What is the difference between the Quran and the other Divine Books?

The complete Holy Qur’an was written during the time of the prophet, but it was written on separate sheets of paper that were not unified in one volume.  After the death of the prophet, the first caliph Abu Bakr (may God be pleased with him) decided to collect the Holy Qur’an in one volume.  Therefore, he commissioned a group of the memorizers of the Holy Qur’an, headed by Zaid ibn Thabet, to do the Job.  The chosen committee followed a great methodology in collecting the written sheets of the Holy Qur’an and comparing what was written with what was memorized.  One of the main stipulations of that committee was the presence of at least two written copies of the same verses.  They did not accept the written version unless it corresponded to the memorized one, and vice versa.  Zaid and his colleagues did their utmost best to insure the authenticity of their work.  It was related that Zaid asked to be exonerated from this task when he was first selected, but upon the insistence of both Omar and Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with them), he agreed reluctantly.  He described his great sense of responsibility towards the great task by saying: “I swear by Allah that had they asked me to move a mountain from one place to another I’d would have felt more at ease.”

Quran holy book is the revelations by God to Prophet Mohamed (peace upon him) through the Angel Gabriel (Jibril). These revelations of Quran by God to Prophet Mohamed was started in year 610 AD when prophet Mohamed was in Mecca (Makkah) and he was by that time 40 years old. The revelations continued since then and was completed by year 632 AD (year of death of the prophet).That means the revelation period of Quran continued over a period of around 22 years. 

The following are the main issues explaining how Quran is different than other holy books:

Other holy books revelations were accompanied by miracles that God supported the prophets with in order to convince their people with God message preached by those prophets. However, the holy book Quran is a miracle by itself. Quran revelation was in Arabic and was in a time the Arabs were in the flourishing era of language. They were competing in Arabic poetry and literature and were arranging festivals for Arabic language. They were challenged that they can't reproduce a single verse like that of Quran. even the disbelievers were listening to the reciting of Quran to enjoy it.

The long period for full revelation of the Quran (around 22 years) allowed the Quran to be fully memorized and documented by many Muslims (which is not the case with other holy books). It was recited in the mosque by prophet Mohamed during the daily five prayers without single letter change. Many Muslims since then until now are memorizing Quran fully without single letter difference. This explains why Quran remains by God will, and will remain by God will, without single letter change.

Quran is the only holy book that is still recited and read with its original revelation language (Arabic). The Quran revelation language is the only language of all other holy books that still a live language.

Quran speaks about a variety of branches of science like: Astronomy, Embryology, Hydrology, Geology, Sociology, Psychology, Oceanography, Law etc. and is including lots of scientific statements (about the universe creation, clouds, mountains, embryology, rains, deep sea, difference between sun and moon, etc) that were validated only recently and were not known in the time of the prophet. No single contradiction found between any of Quran scientific statements and the current scientific findings or discoveries. Quran included correct scientific information on some incidents that are scientifically incorrect in other holy books (e.g. in the bible mentioned that sun was created after the creation of earth Genesis 1:9-19 and vegetation was created before the Sun-Genesis 1:11-13, 14-19).

Quran as the last holy book remained without single letter change while other holy book texts were subject to alterations and changes.

Quran, as the last holy book, covered almost all aspects of mankind life (e.g. marriage, divorce, inheritance, peace and war rules, etc.) not like other holy books.

None of the books that were sent before the Quran and that are present today are the original books that Allah sent down to His prophets. Their original copies were lost during the course of time; they were rewritten by human beings. Therefore, some additions were made and superstitions were included. For instance, it is a historical truth that the Torah could not be protected by Jews, who lived as slaves and in exile for many centuries and who lost their belief and became idolaters and that the copy that is present today was written by some Jewish rabbis and accepted as a religious book. It is obvious that the book that emerged after such a long and complicated period cannot be the same book that was sent to Moses. Therefore, there are slanders and claims that are not suitable for prophets; there are also some decrees that are contrary to the essence of the religion of oneness in the Torah.

The Psalms, which consisted of prayers and hymns, sent down to Prophet Dawud underwent the same consequence.

As for the Gospel (Bible), Jesus Christ did not have the revelations that were sent to him written. He became a prophet when he was 30 and his prophethood ended when he was 33 years old. He traveled from village to village, from town to town in order to teach people in three years, which is a short time. He was always followed by the men of Roman administrators due to the provocation of Jews in his last year. He could not have enough time or opportunity to have the Gospel written.  As a matter of fact, today the Gospels (Bibles) are called by the names of their authors and they are like  biographies that include the preaches, lessons and the guidance of Jesus to his disciples. Besides, those who wrote them were not the disciples of Jesus, who were the first believers, but those who listened to the divine words that were sent down to Jesus from his disciples. 

There are some differences in terms of narration and content in the Bibles that are present today. As a matter of fact those Bibles were approved by the council consisting of 1000 bishops that gathered in Nicaea in A.D. 325. That council inspected hundreds of Bibles and accepted the present four Bibles, which advocated the divinity of Jesus Christ, with the unanimity of 318 members and destroyed the others by burning them. 

As it is seen, the principle that Jesus is the son of God was accepted by the decision of a council many years after the death of Jesus. Some Christian churches did not accept that decision. Therefore, it is impossible to say that the four Bibles that are present today are the same as the original Bible sent down to Jesus.

 Islam is Allah’s sole and true religion, all prophets preached Islam.  Islam means full submission to God through unqualified obedience and relinquishing polytheism, because all religions preach monotheism.  Almighty God says: “Not a messenger did we send before thee without this inspiration sent by Us to him: that there is no God but I; therefore worship and serve Me” (Holy Qur’an: 21: 25).

As far as basic beliefs and worship practices are concerned all religions are also similar.  In the Qur’an God says:

“The same religion has He established for you as that which He enjoined On Noah-the which We have sent by inspiration to thee- and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and Jesus: Namely, that ye should Remain steadfast in Religion, and make no divisions therein: to those who worship other things than Allah, hard is the (way) to which thou callest them.  Allah chooses to Himself those whom He pleases, and guides to Himself those who turn (to Him)” (Holy Qur’an: 42: 13).

Thus, all prophets preached monotheism, informed people about God and the hereafter, and advocated the basic belief in the same messages of divine Books.

