a descrever a atitude comum entre os defensores da teoria da evolução, como ignorar o importante contributo dos cientistas muçulmanos e eles abusam da teoria associando-se com conclusões filosóficas injustificadas, tais como o ateísmo. Consideramos que Darwin como um dos maiores cientistas que inconscientemente seguiu as instruções do Alcorao em 29:19-20 (ver abaixo).

Neste livro, o Doutor Shanavas defende a teoria da evolução científica e teologicamente e fornece um background histórico que foi erradicado da memória pública. Embora a grande maioria das pessoas, independentemente da sua religião, considerem Darwin como o iniciador da idéia da evolução, Shanavas lembra-nos que Darwin (1809-1882 ) e seu avô Erasmus Darwin foram influenciados pelo trabalho de cientistas muçulmanos que viveram séculos antes deles. Por exemplo, o Doutor Shanavas cita  John William Draper (1812-1883 ), primeiro presidente da Sociedade Americana de Química, um contemporâneo de Darwin, e um antigo presidente da Universidade de Nova York que resume a amnésia acadêmica deliberadamente induzida no Ocidente. Draper reconhece o fato de que os muçulmanos descreveram a teoria da evolução nas suas escolas séculos antes do Ocidente o fazer:

“Tenho a lamentar a forma sistemática como a literatura da Europa foi planejada para colocar fora de vista nossas obrigações científicas para com os Muçulmanos. Certamente elas não mais podem ser ocultas. Injustiça fundada no rancor religioso e vaidade nacional não pode ser eternamente perpetuada.” (Draper, John William. O desenvolvimento intelectual da Europa, pág. 42.)

“As autoridades teológicas [cristãs] foram, por conseguinte, forçadas a olhar com desfavor qualquer tentativa de levar a origem da terra a uma época indefinidamente remota, e a teoria da evolução Muçulmana que declarou que os seres humanos se desenvolveram ao longo de um longo período de tempo a partir de formas inferiores da vida, para a presente condição.” “às vezes, não sem surpresa, encontramos idéias com as quais podemos deleitar-nos com o terem originado nos nossos próprios tempos. Assim, a nossa doutrina moderna da evolução e desenvolvimento foram ensinadas nas suas [dos muçulmanos] escolas. De fato, eles levaram-as muito mais longe do que estamos dispostos a fazer, estendendo-as mesmo inorgânicamente e mineralmente.” (a história do conflito entre religião e ciência, John William Draper, 118, 187-188)

Ironicamente, essa amnésia ocidental quanto à contribuição científica de muçulmanos coincidiu com o declínio do mundo muçulmano. Abandonando o pensamento racional e a metodologia científica, que segundo o Alcorao é a condição necessária para ser um muçulmano, eles seguiram os dogmas e escrutinadores de história.

Will Durant, um historiador americano, relembra seus leitores que os livros medicos elaborados por Ali Ibni Sina (980-1037 ) e Abu Bakr Gamanga Muhammad ibn Zakariya al-Razi (844-926 ) foram utilizados como manuais em universidades europeias durante séculos, e que em 1395 o livro de Razi Kitab al-Hawi estava entre os nove livros didáticos utilizados pela Universidade de Paris. O mesmo livro informa o leitor que Avicenna’s Qanun fil Tibb, uma enciclopédia de ciência, foi o principal livro nas universidades de Montpelier e Louvain até meio do século 17. Devemos mencionar dois importantes cientistas muçulmanos que tiveram imenso impacto sobre o desenvolvimento científico na Europa: Abu Bakr Gamanga ibn Tufayl, conhecido no Ocidente como Abubacer (1107-1185 ) e o filósofo Abu al-Walid Muhammad ibn Rushd que tornou-se famoso no Ocidente pelo nome Averroes (1126-1298 ).

Os cientistas e filósofos muçulmanos do período medieval não hesitaram em aceitar a evolução como um sistema divino para a criação. Por exemplo, o proeminente pensador, filósofo e sociólogo muçulmano Ibni Khaldun (1332-1406 ), após um parágrafo sobre a origem da espécie humana, recorda ao leitor com uma estrofe descrevendo a natureza determinista do sistema de Deus: “Você nunca vai encontrar uma mudança no sistema de Deus.” No seu famoso livro Muqaddimah, Ibni Khaldun propõe uma teoria da evolução a partir de minerais. Minerais, de acordo com Ibn Khaldun, evoluiram e se tornaram plantas com e sem sements. Plantas evoluem e atingem a seu apogeu como árvores e videiras de palma. A evolução continua com caracois e animais do mar com conchas. A diversificação no reino animal atinge o zénite da criação através evolução gradual em seres humanos com consciência e habilidades racionais. Segundo Ibn Khaldun, os macacos são o elo entre os animais e a primeira fase da humanidade. Ibn Khaldun apresenta a teoria da evolução, utilizando linguagem científica, argumentando que a essência da criação (na terminologia moderna: código genético) passa por diversas alterações (mutações) gerando uma espécie após outra.

Para além destes, Muhammad al Haytham (965-1039 ), que é conhecido no Ocidente pelo nome Alhazen, defende a evolução humana a partir de minerais, plantas e animais na Kitabal Manazer, seu livro sobre ciência óptica. Os proeminentes líderes do sufismo, como Ibn Arabi (1165-1240 ) e Jaluluddin Rumi (1207-1273 ) também não tiveram qualquer problema em aceitar a ideia de criação através da evolução, uma ideia que era comumente aceite entre os muçulmanos. O muçulmano Geólogo al-Biruni (973-1048 ) no seu livro Kitab al-Jamahir também afirma que os seres humanos são criados após longos períodos de evolução de organismos simples através da seleção natural.

Infelizmente, a repressão violenta de fala e a aplicação gratuita da lei anti-Quranica da apostasia por governantes muçulmanos e sua maioria sunita e estudiosos xiitas escolhidos à mão mergulharam o mundo muçulmano numa idade das trevas. Os grandes cientistas e filósofos muçulmanos como Ibn Khaldun, Ibn Sina, Ibn Rushd foram posteriormente condenados como hereges e apóstatas. Actualmente, os muçulmanos parecem ter perdido sua capacidade de apreender o fato de que eles vivem numa idade das trevas. Uma cruzada semelhante à travada pela Igreja Católica contra o modelo heliocentrico promovido por Copérnico e Galileu agora está sendo travada contra a teoria da evolução identificada pelo cientista ocidental Darwin. Ironicamente, os apologistas sunitas e xiitas estabeleceram uma aliança contra a ciência com a ala cristã evangélica.

Um líder da cruzada sunita contra a teoria da evolução é um líder turco de culto que coloca sua marca e nome em dezenas de livros escritos, editados, improvisados, ou plagiados pelos seus seguidores que, segundo vários jornais turcos, foram arrancados às famílias mais ricas por membros do culto enquanto eles estavam na escola ou faculdade. Tenho exposto o modus operandi deste personagem num artigo, que ele habilmente escolheu Judeus e evolução como seus dois principais temas na sua ambição de declarar-se como um demagogo muçulmano. Atraindo e provocando as emoções religiosas e anticlasticas da população muçulmana, o culto publicou livros e artigos sobre Judeus e pedreiros, que cospem desinformação e ódio racista. O culto também publicou livros denunciando a evolução. O pretendente a mahdi tornou-se uma voz notória de um segmento reacionário da população muçulmana. Ele deve seu sucesso a muitos fatores, que incluem os vastos recursos financeiros do seu culto, sua auto-importância, o zelo dos seus seguidores que sofrem uma lavagem cerebral a acreditar que eles são os poucos escolhidos que irão ajudar o Mahdi e a ignorância endêmica entre seu público-alvo.

Há alguns anos atrás, escrevi um artigo filosófico intitulado The Blind Watch-watchers ou Cheirem o queijo: Am argumento inteligente e delicioso para um Design inteligente em evolução. Eu incluí o artigo entre os apêndices do Alcorao: uma Tradução reformista. Tenho argumentado que, contrariamente às afirmações das pessoas e dos ateus religiosos, a aceitação da teoria da evolução não reduz o poder dos argumentos para a existência de Deus, incluindo o argumento teleológico. A Evolução das espécies por mutação e seleção cumulativa, tal como subscrito pela comunidade científica moderna, fornece elementos suficientes para a existência de design inteligente imanente na natureza. O artigo suscitou fortes reações de seguidores fanáticos de ambos os grupos. Abaixo estão dois excertos do artigo:

Em suma, milhões de compostos orgânicos e inorgânicos, incluindo os que ainda estão para serem descobertos, com as suas características físicas e químicas distintas, devem ser a materialização da informação imanente no bloco de construção mais pequeno do universo, ou seja, o hidrogênio. Indo para trás, as mesmas qualidades devem ser deduzidas para a partícula subatômica mais fundamental. Não admira que Heráclito tenha inferirido brilhantemente essa lei intrínseca permeando o universo, e chamou-lhe “logos.”

Além disso, quando uma combinação específica de um determinado conjunto de elementos em proporções específicas e ordem gera a função que chamamos vida, as leis ou regras de tal acontecimento devem ter existido antes da ocorrência do evento. Por outras palavras, as leis e regras que determinam como uma determinada seqüência de DNA irá se comportar deve ter precedido a ocorrência real do evento. Por que razão deverá uma configuração particular de moléculas específicas de uma combinação específica de elementos levar a uma célula ou a um organismo vivo? Quem ou o que determinou uma tal configuração mágica? Ninguém, apenas por acaso? Não, não por uma chance! Não, não por acaso! O Acaso não leva a leis. De fato,o próprio acaso está sujeito às leis das probabilidades. As leis que dominam o universo iniciaram-se com o primeiro momento do Big Bang. Se você apostou sua riqueza inteira num casino você irá provavelmente perdê-la e você irá merecer o título de “outra pessoa matematicamente contestada” e você pode até mesmo receber uma medalha de prata no próximo Prêmio Darwin. Mas você pode apostar a sua riqueza na sua totalidade numa previsão científica baseada em leis naturais e você provavelmente irá ganhar.

É por causa das leis naturais de causa e efeito que os cientistas podem empregar a razão e predizerem os eventos. Mendeleiev sabia que alguns elementos não estavam agindo discricionariamente, assim ele descobriu a tabela periódica. Assim, é irrelevante como muitos milhões ou bilhões de anos se passaram antes que o primeiro organismo existice entre cadeia aleatória e caótica de eventos químicos e físicos. A partir dos primeiros segundos de criação de partículas materiais 13,7 bilhões de anos atrás, as pré-condições e leis da vida devem ter entrado em existência . O que os cientistas fazem não é inventar, eles simplesmente descobrem. Os cientistas não inventam as leis da física ou química; eles aprendem essas leis bocado a bocado, após experimentação enfadonha e, com base na informação que adquirem eles juntam as peças do Lego. As características de cada forma recentemente descoberta foi codificada na sua natureza desde o início do universo.

Assim, quando um observador de cegos observadores se refere à idade do mundo, e o seu tamanho para explicar as maravilhas da seleção cumulativa cega, não se deve aceitar cegamente o seu argumento. As informações ou as leis da vida existiam bilhões anos antes do surgimento da vida. Por isso, devemos exigir uma explicação quanto a uma informação a priori criando o design dos organismos vivos…

Dawkins oferece cálculos de probabilidade de um trabalho aleatório num computador utilizando 26 letras do alfabeto e uma barra de espaço, totalizando 27 caracteres. De forma aleatória tipo as declarações das 28 personagens de Hamlet, PENSO QUE É como uma doninha, seriam necessárias 27 das 28 teclas pressionadas, que seria uma probabilidade muito baixa, cerca de 1 em 10.000 milhões milhões milhões milhões milhões milhões. Em vez de um único passo de variação aleatória, Dawkins sugere-nos programar o computador para utilizar seleção cumulativa. O computador gera alguns 28 caracteres aleatórios e escolhe a que mais se assemelha à frase escolhida, PENSO EU…