The main differences, however, lie in the legislative and commandment laws, because the divine laws are based on looking after the interests of those required to worship.  However, what might be feasible for one nation might not necessarily be the same for another.  Therefore, the details kept changing without touching the basics, until human societies developed and matured.  It was then that God sent His final and eternal religion, Islam. God points to the differences in religious legislations when He says: “To each among you have We prescribed a Law and an Open Way.”  (Holy Qur’an: 5: 48).

Islam is religion of peace

Splitting of the moon

The moon was split into two parts during the lifetime of the Prophet.

Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari 3638

Narrated `Abdullah bin Masud:

During the lifetime of the Prophet the moon was split into two parts and on that the Prophet said, "Bear witness (to thus).

Reference: Sahih al-Bukhari 3636

Note: Both Abdullah ibn Masud and Ibn Abbass were companions of the Prophet (salallahu alayhi wassalam) and also, one of the greatest scholars of Islam.

Al-Bukhari recorded that Anas bin Malik said, "The people of Makkah asked the Messenger of Allah to produce a miracle, and he showed them the splitting of the moon into two parts, until they saw (the mount of) Hira' between them.'' This Hadith is recorded in the Two Sahihs with various chains of narration.

and Allah said what you quoted from Surah Al-Qamar 54:1-2

Narration of Jabyr bin Mut'im

Imam Ahmad recorded that Jubayr bin Mut'im said, "The moon was split into two pieces during the time of Allah's Prophet ; a part of the moon was over one mountain and another part over another mountain. So they said, Muhammad has taken us by his magic.' They then said, `If he was able to take us by magic, he will not be able to do so with all people.''' Only Imam Ahmad recorded this Hadith with this chain of narration. Al-Bayhaqi used another chain of narration in a similar Hadith he collected in Ad-Dala'il.

Source: Tafsir of Surah Qamar

Apart from that,

You might be knowing the fault line in the moon that splits it. NASA says it appears all over the moon. Not that I am claiming evidence that it happened during the splitting of moon by Prophet (Peace be upon him), but it can be a food for thought. NASA doesn't have any concrete evidence regarding how it happened.

Annemarie Schimmel (a non-Muslim author of "And Muhammad Is His Messenger: The Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety", University of North Carolina Press, 1985, p.69–70) quotes Qadi Iyaad in support of this miracle as follows:

"It has not been said of any people on the earth that the moon was observed that night such that it could be stated that it was not split. Even if this had been reported from many different places, so that one would have to exclude the possibility that all agreed upon a lie, yet, we would not accept this as proof to the contrary, for the moon is not seen in the same way by different people.... An eclipse is visible in one country but not in the other one; in one place it is total, in the other one only partial."

The miracle of the splitting of the moon occurred before the migration to Medina upon the demands of the polytheists with the permission of God and it was shown by the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as narrated by many companions like Anas b. Malik, Hz. Ali, Huzayfa b. Yaman, Abdullah b. Mas’ud, Abdullah b. Abbas, Abdullah b. Umar, Abdullah b. Amr b. As , Jubayr b. Mut’im (May Allah be pleased with all of them).

Among Quraish polytheists, Walid b. Mughira, Abu Jahl. As b. Wail, As b. Hisham, Aswad b. Abdi Yaghus, Aswad b. Muttalib, Zama b. Aswad, Nadr b. Harith and others said to the prophet Muhammad (PBUH):

“If you truly are a Prophet that has been appointed by Allah, then split the moon in half. Let it be in such a way that one half will appear over the Mount Abu Qubais and the other half will be seen over Mount Quayqian.”

The prophet Muhammad (PBUH) asked:

“If I do it, will you become Muslims?”

The polytheists answered:

“Yes, we will.”

On the 14th night, when it was full moon, the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) wanted Almighty Allah to give him the miracle which the polytheists demanded from him.

When the Gabriel (AS) informed the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that God had accepted his prayer, he announced it to the Meccans. The polytheists witnessed the splitting of the moon on the 14th night.

When Almighty God let the moon split in half, one half standing over Mount Abu Qubais and the other half over Mount Quayqian, the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) shouted at Muslims:

“O Abu Salama b. Abdulasad! Arqam b. Abi’l Erqam! Bear witness!

And to the polytheists, he said, “Bear witness! So and so!

However, the polytheists said “This is one of the spells of Abu Kabsha’s Son.” “The son of Abu Kabsha cast a spell on you!” They said “Muhammad cast a spell on us!”

Some of them also said:

“If Muhammad had cast a spell on us then, He couldn’t have cast a spell on everyone! Let us ask the wayfarers who came from the surrounding areas if they saw what we saw.”

They asked the people who came from every everywhere.

“Yes! We also did see the moon in that state! We saw the moon as split! They informed that the moon was split. Among the people who came from everywhere and seen the moon split, there was no one who had not informed them about it.

However, the polytheists rejected to be Muslims and to believe by saying:

“This is a prevalent magic!” , they said “Abu Talib’s orphan affected the sky with his spell!” .

اقْتَرَبَتِ السَّاعَةُ وَانشَقَّ الْقَمَرُ وَإِن يَرَوْا آيَةً يُعْرِضُوا وَيَقُولُوا سِحْرٌ مُّسْتَمِرٌّ

The hour drew nigh and the moon did rend asunder. And if they see a miracle they turn aside and say: Transient magic.

Early traditions and stories explain this verse as a miracle performed by God during the life of Muhammad in order to convince Quraysh of his prophethood.[8][9] Most Muslim commentators accept the authenticity of those traditions[clarification needed]. The following verse 54:2, "But if they see a Sign, they turn away, and say, 'This is (but) transient magic'" is taken in the support of this view.[9] The classical commentator Ibn Kathir provides a list of the early traditions mentioning the incident: A tradition transmitted on the authority of Anas bin Malik states that Muhammad split the moon after the pagan Meccans asked for a miracle. Another tradition from Malik transmitted through other chains of narrations, mentions that the mount Nur was visible between the two parts of the moon (Mount Nur is located in Hijaz. Muslims believe that Muhammad received his first revelations from God in a cave on this mountain, Cave Hira'). A tradition narrated on the authority of Jubayr ibn Mut'im with a single chain of transmission says that the two parts of the moon stood on two mountains. This tradition further states that the Meccan responded by saying "Muhammad has taken us by his magic...If he was able to take us by magic, he will not be able to do so with all people." Traditions transmitted on the authority of Ibn Abbas briefly mention the incident and do not provide much details.[2] Traditions transmitted on the authority of Abdullah bin Masud describe the incident as follows:

We were along with God's Messenger at Mina, that moon was split up into two. One of its parts was behind the mountain and the other one was on this side of the mountain. God's Messenger said to us: Bear witness to this 039:6725

Al-Zamakhshari, a famous commentator of the Qur'an, acknowledged the splitting of the moon as one of Muhammad's miracles. But he also suggested that the splitting might take place only on the day of judgment.[5] The Muslim scholar Yusuf Ali provides three different interpretations of the verse. He holds that perhaps all three are applicable to the verse: Moon once appeared cleft asunder at the time of Muhammad in order to convince the unbelievers. It will split again when the day of judgment approaches (here the prophetic past tense is taken to indicate the future). Yusuf Ali connects this incident with the disruption of the solar system mentioned in 75:8-9. Lastly, he says that the verses can be metaphorical, meaning that the matter has become clear as the moon.