“O que importa é a diferença entre o tempo tomado pela seleção cumulativa, e o tempo que o mesmo computador, trabalhando intensamente com a mesma taxa, poderia tomar para chegar à frase escolhida, se foram forçados a utilizar o outro procedimento de selecção de passo único: cerca de um milhão de milhões milhões milhões milhões de anos. Isto é mais do que um milhão de milhões milhões de vezes desde que o universo existe até agora. ( …) Considerando que o tempo tomado por um computador trabalhando aleatória mas com a condicionante de seleção cumulativa para executar a mesma tarefa é da mesma ordem que os seres humanos normalmente podem compreender, entre 11 segundos e as vezes, leva para almoçar… Se o progresso evolutivo teve de confiar na seleção de passo único, ela nunca teria chegado a qualquer lugar. Se, no entanto, tivesse existido qualquer forma em que as condições necessárias para a seleção cumulativa poderiam ter sido criadas pelas forças cegas da natureza, as conseqüências poderiam ter sido estranhas e maravilhosas. No entanto foi exatamente isso que aconteceu com este planeta, e nós estamos entre os mais recentes, se não os mais insólitos e mais maravilhosos, daqueles consequências.” (Richard Dawkins, o relojoeiro cego, Norton, 1987, p. 49).

Embora ele seja um cientista brilhante e articulado, Dawkins toma muitos fatos e acontecimentos como garantidos sem sequer os mencionar: como, por exemplo, o número de caracteres, a sua proporção, o computador programador e programa que seleciona os caracteres certos, a energia que realiza o trabalho, os materiais que compõem os caracteres, tempo e espaço, a continuidade de sua existência, etc. Na página seguinte, Dawkins distingue o seu exemplo do processo evolutivo da vida.

“A evolução não tem uma meta de longo prazo. Não existe um alvo a longa distância, nenhuma perfeição final para servir como um critério de selecção, embora vaidade humana celebre a ideia absurda que a nossa espécie é a meta final da evolução. “… O “relojoeiro” que é seleção natural cumulativa é cego para o futuro e não tem meta de longo prazo.” (Id, P. 50).

Aqui Dawkins reconhece que ele acrescentou sua inteligência e intenção teleológica, determinando um alvo, um critério de selecção. Assim, Dawkins toma como garantidos muitos fatos e acontecimentos, e faz uma analogia de um simples programa de computador no qual ele basta olhar para sua inteligência, um alvo, e um critério de selecção para explicar algo que, segundo ele, não tem nenhum deles.

Como alguns cientistas têm alergia à idéia de considerar Deus, muitas pessoas religiosas estão ansiosas para ignorar as evidências avassaladoras apoiando a teoria da evolução.

Porque é que algumas pessoas não conseguem aceitar a teoria da evolução dos primatas? Embora não tenham nenhum problema com evolução de uma gota de substância branca malcheirosa e um embrião, num feto de um sapo, ou de um bebé que tenta chupar tudo em estreita proximidade, eles não conseguem entender como um chimpanzé pode ser seu primo distante? Gostaria de compartilhar com você um ponto de Hulusi Başar Çelebi, um participante do fórum turco em Em resposta a um crítico sunita do meu artigo defendendo a teoria da evolução, ele escreveu o seguinte:

“O Que é um mais grave: erradicar os tabus ou protegen-los? Macaco, ou gato, cobra ou morcego … que animais humildes, não são? Eles cheiram mal como carcaça e caminham em terrenos sujos. Meu estômago revolta-se! Como para os seres humanos, eles são excepcionais desde que os seus corpos estejam envolvidos. Cheiram de rosas e flores. Compostos a partir de substâncias muito diferentes… pele perfeita, sem pêlos ou hormonas… Eles são inodoros e transparentes. Derramem leite nos seus corpos e lambam-no. Não enterrem os seus cadáveres; pendurem seus pulmões na parede, de modo que os vossos olhos e corações façam uma festa. Que desilusão! Todos partilham os mesmos ingredientes. Isso também é outro sinal divino; certo para aqueles que têm visão. Se você não gosta, passe o Darwin, passe o materialismo, mas a evolução é um fato. Todos os seres vivos que já passaram por mutações durante milhões de anos mudaram suas formas e também as características.”

Ironicamente, quem colocou o planeta terra no centro do universo há séculos teve problemas com uma massa rotativa, e seus seguidores estão agora repetindo a mesma coisa. Desta vez, em vez de planetas centram-se  noutra fantasia centrada nos humanos: os seres humanos são uma espécie à parte separada das outras criaturas, somos seres perfeitos, e que somos a espécie final!

Não devemos distorcer e comprometer o nosso raciocínio com hormonas primitivas. A oposição às teorias científicas devido a dependência de emoções moldadas pela cultura e dogma tem servido como uma importante causa de problemas no passado. A representação Quranica da criação não contradiz a teoria da evolução. De fato, ela apoia-la:

15:26 Criamos o homem de argila, de barro modelável.

Este versículo acima, descreve a lama com a palavra masnun, chama a nossa atenção para o prolongado tempo da criação. A criação do barro tem dois significados. (1) argila como a substância de origem, e (2) argila como um lugar de origem. Ambos os significados podem ser verdadeiros ao mesmo tempo. Podemos aprender com outros versículos que argila não é a única substância utilizada na nossa criação; também a água é um ingrediente vital. Como o Alcorao, a Bíblia menciona água e solo como a origem principal ou ingredientes da vida (Gênesis 1:20-21 ; 2:19).

Nosso Criador começou a evolução biológica de organismos microscópicos em camadas de argila. A recente investigação científica levou alguns cientistas a considerem a argila como a origem da vida, desde que a argila é uma rede frouxa de átomos arranjados geodesicamente dentro formas otaédricas e tetraédricas. Esta concepção gera camadas flexíveis e deslizantes que catalisam reações químicas. Os seres humanos são os frutos mais adiantados da vida orgânica que começou há milhões de anos a partir de camadas de argila. Veja 29:18-20 ; 41:9-10 ; 7:69; 24:45; 32:7-9; 71:14-17 .

24:45 E Deus criou da água todos os animais; e entre eles há os répteis, os bípedes e os quadrúpedes. Deus cria o que Lhe apraz, porque Deus é Onipotente.

É importante ressaltar que os humanos estão incluídos na classificação dos seres vivos em função de características fisiológicas. Isto está em consonância com outros versículos que indicam um método evolutivo na criação do corpo biológico de Adão. Há milhões de anos, a habilidade do mamífero Homo erectus de andar de pé sobre duas patas foi considerado um ponto crítico na evolução do cérebro humano e a criação do Homo Sapiens. Andar sobre dois pés poderia parecer como uma alteração ortopédica simples, mas seu efeito sobre a transformação neuropsicológica é enorme. Veja 29:18-20 ; 41:9-10 ; 7:69; 15:26; 32:7-9; 71:14-17 .

29:19 Não reparam, acaso, em como Deus origina a criação e logo a reproduz? Em verdade, isso é fácil a Deus..

29:20 Dize-lhes: Percorrei a terra e contemplai como Deus origina a criação; assim sendo, Deus pode produzir outra criação, porque Deus é Onipotente.

levantamentos arqueológicos mostram que a raça humana se desenvolveu por mutação e seleção natural a partir de organismos microscópicos. O Capítulo 71, que se centra na história de Noé, informa-nos da nossa criação neste planeta em termos de evolução, mais do que um instantâneo.

71:13 Que vos sucede, que não depositais as vossas esperanças em Deus,

71:14 Sendo que Ele vos criou gradativamente?

71:15 Não reparastes em como Deus criou sete céus sobrepostos,

71:16 E colocou neles a lua reluzente e o sol, como uma lâmpada?

71:17 E Deus vos produziu da terra, paulatinamente.

71:18 Então, vos fará retornar a ela, e vos fará surgir novamente.

71:19 Deus vos fez a terra como um tapete,

71:20 Para que a percorrêsseis por amplos caminhos.

71:21 Noé disse: Ó Senhor meu, eles me desobedeceram e seguiram aqueles para os quais os bens o filhos não fizeram mais do que lhes agravar a desventura!

A Evolução é uma linha de montagem concebida por Deus. Os versos acima fornecem uma associação interessante entre Noé e a evolução por simples justaposição. Esta dica é suportada por um outro versículo. No versículo seguinte, pode-se inferir que o ser humano passou por uma grande evolução durante o tempo de Noé:

7:69 “Estranhais, acaso, que vos chegue uma mensagem do vosso Senhor, por um homem da vossa raça, para admoestar-vos? Reparai em como Ele vos designou sucessores do povo de Noé, e vos proporcionou alta estatura. Recordai-vos das mercês de Deus (para convosco), a fim de que prospereis..”

Este versículo avaliado juntamente com os versículos do capítulo 71, informa-nos da fase evolutiva ou melhoramento genético na nossa criação após Noé.

Discordo do irmão Shanavas quando intercala citações de hadith, que são relatos contraditórios de rumores falsamente atribuídos a Maomé séculos após sua morte. Contrariamente às suas expectativas, eles desvalorizam o poder do seu argumento. Também não concordo com o irmão Shanavas quanto ao significado de khalifa. Não posso aceitar que os humanos sejam os representantes ou substitutos de Deus. Os seres humanos são sucessores (khalifa) das espécies anteriores, substituindo-os no topo da cadeia alimentar. Com a confusão dos controladores (anjos) que expressam suas expectativas negativas do comportamento humano, pode-se inferir que eles haviam testemunhado primatas violentos em roaming pelo planeta.

2:30 (Recorda-te ó Profeta) de quando teu Senhor disse aos anjos: Vou instituir um legatário na terra! Perguntaram-Lhe: Estabelecerás nela quem alí fará corrupção, derramando sangue, enquanto nós celebramos Teus louvores, glorificando-Te? Disse (o Senhor): Eu sei o que vós ignorais.

2:31 Ele ensinou a Adão todos os nomes e depois apresentou-os aos anjos e lhes falou: Nomeai-os para Mim se estiverdes certos.

O versículo 2:31 puxa a nossa atenção para nossa inata capacidade de relacionar e discriminar, utilizando habilidades sofisticadas abstratas e linguagem.

O livro de Shanavas fornece argumentos persuasivos para a evolução, ao mesmo tempo demonstra que se tratava de uma teoria aceite entre os muçulmanos muito antes de Darwin introduzir uma evidência esmagadora para ela. Espero que este livro leve os muçulmanos contemporâneos a questionarem os dogmas que contradizem fatos científicos. Isto também servirá como um lembrete para o mundo ocidental sobre as raízes de algumas das descobertas científicas importantes. Gostaria de terminar esta introdução com uma citação de Dra. Shanavas: “Na nossa pesquisa do pensamento muçulmano precoce e o estudo do Alcorao, aprendemos que os estudiosos muçulmanos descreveram o processo evolutivo em pormenor. Embora eles e o Alcorao não utilizem a terminologia usada por cientistas de hoje, eles acreditaram no sempre crescente arbusto chamado vida muito antes dos cientistas modernos, como Stephen Jay Gould, Ernst Mayr. Não foram só os estudiosos ocidentais a seqüestrar os fundamentos da teoria muçulmana da evolução e apresentá-la como sua idéia primitiva, mas eles também excluíram os muçulmanos dos seus arquivos consciente ou inconscientemente. Por exemplo, a Enciclopédia da evolução por Richard Milner, com prefácio de Gould, exclui os autores muçulmanos com a história do Teoria da evolução. Essa omissão é comparável ao escrever a história dos Estados Unidos sem mencionar George Washington, John Adams e Thomas Jefferson, ou Abraham Lincoln”.

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

“Como podemos observar as orações Salaat seguindo unicamente o Alcorão?”

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

“Como podemos observar as orações Salaat seguindo unicamente o Alcorão?”

Edip Yuksel

(Traducido por Pedro Miguel)

 Salat prayer


“Como podemos observar as orações Salaat seguindo unicamente o Alcorão?” é uma pergunta favorita entre muçulmanos sunitas e xiitas que seguem textos derivados, ensino religioso, ensinamentos e leis, que são escritos por homens. Com esta pergunta, ambas as seitas tentam justificar a necessidade e a proliferação de ensinamentos contraditórios sectária, cultura árabe medieval, cheia de leis opressivas proibições e regulamentos – todos falsamente atribuídos a Deus e ao Seu profeta.