Dissenting commentators who do not accept the miracle narration such as Hasan al-Basri (d. 110 H.) and 'Ata al-Khurasani (d. 135 H.) believe that the verse only refers to the splitting of the moon at the day of judgment.[4][9][12] Likewise, M. A. S. Abdel Haleem writes:

The Arabic uses the past tense, as if that Day were already here, to help the reader/listener imagine how it will be. Some traditional commentators hold the view that this describes an actual event at the time of the Prophet, but it clearly refers to the end of the world.

Some Muslim scholars postulate and believe that a (now known) Astronomical event must have happened at that time, which made it appear to the observers as if the moon had been split in two, because the phenomenon was seen at least in India as well.[14] One of the possible lunar events could be a large asteroid hitting the moon, and the plume and debri from the strike blocking enough lunar view to make it appear as if the Moon had split in two. A second possibility could be a celestial body passing between Earth and the Moon and blocking some part of lunar surface for short time. Moreover, in the light of the verse that was revealed at that time, the word "Saa'at" also means spiritual revolution, so the event also symbolized the end of the Pagan Arab culture and religions which used Moon as their symbol or worshipped moon gods. Though a few other Muslim thinkers had difficulties accepting this event and other preternatural events and, according to Annemarie Schimmel, sometimes tried to "de-mythologize" it.[4][5] For example, Shah Waliullah of Delhi (d. 1762) said that the event "may have been a kind of hallucination, or perhaps caused by a smoke, by the swooping down of a star, a cloud, or an eclipse of the sun or the moon which might be given the impression that the moon was actually split in two."

In later Islam

The narrative was used by some later Muslims to convince others of the prophethood of Muhammad. Annemarie Schimmel for example quotes the following from Muslim scholar Qadi Iyad who lived in Ceuta in Spain:[4]

It has not been said of any people on the earth that the moon was observed that night such that it could be stated that it was not split. Even if this had been reported from many different places, so that one would have to exclude the possibility that all agreed upon a lie, yet, we would not accept this as proof to the contrary, for the moon is not seen in the same way by different people.... An eclipse is visible in one country but not in the other one; in one place it is total, in the other one only partial.

Western historians such as A.J. Wensinck and Denis Gril, reject the historicity of the miracle arguing that the Qur'an itself denies miracles, in their traditional sense, in connection with Muhammad.

Debate over the inviolability of heavenly bodies

The Qur'anic verse 54:1-2 was part of the debate between medieval Muslim theologians and Muslims philosophers over the issue of the inviolability of heavenly bodies. The philosophers held that nature was composed of four fundamental elements: earth, air, fire, and water. Philosophers however held that the composition of heavenly bodies were different. This belief was based on the observation that the motion of heavenly bodies, unlike that of terrestrial bodies, was circular and without any beginnings or ends. This appearance of eternity in the heavenly bodies, led the philosophers to conclude that the heavens were inviolable. Theologians on the other hand proposed their own conception of the terrestrial matter: the nature was composed of uniform atoms that were re-created at every instant by God (the latter idea was added to defend God's omnipotence against the encroachment of the independent secondary causes). According to this conception, the heavenly bodies were essentially the same as the terrestrial bodies, and thus could be pierced.[5]

In order to deal with implication of the traditional understanding of the Qur'anic verse 54:1-2, philosophers argued that the verse should be interpreted metaphorically (e.g. the verse could have referred to a partial lunar eclipse in which then earth obscured part of the moon).[5]

Literature

This tradition has inspired many Muslim poets, especially in India.[6] In poetical language Muhammad is sometimes equated with the sun or the morning light. As such, part of a poem from Sana'i, a renowned early twelfth century Persian Sufi poet, reads: "the sun should split the moon in two".[4] Jalal ad-Din Rumi, a renowned Persian-writing poet and mystic, in one of his poems conveys the idea that to be split by the Muhammad's finger is the greatest bliss the lowly moon can hope for and a devoted believers splits the moon with Muhammad's finger.[4] Elaborating on this idea, Abd ar-Rahman Jami, one of the classical poets and mystics of Persia, plays with the shapes and numerical values of Arabic letters in a complicated way: The full moon, Jami says, resembles the Arabic letter for a circular m with the numerical value 40. When Muhammad split the moon, it became like two crescent-shaped n's (the Arabic letter for "n") whose numerical value is 50 each. This would mean that, thanks for the miracle, the value of moon had increased.[4]

In another place Rumi, according to Schimmel, alludes to two miracles attributed to Muhammad in tradition, i.e. the splitting of the moon (which shows the futility of man's scientific approach to nature), and the other that Muhammad being an illiterate:[4]

NASA mis-cited as proof

NASA photograph from Apollo 10 in 1969. A scar on the surface of the moon alleged to be evidence of a healed split

Apollo mission photographs of the Rima Ariadaeus revealed a rift line across the surface of the moon. A 2004 book by Zaghloul El-Naggar reproduces one of these photographs and says that British Muslim David Musa Pidcock told him he had seen a 1978 "program" (sic) in which he claimed that unnamed US space scientists had said that "the moon had been split a long time ago and rejoined, and there is a lot of concrete evidence on the surface of the moon to prove this".[16] This was reported as proof of splitting by news services such as Jafariya News[17][18] and on Internet Web sites. On being asked in 2010, NASA scientist Brad Bailey said, "My recommendation is to not believe everything you read on the internet. Peer-reviewed papers are the only scientifically valid sources of information out there. No current scientific evidence reports that the Moon was split into two (or more) parts and then reassembled at any point in the past."[7]

The leader of all the Prophets and the messengers

The glorious Quran and Sunnah were revealed to Imam al-Anbia (The leader of all the Prophets and the messengers) Muhammad (p.b.u.h.). As Imam Tahawi said about him:
Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) is undoubtedly Allah's most exalted creature, His most beloved Messenger and a chosen Prophet. He is the last of the Prophets, Imam of all pious people, the Master of all the Messengers and the most beloved to the Creator of this universe. 