Como resultado, o monoteísmo é redefinida como uma “sociedade limitada”, no qual o reconhecimento e submissão a Deus tornam-se um paradoxo, uma contradição nos termos em que outros “parceiros” são submetidos e aceites por esses “crentes”. O mais comum set-up para sunita shirk é: o Alcorão (Deus) + hadiths e sunnah (mensageiro) + a prática dos companheiros do Profeta + a prática dos companheiros dos companheiros do Profeta + a opinião dos imams (qiyas e ijtihad) + consenso “ulama” em uma seita particular (ijma ‘) + os comentários e opiniões dos seus alunos + os comentários e opiniões dos primeiros “ulama” + os comentários e opiniões de mais tarde “ulama” + a fatwas de vida “ulama. ”

Na versão xiita “shirk”, além dos parceiros acima mencionados, os 12 Emams Infalíveis (todos os parentes e os descendentes do profeta Maomé começando com Ali) e Emam substituto vivo é adicionado ao conselho de administração da Parceria Sagrado Limitada. O Alcorão é considerado geralmente um livro ambíguo e é basicamente usado para a justificação deste “shirk”, isto é, estabelecendo parcerias com Deus. (Para uma discussão extensa sobre o assunto consulte “19 Perguntas Para estudiosos muçulmanos” no

Islam, que significa submissão, é o estado de espírito de todas as pessoas que se submetem a Deus. Todos os mensageiros, Noé, Abraão, Moisés, Salomão, Jesus e todos os monoteístas anteriores foram Submissos (2:131; 5:111; 7:126; 10:72,84; 22:78; 27:31,42,91; 28 : 53; 72:14). Assim, a única religião aprovada por Deus é a submissão a Deus (3:19). É Deus Todo-Poderoso que usa esse atributo para descrever aqueles que se submetem a Sua lei (22:78). O Islã é referido como a “religião de Abraão” em muitos versos desde que os adoradores de ídolos de Meca foram alegando que eles estavam seguindo seu pai Abraão (2:130,135; 3:95; 4:125; 6:161; 12:37-38; 16:123; 21:73; 22:78). E Maomé era um seguidor de Abraão (16:123).

Ignoram o fato de que Ibrahim practicava as orações de contato (21:73), muitos muçulmanos contemporâneos desafiam Deus, perguntando onde podemos encontrar o número de unidades em cada oração de contato. Ignoram o fato de que Deus afirmou que Quran está completo (6:11-116), eles não “reparam” que todas as práticas religiosas de Submissão / Monoteísmo foram estabelecidas e praticadas antes da revelação do Alcorão (8:35; 9:54; 16:123; 21:73; 22:27; 28:27). Mensageiros anteriores a Abraham praticavam Salaat, a caridade obrigatória e o jejum (2:43; 3:43; 11:87; 19:31,59; 20:14; 28:27; 31:17).

Os mushriks de Meca costumavam acreditar que eles eram seguidores de Abraão. Eles não estavam adorando “estátuas” ou “ícones” como alegado pelos fabricantes de hadith, mas eles estavam orando para “Shafaat” (intercessão) de alguns nomes de santos, como al-Lat, al-Uzza, e al-Manaat (53: 19-23). Assim, ao contrário da sua afirmação falsa de ser monoteístas (6:23), eles foram acusados ​​de serem “mushrik” ou de associar parceiros a Deus (39:3).

Estudiosos sunitas e xiitas, posteriormente fabricaram histórias numa tentativa de apagar quaisquer semelhanças entre eles e os mushriks, mas ao fazê-lo exposeram as suas próprias mentiras inerentes descrições contraditórias dos estatutos (Por exemplo, veja o livro clássico de Al Kalbi-sobre estatutos: Kitab- ul Asnam). Os Mushriks de Meca que se orgulhavam da lenda de Abraão não poderiam praticar a observância literal da idolatria; eles estabeleceram uma armadilha satânica mais metafísica por aceitarem a intercessão e as proibições religiosas criadas pelo Homem (6:145-150; 39:3). Eles eram metafísicos ou adoradores de ídolos espirituais.

Os Mushriks de Meca, durante a época do Profeta Muhammad (a paz esteja com ele) respeitavam a Masjid Sagrada construída por Abraão (09:19). Eles praticavam as orações de contato, o jejum e a peregrinação (2:183,99; 08:35 o significado deste verso é deliberadamente distorcida nas traduções tradicionais; 09:54; 107:4-6). Embora soubessem do Zakat (caridade obrigatória) não estavam cumprindo a sua obrigação (53:34). Durante o tempo doas pessoas Profeta Muhammad as pessoas sabiam o significado de “Salaat”, “Zakat”, “Sawm”, e “Hajj”. Elas não eram palavras estrangeiras.

Deus enviou o Alcorão na sua língua. Tal como acontece com cada livro precedente, a revelação foi dada no seu tempo, na lingua das pessoas que receberam a revelação. Deus ordena e revela de uma forma que pode ser tanto entendida e seguida, e então Ele detalha as Suas exigências ao seu povo através do Seu livro (16:103; 26:195). Além disso, se Deus quiser adicionar um novo significado para uma palavra conhecida, Ele nos informa. Por exemplo, a palavra árabe “al-din” em 1:04 é explicado em 82:15-19.

16:123 este verso é uma prova direta de que todas as práticas religiosas no Islã estavam intactas quando Muhammad (a paz esteja com ele) nasceu. Assim, ele foi chamado para “seguir a religião de Abraão.” Se eu pedir-lhe para andar de bicicleta, presume-se que você sabe o que é uma bicicleta e você sabe ou aprende com os outros como montá-la. Da mesma forma, quando Deus ordenou a Muhammad (a paz esteja com ele) para seguir as práticas de Abraão (16:123), tais práticas deviam de ser bem conhecidas.

No entanto, contrariamente à crença popular, o Alcorão detalha as orações de contato. Embora nem o Alcorão nem livros hadith contenham ilustrações para salaat ou clipes de vídeo mostrando como os profetas praticavam salat, o Alcorão descreve a oração. A descrição corânica do Salaat é muito superior pelas seguintes razões:

1. A língua do Alcorão é superior à linguagem das hadiths. Hadiths são coleções de narrações contendo numerosos dialetos diferentes e são afectadas por problemas linguísticos crônicos e endêmicos . A língua do Alcorão é muito mais simples como testemunhado por aqueles que estudam tanto o Alcorão como a Hadith. A eloquência da língua do Alcorão é enfatizada no Alcorão com uma pergunta retórica repetida (54:17, 22, 32, 40).

2. Os Livros Hadith podem conter mais detalhes. Mas serão esses detalhes úteis e consistentes com o Alcorão? Como é que um crente pode decidir entre as informações conflitantes? Será que ele só escolhe a palavra do seu Imam favorito? Se seguirmos as palavras de um imam favorito, isso significa que estamos realmente seguindo a prática do profeta? Por exemplo, você pode encontrar dezenas de hadiths em Sahih Muslim narrando que o Profeta Muhammad (a paz esteja com ele) inclinava-se para ler al-Fatiha, sem ler nenhuma versículos adicionais do Alcorão. Você vai encontrar muitos outros hadiths alegando que o Profeta lia este ou aquele capítulo, depois da al-Fatiha. Há também muitos hadiths conflitantes sobre a ablução, que é a fonte de rituais diferentes entre seitas. Hadith, não pode guiar-nos para a verdade. Tornou-se um mal necessário para os crentes ignorantes e líderes comunitários que pretendiam manipulá-los.

3. Os Livros de Hadith narram uma história boba sobre os tempos de oração Salaat e sua ordenança. A história da Mirage é uma das mais longas hadiths na Bukhari. Consta que, depois de receber conselhos de Moisés, indo para cima e para baixo entre os sexto e sétimo céu, Muhammad negociou com Deus para reduzir o número de orações a partir de 50 vezes por dia (uma oração para cada 28 minutos) a 5 vezes por dia. Este hadith retrata Maomé como um líder sindical compassivo a salvar seu povo da demanda impiedosa e impossível de Deus.

ORAÇÃO Salat acordo com o Alcorão

Praticar a oração Salaat é freqüentemente mencionada junto com praticar a caridade e, assim, enfatizar a consciência social e responsabilidade comunal de quem observa a oração (2:43,83,110; 4:77; 22:78; 107:1-7).

A oração Salaat é usada para comemorar e lembrar de Deus sozinho (6:162; 20:14). Esta lembrança protege os Submissos dos pecados e de prejudicar outros(29:45). O Salaat deve ser observado continuamente até á morte (19:31; 70:23,34).


Para observar a oração deve-se fazer a ablução (4:43; 5:6). Ablução é anulada apenas por relações sexuais ou ao urinar ou defecar. Ablução permanece válida mesmo se passou gás, apertou as mãos com o sexo oposto, ou uma mulher menstruada. A mulher menstruada pode observar orações contato, ao contrário das supersticiosas crenças culturais (5:6; 2:222; 6:114-115).

Código de vestir

Não existe um código de vestimenta especial para a oração, de fato, se você quiser você pode orar nu em sua privacidade. Cobrir o nosso corpo é uma necessidade social e cultural que tem como objetivo nos proteger de mal-entendido, do assédio e das indesejadas conseqüências (7:26; 24:31; 33:59).

Tempos de oração

Alcorão menciona três períodos de tempo em conjunto com a oração Salaat. Em outras palavras, o Alcorão qualifica a palavra “Salaat” por três diferentes palavras temporais: (1) Salaat al-Fajr (oração da manhã), (2) Salaat al-Esha (Oração da Noite), (3) Salaat al-Wusta ( Médio / Oração Noon). A oração da manhã (24:58) e oração da tarde(24:58) deve ser practicada em ambas as extremidades do dia, isto é, início da noite (11:114) e da Oração Médio (2:238). (Discutiremos os tempos de orações Salaat mais tarde em detalhe no final deste artigo).

Para direção de Oração

Para a oração é preciso enfrentar o Masjid Sagrado construído por Abraão, a Caaba (2:125, 143-150; 22:26). Para encontrar o qibla corrigir uma pessoa deve ter em mente que o mundo é um mundo, muito diferente do mapa plano de Mercator. Desde a oração durante a emergência e o medo é reduzido a uma unidade, em condições normais, a oração deve ter pelo menos duas unidades e durante a oração deve-se reduzir drasticamente a sua / seu contato com o mundo externo (4:101-103). Orações, ao contrário de jejum, não podem ser realizadas mais tarde, pois elas devem ser observados na hora certa (4:103).

Oração congregacional

Crentes, homens e mulheres, uma vez por semana são convidados a um determinado local para rezar juntos a cada dia Juma (Congregacional). Eles voltam ao seu trabalho e programação diária normal após a Oração Congregacional que pode ser liderada por um homem ou uma mulher (62:9-11). As mesquitas ou masjids deve ser dedicadas a Deus, portanto, o convite deve ser restrito para adorar a Deus sozinho, e nenhum outro nome deve ser inscrito nas paredes de mesquitas e ninguém menos que Deus deve ser comemorado (72:18-20) . Aqueles que vão para masjids devem vestir-se bem pois as masjids são para adoração e reuniões públicas (07:31).

Posição Para Oração

Deve-se começar a oração Salaat na posição de pé (2:238; 3:39; 4:102) e não deve mudar a sua / seu lugar, exceto em circunstâncias incomuns, como durante um percurso ou condução (2:239). Submissão a Deus deve ser declarada física e simbolicamente, primeiro curvando e prostrando (4:102; 22:26; 38:24; 48:29). Este ritual físico não é necessário nos momentos de emergências, de medo, e circunstâncias não usuais (2:239).