Such were the qualities due to which Quran was revealed to him. Ibn Masud beautifully mentioned the Prophet (p.b.u.h.) when he said, 
'Indeed Allah looked into the hearts of the servants and found the heart of the heart of the Muhammad (p.b.u.h.) to be the best of the hearts of His servants and so He chose him for himself and sent him as a messenger….. '

STATEMENTS OF NONMUSLIMS REGARDING PROPHET MUHAMMAD 

Timothy, Nestorian Christian and an eighth-century patriarch of the Assyrian Church stated:
Muhammad is "worthy of all praise" and "walked in the path of the prophets" because he taught the unity of God. He taught the way of good works; he opposed idolatry and polytheism he taught about God, his Word, and his Spirit he showed his zeal by fighting against idolatry with the sword; like Abraham he left his kinfolk rather than worship idols.

George Sale became the earliest Westerner to rise above bigotry toward Muhammad when he translated Quran into English from Arabic for the first time. That 1734 work, along with his clarifying notes, fulfilled his intention of giving "the original impartial justice." Sale, a Protestant lawyer, writes in his introduction:
"Muhammad gave his Arabs the best religion he could, as well as the best laws; preferable, at least, to those of the ancient pagan lawgivers."

For two centuries, Sale's work was the best single source in English for the study of Islam.

Later in the eighteenth century, distinguished historian Edward Gibbon gave a balanced treatment of Muhammad's character. Gibbon recognized that Muhammad was "endowed with a pious and contemplative disposition and that he despised the pomp of royalty." Gibbon thought that Europeans who stress the prophet's amorous activities have "maliciously exaggerated the frailties of Muhammad."

Thomas Carlyle, another outstanding English writer, became famous for his theory that "the history of the world is but the biography of great men." He discovered Muhammad to have been a sincere leader after approaching him in this positive manner: "I mean to say all the good of him I justly can." Carlyle rejected the characteristic European outlook of the preceding millennium, that Muhammad was "a scheming impostor." While laudatory toward the founder of Islam, Carlyle's appreciation did not carry over to the style of Quran as he read it in English. He confessed:
"It is as toilsome reading as I ever undertook a wearisome confused jumble."

Writing at the time of Carlyle in the nineteenth century, European historian Johann Doellinger asserted: 
"No other mortal has ever, from the beginning of the world, exercised such an immeasurable influence upon the religious, moral, and political relations of mankind, as has the Arab Muhammad."

In the twentieth century, non-Muslim scholars have increasingly acknowledged the greatness of Muhammad. For five decades Anglican bishop Kenneth Cragg has been writing books to publicize the admirable qualities of Islam and has translated selections from Arabic religious literature. He states: 

Bassetti-Sani is aware that the Bible contains this promise to Abraham: 
"As for lshmael, I have heard you; I will bless him ... and make him a great nation."

According to Muslim tradition, Muhammad is a descendant of Hagar's grandson Nebaioth (or Nabit).

Alfred Guillaume, the English translator of the most important Arabic biographical sources on the prophet, writes: 
"Trustworthy tradition depicts a man of amazing ability in winning men's hearts by persuasion and in coercing and disarming his opponents. . . . He stands out as one of the great figures of history."

Historian Will Durant likewise concludes his treatment of Muhammad with this tribute:

If we judge greatness by influence, he was one of the giants of history. He undertook to raise the spiritual and moral level of a people harassed into barbarism by heat and foodless wastes, and he succeeded more completely than any other reformer seldom has any man so fully realized his dream.... When he began, Arabia was a desert flotsam of idolatrous tribes; when he died it was a nation.

Michael Hart, a contemporary American scientist, offers a similar estimate of Muhammad's impact. Hart ranks the three most influential persons in history in this order: Muhammad, Isaac Newton, and Jesus. Hart places Muhammad at the top of his list of one hundred humans because he was "the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular levels." Within a century, his followers controlled the largest empire in human history.



http://hassanelagouz.blogspot.com/

Why i used the word "Greatest" with Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) when all Prophets are equal.

Many People said that in Quran it is mentioned that all Prophets are equal so i should remove the word "Greatest" from the name of this page.

No doubt there are many verses of Quran and Hadees saying to make no distinction between any of the messengers.

(2:136) Say (O Muslims), "We believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Ibrâhim (Abraham), Ismâ'il (Ishmael), Ishâque (Isaac), Ya'qûb (Jacob), and to Al-Asbât [the twelve sons of Ya'qûb (Jacob)], and that which has been given to Mûsa (Moses) and 'Iesa (Jesus), and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we have submitted (in Islâm)."



(4:152) But those who believed in Allah and (all) His Messengers and, (in embracing faith,) made no distinction between any of these (Messengers), He will soon pay them their rewards. And Allah is Most Forgiving, Ever-Merciful.

In Some Hadees Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said the same thing.

My humble explanation, when i used the word "greatest" with Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) it was not that i was looking down toward other Prophets but it was just because of the love of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and what Quran is forbidding Muslims to do is to look down to other prophets like Jews and christens did. My love and the word "greatest" for Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) is also according to Quran and Hadees.

In Quran Allah says,
“Allah chooses Messengers from angels and from men. Verily, Allah is All-Hearer, All-Seer” [al-Hajj 22:75]

“Those Messengers! I preferred some  of them to others; to some of them Allah spoke (directly); others He raised to degrees (of honour)” [al-Baqarah 2:253]

  Allah tells us that He chose and selected these Messengers from among mankind. After mentioning some of the Prophets and Messengers,

He says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And also some of their fathers and their progeny and their brethren, We chose them, and We guided them to the Straight Path” [al-An’aam 6:87].

And Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And Allah has preferred some of you above others in wealth and properties” [al-Nahl 16:71].
=========================================================================================================

And According to Hadees

 Sayyidina Abu Sa’eedKhudri  (RA) reported that Allah’s Messenger ‘ said, “I will be the chief of the children of Aadam on the Day of Resurrection, no boast( not saying this with pride). In my hand will be the standard of praise and, no boast. There will be no Prophet on that day Aadam included-but will be under my banner. And, I will be the first for whom the earth will be split open-and, no boast.”
Jamia Tarmadi. vol 2. no 1580

Anas b. Malik reported: The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: I would be the first among people to intercede in the Paradise and amongst the apostles I would have the largest following (on the Day of Resurrection).
Sahi Muslim, vol 1, no 483

Abu Huraira reported that the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: I have been given superiority over the other prophets in six respects: I have been given words which are concise but comprehensive in meaning; I have been helped by terror (in the hearts of enemies): spoils have been made lawful to me: the earth has been made for me clean and a place of worship; I have been sent to all mankind and the line of prophets is closed with me.
Sahi Muslim, vol 1, no 1162
=========================================================================================================

In His wisdom, He that Adam (peace be upon him) should be the father of mankind, and His wisdom, mercy and justice decreed that from among Adam’s progeny He should select an elite of Messengers and Prophets – may peace and blessings be upon them and upon our Prophet. Among those whom He chose and preferred over others were the Messengers of strong will [Uloo’l-‘Azm, see al-Ahqaaf 46:35], namely, Muhammad, Ibraaheem, Nooh, Moosa and ‘Eesaa ibn Maryam, may the best of blessings and peace be upon them. And He chose and favored above them all their leader, the final Messenger, our Prophet Muhammad ibn ‘Abd-Allaah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). He is indeed the leader of the sons of Adam, with no boast. He will carry the banner and will be granted the power of intercession [on the Day of Resurrection]. He is the one who will attain al-maqaam al-mahmood (the Praised Position) in Paradise, which will be given to one person only, and that person will be our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Hence Allah took the covenant and pledge from all the Prophets that if Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was sent during the lifetime of any one of them, they would be obliged to follow him (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), to leave behind what they had brought and follow what our Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) brought.

As Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“And (remember) when Allah took the Covenant of the Prophets, saying: ‘Take whatever I gave you from the Book and Hikmah (understanding of the Laws of Allah), and afterwards there will come to you a Messenger (Muhammad) confirming what is with you; you must, then, believe in him and help him.’ Allaah said: ‘Do you agree (to it) and will you take up My Covenant (which I conclude with you)?’ They said: ‘We agree.’ He said: ‘Then bear witness; and I am with you among the witnesses (for this).’ Then whoever turns away after this, they are the Faasiqoon (rebellious: those who turn away from Allah's obedience)” [Aal-Imraan 3:81-82]

The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said to ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allah be pleased with him): “By Allah, if my brother Moosa were alive, he would have no  choice but to follow me.”

And when the Messiah ‘Eesaa ibn Maryam (peace be upon him) comes down at the end of time, he will come to rule in accordance with the sharee’ah (religious laws)of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), and he will follow him (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

All of the above refers to their status before Allaah. With regard to their religion, it is one religion, for they all called people to believe in One God, Allah (Tawheed) and to devote worship sincerely to Him Alone. With regard to laws, each of them had his own law which was for his people alone.

Allah says (interpretation of the meaning):
“To each among you, We have prescribed a law and a clear way” [al-Maa’idah 5:48]. But the way (sharee’ah) of our Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the most perfect, the best, the most complete and the most beloved to Allah; it abrogates all laws that came before it. Undoubtedly the Prophets differ in status, and they are at varying levels. The best of them, as stated above, are the five Messengers of strong will (Uloo’l-‘Azm), and the best of them all is the Seal of the Prophets, Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

With regard to the saheeh ahaadeeth (authentic prophetic narrations), “Do not prefer me over Yoonus ibn Mattaa” and “By the One Who chose Moosa over all of creation” – these all indicate the immense humility of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) when speaking of his brothers the Messengers. But he is undoubtedly the best of them all, for he led them in prayer in Bayt al-Maqdis (Jerusalem) on the night of the Israa’ (Night Journey). He will be the leader of the sons of Adam on the Day of Resurrection, and he is the only one among all the Messengers who will be granted the power of intercession on that Day. He (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the one who said: “From among the sons of Adam, Allah chose Quraysh; from among Quraysh He chose Kinaanah; from among Kinaanah He chose Bani Haashim; and from among Bani Haashim He chose me.” He (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the Chosen One (Muhammad(PBUH)) from among all of mankind.


And Allah knows best.

What are the fundamental differences between Shias & Sunnis authentic notions?

   As much as it's tragic for the Ummah to be divided into sects, but the fact is sects DO exist and amongst them the major ones are Shias and the Sunnis.

 What are the fundamental differences between Shias & Sunnis authentic notions? Whether the differences are basic and threatening to faith (Iman) or just trifle? Why do some scholars call them as non-Muslims?

    To start with, we should all remind ourselves of this quranic verse and ponder over it: "As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: their affair is with Allah. He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did. (Al'Anam 6:159)

There are a number of differences in the Shia and the Sunni Juristic opinions. But these differences cannot be termed as the "basic differences" in these two (unfortunately) major sects of Islam. The basic difference in the two sects is that of the Shiite faith of the system of "Imamat". The Shiite faith of "Imamat" implies that after the Prophet (pbuh), there shall be no other prophet, but the only true leader of the Muslims, at a given time, is an "Imam" who, like the prophets of Allah, is directly appointed by Allah. The appointment of the first "Imam" was made by Allah through the last prophet (pbuh) and every subsequent "Imam" is appointed by Allah through the "Imam" who precedes him. Another qualification of the "Imam", according to the Shiite belief is that he shall belong to the family of the last prophet (pbuh). In this category, the khilafat of first, second and third caliphs of Islam are held null and void and done out of treachery to the Ummah. The Shiite belief holds that the "Imams", like the prophets of Allah, are "masoom" (sinless, innocent) and therefore should be obeyed in all matters and under all circumstances. The "Imams", according to the Shiite faith, are thus not just the political leaders of the Muslims but also their religious leaders and clergy. The Sunni school, on the other hand, do not hold any such belief.