Compreensão e propósito da oração

Devemos compreender o significado de nossas orações, pois estes são os momentos em que nos comunicamos diretamente com Deus (4:43). Devemos ser reverentes durante as orações do nosso contato (23:2). Junto com a compreensão do que dizemos, nós podemos recordar um dos atributos de Deus, dependendo da nossa necessidade e condição durante o tempo da nossa oração (17:111). A oração é para comemorar a Deus, e Deus sózinho (6:162; 20:14; 29:45). A oração é para louvar, exaltar e lembrar a Sua grandeza, Sua Misericórdia e, finalmente, a nossa dependência em cada um desses atributos (1:1-7; 20:14; 17:111; 02:45). De modo que mencionar outros nomes além de Deus contradiz o nosso amor e dependência Dele (72:18; 29:45).

Durante a recitação da oração Salaat

Preferindo o Alcorão para recitação tem benefícios práticos desde os crentes de todo o mundo podem rezar juntos sem discutir em qual idioma escolheu ou que tradução usar. O capítulo al-Fatiha (A Abertura) é o único capítulo que trata de Deus em sua totalidade e é uma oração apropriada para Salaat. Para os não-árabes não deve ser muito difícil de aprender o significado das palavras em al-Fatiha, uma vez que consiste em sete versos curtos. Aqueles que são incapazes de aprender o significado de al-Fatiha devem orar na língua que ele ou ela entende. Eu não vejo nenhuma razão prática para recitar em árabe durante as orações observadas individualmente.

Devemos recitar orações Salaat em tom moderado, e não devemos tentar esconder as nossas orações nem tentar orar em público para manifestação política ou religiosa (17:111). Se for observada com a congregação, devemos ouvir a recitação dos homens ou das mulheres que conduzem a oração (7:204; 17:111). Depois de completar a oração Salaat, devemos continuar lembrança de Deus (4:103).

Unidades de Oração

O Alcorão não especifica qualquer número de unidades para as orações. Ele deixa a nosso critério. As unidades da Oração Congragational são 2 está revelando, uma vez que é mais provável que seja preservada precisamente.

Oração funeral

Orações fúnebres não são obrigatórias. Elas são observadas para recordar aqueles que morreram como monoteístas e fornecer o apoio da comunidade para seus parentes.

Inovações sectária

Há muitas inovações sectária que diferem de seita em seita. Algumas das inovações são: combinar os tempos de oração, realizando as orações omitissas no seu tempo adequado, encurtando as orações durante as viagens normais, acrescentando orações extras, como “sunnah” e “nawafil,” inovando o pagamento a um clérigo para liderar as orações , proibindo as mulheres de liderar a orações, ao sentar-se recitar uma oração “no-Tahiyatu”, que aborda o profeta Maomé como ele está vivo e onipresente, adicionando o nome de Maomé à Shahada, recitando zumm-us Sura (capítulos extra) após o al -Fatiha, entregando-se a argumentos sectários em detalhes de como segurar suas mãos e dedos, lavando a boca eo nariz como elementos de tomar ablução, escovar os dentes com “misvak” (um galho seco de uma arvore batido em fibras numa extremidade como  escova de dentes) mesmo antes de iniciar as orações, vestir turbantes ou lenços para receber mais créditos …

Quantas orações POR DIA?

Apenas três Orações de contato são mencionados pelo nome no Alcorão. Em outras palavras, a palavra “salaat” é qualificada com palavras descritivas em três instâncias. Estas são:

    1. Salaat al-Fajr-ORAÇÃO DAWN (24:58; 11:114).

    2. Salaat-al-Esha NOITE DE ORAÇÃO (24:58; 17:78; 11:114)

    3. Salaat al-ORAÇÃO Wusta-MEIO DIA (2:238; 17:78)

Todos os versos que definem os tempos das orações são atribuíveis a uma dessas três orações. Agora vamos ver os versículos relacionados:

DAWN & NOITE ORAÇÕES pelos seus nomes:

“Esta deve ser feita em três instâncias:…… Antes da oração da alvorada, ao meio-dia quando você muda sua roupa para descansar, e após a oração da noite” (24:58).

Por outro uso da palavra “esha” (à noite) ver: 12:16; 79:46

Os tempos de ORAÇÕES TARDE & NOITE definidos:

“Você deverá observar as orações de contato em ambas as extremidades da luz do dia, isto é, durante as horas ao lado da noite…” (11:114)

Tradutores tradicionais e comentaristas consideram a última cláusula “Zulfan minal layl” deste versículo como uma oração separada, mencionando a “noite” de oração. No entanto, consideramos que a cláusula não como um complemento, mas como uma explicação da cláusula anterior ambígua, que explica a direção temporal do fim do dia. Os limites da “Nahar” (luz do dia) é marcada por dois pontos distintos: o nascer e o pôr do sol. Em outras palavras, duas orações devem ser observadas não apenas depois do sol nascer e antes dele se pôr, mas antes e depois do anoitecer.

Além disso, o entendimento tradicional depara-se com o problema de contradizer a prática da tradição que pretende promover. Tradicionalmente, tanto orações da manhã e à noite são observadas num período de tempo que Quranicamente é considerado “Layl” (noite) desde Layl começa a partir do pôr do sol e termina ao nascer do sol. A palavra “Layl” em árabe é mais abrangente do que a palavra “noite” usada em Inglês.

Se a expressão “tarafayin nahar” (ambas as extremidades do dia) refere-se à manhã e à noite que fazem parte da “Layl” (noite), então, a última cláusula não pode estar descrevendo um outro tempo de oração.

O tempo de oração e NOON NOITE definido.

“Você deve observar a oração de contato desde o declínio do sol até à chegada da noite, e cumpre a recitação matinal, porque é sempre testemunhada.(17:78).

O declínio do sol pode ser entendido tanto o seu declínio a partir do ápice marcando o início da oração Noite ou seu declínio por trás do horizonte, marcando o início da oração do final da tarde. Há duas teorias opostas sobre a finalidade do uso de “duluk” (esfregar) no verso, no entanto, nenhuma delas irá contradizer a idéia de orar 3 vezes por dia uma vez que tanto a do meio-dia e da noite são aceites.


“Você deve sempre observar as orações de contato, especialmente ORAÇÃO do meio dia, e dedicar-se totalmente a Deus.” (2:238).

38:32 este verso implica que o tempo da oração do Meio dia termina com o pôr do sol.

Podemos facilmente compreender a oração do meio como uma oração entre as duas outras orações mencionado pelo nome (pôr do sol e à noite).

O Antigo Testamento tem pelo menos três versos referindo-se às Orações de contacto (Salat) e confirmam esse entendimento. Embora não possamos confiar nas traduções da Bíblia literalmente, mas não podemos considerá-los como erros já que a consistência interna e externa das passagens bíblicas sobre as Orações de contato são impressionantes.

“E logo que o rapaz tinha ido embora, David surgiu de um lugar para o sul, e caiu com o rosto em terra, e inclinou-se três vezes: e eles se beijaram um ao outro, e choraram um com outro, até que David se excedeu . ” (1 Samuel 20:41)

“Quanto a mim, clamo a Deus, e o Senhor me salvará à tarde e de manhã e ao meio-dia, orarei, e clamarei, e ele ouvirá a minha voz.”. (Salmo 55:16-17) (PS: clamando aparentemente significa orar com paixão).

“Quando Daniel quando soube que o edito estava assinado, entrou em sua casa (ora havia no seu quarto janelas abertas do lado de Jerusalém), e três vezes no dia se punha de joelhos, e orava, e dava graças diante do seu Deus, como também antes costumava fazer.” (Daniel 6:10)

Os seguidores da seita xiita observam cinco orações em três tempos: manhã, tarde e noite. Esta prática estranha, talvez, foi o resultado de um compromisso histórico com os sunitas dominantes que practicavam cinco vezes por dia.

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Torture Shame for Humanity

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Torture Shame for Humanity
We Should Never Forget

Edip Yüksel
30 April 2013


I know torture first hand. I have told about it in my upcoming autobiography. And I knew that I was tortured with American devices by the members of the fascist military regime who were called by the USA as “our boys.” From that experience, whenever I see anyone trying to justify torture, it invokes powerful emotions. I see them as animals, as monsters, as ogres disguised under fancy clothes, modern grooming and rich arsenal of lexicon and sophistry to fool scared people.

Thousands of prisoners in Iraqi jails, especially, in Abu Gharib were subjected to appalling series of systematic terror and tortures. It was the application of the so-called Torture Manuals, which was partially declassified in 1996 by the Pentagon. Thousands of Iraqis and Afghans were raped and sodomized by American soldiers and contractors for years. And knowing the history of imperialism, I am sure that it still continues in many places around the world. No more than 30 of the despicable men and women who committed those atrocities were punished. Compared to their crimes, they received light punishment. They also betrayed the American people by inflaming the rage and anger against Americans, thereby adding more recruits to the terrorist organizations. The New York Times, on January 12, 2005, reported testimony suggesting that the following actions had taken place at Abu Ghraib:

  • Urinating on detainees.
  • Jumping on detainee’s leg (a limb already wounded by gunfire) with such force that it could not heal properly afterward.
  • Continuing by pounding detainee’s wounded leg with collapsible metal baton.
  • Pouring phosphoric acid on detainees.
  • Sodomization of detainees with a baton.
  • Tying ropes to the detainees’ legs or penises and dragging them across the floor.

Though many Americans were shocked to hear the news of torture, they forgot about it as fast as they were shocked by it!

Knowing the power of state propaganda, jingoism and common hypocrisy, many politicians to promote torture based on outlandish scenarios and fear, despite the fact that torture does not help in gathering reliable information.

The table blow is sufficient to indict the USA as the major violator of human rights. It is from my friend Noam Chomsky’s book, The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism.


Torture (Countries With US training) – Post World War II to 1975

Torture Countries identified by Amnesty International 

Torture Country



US military Aid in $ 




















South Korea



South Vietnam






Saudi Arabia

































Dominican Republic



















Source: The Washington Connection and Third World Fascism, Chomsky N, Herman ES, Spokesman (1979), ISBN 0-89608-090-0, pg 361

Aba Gharib Torture 3

Aba Gharib Torture 4

Aba Gharib Torture 2

Aba Gharib Torture

Aba Gharib Torture 5




FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Matine Yuksel Meets Noam Chomsky

FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare

Matine Yuksel visits Noam Chomsky at MIT

26 April 2013

Matine Yuksel, Noam Chomsky and Monica Seng at MIT, 26 April 2013

Matine Yuksel, Noam Chomsky and Monica Seng at MIT, 26 April 2013


In an email conversation with Noam Chomsky we talked about the interconnection of ethnicity, culture, politics, religion and world economy. I gave him the example of Chobani Yogurt, which has been very successful in the USA yogurt market. Yogurt is originally a Turkish food and the name yogurt is originally Turkish. It is owned by Kurdish people from Turkey and for political/marketing reasons it is described as Greek Yogurt to sell American consumers. Kurd-Turk-Greek-American all in one yogurt :) During our conversation, I promised Chomsky to serve him Chobani Yogurt when I visit him again at MIT, Boston. Well, my younger Son Matine, who is accepted to Princeton University and other competitive colleges, traveled to Boston to visit MIT, just to compare it with Princeton to make sure that he still wants Princeton. I told him to visit Noam and deliver him a few Chobani Yogurt as my gift. Beforehand, I called Noam’s secretary to treat my son and wrote to Chomsky the following:

25 April 2013

Dear Noam,

My younger son, Matine, has been accepted by several Ivy schools. Though he will most likely choose Princeton, which offered him a generous scholarship and welcomed him like a prince, he decided to visit MIT where he has friends. He and his high school classmate Monica is currently staying with their close friend, Brianna, at MIT. Matine (18) is a young admirer of your work and activism. He was lucky to have Steve Saradnik as a teacher for his AP History class and years ago read “A People’s History Of The United States” by Howard Zinn.

Today, he visited your office to deliver you a few cups of yogurt, but you were not in the office. I called Bev and told her to be nice to them :) I hope that tomorrow you will have a few minute with this young man and his friends. A picture of you eating yogurt together with these brilliant students who value peace and justice, would be very “cool” :)


FacebookTwitterGoogle GmailShare