This may, at first sight, seem to be a trivial difference between the two schools. But a close analysis reveals that it amounts to a difference of the sources of religion for the two schools. The Sunni school, because of its lack of belief in the institution of "Imamat" holds the last prophet of Allah and the book revealed on him as the two primary sources of Islam, while the Shiite school, because of the importance and position it gives to the "Imams" holds them to be an autonomous source of their religion. Anything that an "Imam" says, any thing that he does and anything that he narrates is "religion" for the Shiite school. Differing with an "Imam" in any matter is of about the same consequence as differing with a prophet. Not submitting to the directions of an "Imam" is as grave a sin as refusing to submit to the directions of a prophet of Allah.

As can be seen from the above explanation, the difference between the Shiite and the Sunni schools are not trivial, rather these differences are "very" basic.

But even so, the best thing to do is not to condemn each other, call each other "Kaafir" (infidel) or non-Muslim", air the fire of hatred and promote each other’s killings, but to try and convince the other person as well as one’s own self to accept whatever is right in the light of the Qur’an and the true teachings of the Prophet (pbuh), to promote empathy for each other’s point of view and to try and stress the common points in each other’s beliefs. The question that whether Shias are Muslims or not is concerned, we strictly believe that it is not the jurisdiction of the scholars of religion to declare an individual or a group “non-Muslim”. The job of the scholars of Islam is to inform people of the true teachings of the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Declaring an individual or a group “Muslim” or “non-Muslim” is a legal matter, as far as the life of this world is concerned. Only the legal authorities that are competent for this purpose should therefore, be referred to for such declarations. In my opinion, because this issue pertains to the whole Muslim community, therefore such declaration should be made by the collectivity of the Muslim community. Scholars of Islam should strictly refrain from declaring each other “non-Muslims”, as such actions would only result in breaking the already weakened Muslim community into further smaller pieces. Disregard of this fact shall not only result in the further segmentation of the Muslim Ummah, but shall also present a comic situation as a whole, where each group shall declare the other as non-Muslim and yet all are considered Muslims by the Muslim collectivities and then the members of all groups – non-Muslims in the eyes of one another – shall, for instance, be performing Hajj, in the Bayet Allah together.  

"And if two parties or groups among the believers fall to fighting, then make peace between them both, but if one of them rebels against the other, then fight you (all) against the one that which rebels till it complies with the Command of Allah; then if it complies, then make reconciliation between them justly, and be equitable. Verily! Allah loves those who are equitable.” (Qurân 49:9), meaning even if one group rebels the other one, Allah still called them believers, which is better than some Muslim scholars calling or naming the other group as unbeliever.

    It should be interesting to note here that although these two sects have co-existed for centuries now, the extent and gravity of sectarian violence has never been felt more than in the present times, especially in Muslim countries of Pakistan and Iraq. The basic reason for this change in the situation is that a number of prominent scholars and knowledgeable personalities of both these sects have changed the roles that they played in the past. In the past, the differences of both the sects were a matter of intellectual debate between the scholars of these sects. The gravity of these differences was also fully known, but the scholars never promoted violence against each other. But now the situation is completely different. The scholars of these sects now sit on their respective pulpits and use these differences as fire to burn the emotions and feelings of their addressees against the people of the other sects. They promote the killings of the followers of other sects by labeling these followers with various derogatory terms. They call such killings a part of Jihad and they promise their followers the everlasting bliss of jannah (paradise) if they take part in such killings. None of them can attain paradise this way, if they believe in the this authentic of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh): Abdullah b. (Mas'ud) reported Allah's Messenger (on whom be peace ) as saying: The first (thing) that will be decided amongst people on the Day of Judgment, will pertain to bloodshed. [Book 016, Number 4158 (Muslim)] A Muslim killing another innocent human being, be it a Hindu, Muslim, Christian or a Jew, will have to answer for the blood of the innocent or the murder he committed. How can any group of Muslim, claim to enter paradise by flowing the blood of another Muslim who ( at least) believed in the Unity of Allah(swt) and Prophethood of Muhammad (saw), is beyond my senses.

 Yes, I do agree that the difference in the Shiite and the Sunni sects are quite basic and not trivial, but I think there is still no need to fire each other’s emotions to such great extents, even on differences that are so grave.We Muslims must be united. We must be one hand, one body, one heart, one mind and one word. We have the same God, the same Prophet (SAW), the same Mecca, the same prayers, the same Ramadan, the same goals, the same destiny and the same enemy. True Muslims do not allow anything to create disunity among them, because Allah (SWT) Has repeatedly prohibited divisions among believers. 

"Do not be like those who are divided among themselves and fall into disputations after receiving clear evidence; for those (who are divided) will be a great punishment" Holy Quran 30:31, 32

"Be united by holding onto God's Covenant, and do not be divided" Holy Quran 8:46

"Obey Allah and his Messenger, and fall into no disputes, losing your heart and your power, and be patient, surely Allah is with those who are patient" Holy Quran 6:159

"The believers are brothers, make peace between your brothers, and beaware of Allah, that you may receive mercey" Holy Quran 59:10

"O Lord, forgive us, and our brothers who came before us into the faith, and leave no, in our hearts, any animosity against the believers"

"The beleivers, men and women, are Auliya (friends) of one another" Holy Quran 9:71

"The believers are nothng else than brothers" Holy Quran 49:10

The Prophet Mohammed (SAW) said: "A Muslim is the brother of every other Muslim; he doesn't do him wrong and does not abandon him. Whomsoever comes to the aid of his brother at the time of need, Allah will aid him at his time of need. Whomsoever lifts a burden off of his brother, Allah will remove from upon him a burden from burdens of the day of judgment".

    Reader 1 comments: Having read all this, my belief is still that, Shias are not true Muslims which by the way is also supported by Sunni scholars let alone those who can rule by virtue of 'Fatwa'. Your position is that it is a duty of a state to make such a declaration. I think you probably may not want to get involved in such a controversy which may take a big bite of your time and efforts which you may rather like to use for what you have been doing? 

Where do you stand in matter of theology of the two sects?

    I really see no benefits accruing from such an act. I am sure you would agree with me that the position of an individual in the hereafter is not affected by yours or my opinion about his or her being a Muslim or a non-Muslim. Allah(swt) shall decide about that position on the basis of His own absolute knowledge, obviously, not on the basis of my or any one else’s opinion about that individual. As far as the worldly benefits of our declaring someone a non-Muslim are concerned, I am completely unaware of any that are likely to follow such a declaration, except for creating an obvious aversion in the hearts of such individual's against prophet's call to the path of Allah(swt). 

Some people point out that if such a declaration is made, it would result in spreading the knowledge that the beliefs of such and such group are not a part of Islam. I do not agree with this opinion. In my opinion, this advantage can more effectively be enjoyed by merely presenting the true beliefs of Islam in an effective and consistent manner. In view of the above details, I really do not think that it is in our jurisdiction to declare any group or individual non-Muslim. Our work should be, to primarily understand and secondly to present the call of Islam in a manner that is effective and one, which creates no aversion in the hearts and minds of my addressees. 

   Therefore, even though I consider the Shiite beliefs to be against the teachings of the Qur’an, as otherwise I would, obviously, have been a Shiite myself, yet I am not prepared to call them non-Muslims as I do not consider such an act to be within anyone's jurisdiction.  

   Regarding my personal stand on this issue, then according to the Shias claim, there were 125,000 followers of Islam present at Gadhir-al-Khum and around Mount of Arafat, the site of the last Sermon. It was here, that Prophet (pbuh) declared Ali(ra) as Muslims 'mawla', then how come each and everyone of the 125,000 disobeyed the Prophet for the first voting, for the second voting and even for the third voting for the appointment of the THREE Khalifs? I hate to think that the followers of Prophet of that generation were that COWARD, so as not to raise their voices for all these years when Abu Bakr(ra) mischievously declared himself as Khalifa of the Ummah despite prophet's clear indications? Finally, the religion is for ALLAH ALONE and not for any individual, be it Ali or Abu Bakr or Umar or Uthman(pbut) or current Shia Ismaili Imam - Karim Agha Khan.

We're against the hereditary (generation after generation) Imamat of Ali's descendants. Also, never did either Prophet (pbuh) or even Ali(ra) say that Ali's son or sons were to be the next Imam or mawla. A Khalifa's son or Minister's Son or Pope's son does not become the next Khalifa or Minister or Pope. I once asked a question to myself as to, "on what basis have we decided to be called as Muslims and who are our primary sources for guidance mentioned in Qur'an? From what I have read till now, the ONLY reason of us having opted to be called as Muslims is because we believe in Allah(swt) and ALL his prophets, including the last one, Muhammad (pbuh).

Did we become Muslims because Ali(as) or Fatima(as) were the 'infallible' ones and Ayesha(ra) was taking the wrong side of Islamic forces? Are we commanded by Allah(swt) to follow ONLY the ahl-a-Bait (they are most definitely an important source of our guidance alongside the Qur'an but NOT where Qura'nic verses are self sufficient, unambiguous and explicit in themselves.) and start criticizing all the others based on some hadiths which might have been borne out of political compulsions of those times. (Not to mention that some hadeeths have been proven to contain some malicious writings added during the course of time). 

Lets all ask ourselves one simple question, "Have we been commanded by Allah(swt) in Qur'an to respect ALL the companions including Ali(as) and ALL the wives of the prophet are mothers of the believers, irrespective of what they might have done during their lifetimes...for their case rests with HIM and HIM alone? " If the answer is Yes!, then it absolves them of every curse or condemnation and we lose the right to even criticize them in the light of these Quranic verses...

Allah bears witness in the Qur'an that Abu Bakr is a close companion to the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) by his saying:

"If ye help not (Muhammad (pbuh)), (it is no matter): for Allah did indeed help him, when the Unbelievers drove him out: he had no more than one companion (Abu Bakr): they two were in the Cave, and he said to his companion, Have no fear for Allah is with [us]." (Quran 9:40) 

[An argument that some companions were good Muslims and they went astray after his death can be attributed to abandonment from Allah to his messenger since He did not tell him what would happen in the future to warn the Muslim Ummah. How come Allah who promised to support his religion and his messenger, make the closest companions to his prophet, a group of renegades and hypocrites?!]

Aisha (ra), had a whole sura revealed defending her and this sura is sura An-Nor in this Surah Allah forbids us from speaking badly about her, He says: "Allah forbids you from it and warns you not to repeat the [like of it forever], if you are believers. (Qur'an 24:17), and she was praised in other suras. Like all the other wives of the Prophet, she was also given the choice either to remain with the Prophet or have worldly enjoyments instead and she chose Allah and His Prophet without a blink of thinking. See verses (33:28-34).

[Imam Malik stated that anyone who slanders her should be killed right away because Allah forbids us (in the Qur'an) from it forever and because anyone who curses the Prophet (p) or any member of this family should be killed too. This fatwa was also issued by his teacher Imam Ja'far al-Saadiq. All members of Ahl-ul-Bayt (the family of the Holy Prophet) belong to Sunni Muslims. Imam Ja’far al-Sadiq for instance, is the teacher of Imam Malik and Imam Abu-Hanifa.]

The prophet(saw) also said of Ali(ra) : "Loving Ali is the sign of belief, and hating Ali is the sign of hypocrisy." (Sahih Muslim )

    Bearing these verses and hadeeths in mind, I personally believe that those who follow the four Sunni schools of thought, are closest to Qur'an and it's teachings and more than this, I can only say that Allah(swt) knows best. May He accept all our prayers and dua's and bring about Unity amongst the Muslims.

   Reader 2 comments: Let me ask you this: Have you recited the following verse of the Qur’an? Please do explain to your readership what you understand from this:- Yauma nad’u kulla unasin bi imami-him… (and the day when We will call every people with their respective Imam….) Qur'an .17:71

   You would notice that the reader/ scholar has quoted a *fragmented portion* of verse 17:71 from the Qur'an. The reason for fragmentation is obvious if you were to read the *entire verse* that is quoted below:-

Translation by M. M. Pickthall of verse 17:71:

"On the day when We shall summon all men with their record, whoso is given his book in his right hand -- such will read their book and they will not be wronged a shred."

Translation by Abdullah Yusuf Ali of verse 17:71:

"One day We shall call together all human beings with their (respective) Imams: those who are given their record in their right hand will read it (with pleasure) and they will not be dealt with unjustly in the least."

Transliteration of verse 17:71:

Yawma nad'uu kulla 'unaasim bi- 'Imaam -him fa- man 'uutiya kitaaba -hu bi- yamiini -hi fa- 'ulaa'ika yaqra'uuna kitaaba -hum wa-yuz-lamuuna fatiil(an)

     One would notice that Pickthall has translated the word "Imaam" as "record" (of deeds), whereas Yusuf Ali has left this word non-translated and given his comments. However, upon reading the ENTIRE VERSE, the true meaning of this word "Imaam" as the "record of deeds" is very clear and needs no further comments. Secondly, there are many human beings upon this earth (e.g. Atheists), who have no "Leaders", whereas the verse specifically relates to **all human beings**. However, the deeds of all human beings are recorded as mentioned in verse 36:12 of the Holy Qur'an, quoted below. One may also notice that Yusuf Ali has translated below the same word "Imaam" as the "Book of (recorded) evidence". This verse 36:12 compliments verse 17:71.

I hope that answers the Rebuttal of the Shi'a scholar.

Translation by Yusuf Ali of verse 36:12:

Verily We shall give life to the dead and We record that which they sent before and that which they leave behind and of all things have We taken account in a clear Book (of evidence)

Transliteration of verse 36:12:

'In(na) -naa Nah.nu nuh.yil- mawtaa wa- naktubu maa qaddamuu wa- 'aathaar -hum wa- kulla shay'in ah-saynaa -hu fii 'Imaamim mubiin. 

Note: In verse 46:12 the "Book of Moses" is also called ""Imaam". 

   Readers 3 Comments: Now consider this hadeeth report recorded by Mulla Ali Qari in his Sharh-i-fiqh-i-Akbar  (Mulla Ali Qari is a Sunni Alim and this book is a commentary on Imam Abu Hanifa’s book of Islamic laws FIQH AKBAR), “man mata wa lam y’arif Imam-i-zamanihi, faqad mata meetat-al-Jahiliyya.” (one who dies without knowing the Imam of his time, dies the death of Jahiliyya).

   How could the Prophet (peace be upon him), have spoken the above text of the Hadeeth, recorded by Mulla Ali Qari or by anyone for that matter, when the actual "Concept of The Imamah" and/or the very perception of "The Imam of his time" was not even  known by the Ummah, that lived during the life of the Prophet? The Concepts of the Khilaphat and the Imamat were developed *after* the passing away of the Prophet. Even at the Ghadir-e-Khumn, in accordance with the Shiah Traditions and Riwayats, the Prophet did not declare Hadhrat Ali as the "Imaam" of the Ummah. He just called him as their 'mawla'.

   Same reader 3, further writes : The hadeeth report from the Prophet about the Muslims having twelve Imams is so strongly vouched by Isnaad that it is really impossible to deny it. Consequently, Muslims had to invent at least twelve names to fit that hadeeth. However, in every century and every generation the list of the names has been changing, depending upon who was running the  government. It is only the Shi'a Ithna Ashari who have maintained the list of the twelve Imams from day one and it has not changed.

   There is a serious problem of reconciliation within these two Ahadith. In the earlier Hadith, recorded by Mulla Ali Qari, the Prophet is supposed to have said (one who dies without knowing the **Imam of his time**, dies the death of Jahiliyya). In the later, so called as the strongly vouched Hadith, the Prophet is supposed to have said (the Muslims having **twelve Imams**).

These two statements contradict each other. IF the Prophet knew the future and he also knew it for sure that there were not going to be any more Imams (Leaders) after the twelfth Imam, he could not have made the earlier statement asking the Muslim Ummah that it was imperative to know the Leaders (Imams) of "their own times". How could those that were to be born after the twelfth Imam, know the "Imams of their own times" when there were going to be none, during their life time? The earlier statement in effect acknowledges the perpetually of the Leadership (Imams), which the later statement NEGATES. Here is one more reason why each and every narration that is in circulation could not be recognized as the authentic narration. Some are, others are not.

   Reader 4 comments: Do you sunnis know what? Bibi Fatima cursed both Abu Bakr and Umar after her prayers till the day she died. Abu Bakr and Umar displeased Allah. They burned the house of Fatima, attacked Ali, broke Zubair's sword, and smashed the door of the house so that Fatima was squeezed between it and her baby miscarriaged. Doesn't your blood boil with this? Also the Holy prophet had predicted that the people of his faith will be divided into 73 groups of which only one will be on the right and will be saved, and the 

rest will be on the wrong and will go astray. Finally, to establish the authenticity of Ahl-e-Bait amongst the Prophet's household, take a close look at the verse: "3:61 If any one disputes in this matter with thee, now after (full) knowledge Hath come to thee, say: "Come! let us gather together,- our sons and your sons, our women and your women, ourselves and yourselves: Then let us earnestly pray, and invoke the curse of Allah on those who lie!" (Yusuf Ali translation). The people who followed Prophet for this 'Muhabila' were Ali(as), Fatimah(ra), Hassan and Hussian (pbut). It was thus ordained indirectly by Allah(swt) in this verse that ONLY these were the true family members and descendents of Prophet.

  The above story about accidental miscarriage of Bibi Fatima(ra) may be TRUE OR TOTALLY FALSE. We all have not joined Islam because of the THREE Khaliphs or because of ALI(as) or Fatimah(ra) and their actions or deeds. Their history is with them. I have entered Islam after hearing and believing the Words of Allah written in Qur'an. I follow the clear sunnah of the Prophet because that is what the Quran tells us to do. Regarding the hadith about Prophet predicting the division amongst his Ummah, it can also be debated because it seems to go against the verse of Qur'an which talks about 'only Allah has the knowledge of the future (30:4). Even if Allah(swt) imparted this knowledge to His prophet through angels, then this Hadith is being quoted now by every member or leader of the 70 odd sects in Islam today. Who all can we deny? Finally from my side, regarding the issue of the TRUE descendents of Prophet then I fail to understand this Quranic verse and it's meaning: "Muhammad is not the father of any of your men, but (he is) the Messenger of Allah, and the Seal of the Prophets, and Allah has full knowledge of all things." Qur'an 33:40 "...And whose word can be truer than Allah's?" Qur'an 4:87. From a genealogical point of view Imam Hussain was the Direct Descendant of: Hadhrat 'Ali  ibn Abi Talib  ibn  'Abd al-Muttalib ibn Hashim. If you were to ask yourself, whose Direct Descendant are you? The obvious and honest answer would be the Direct Descendant of your father and grandfather. BUT, not of your mother's father or your maternal grandfather. These were surely the family members of the Prophet and I don't disagree but to say that Hassan and Hussain (pbut) were true descendents of holy Prophet. It's also a known and agreed fact that Ali(ra) did marry one of his daughters to Caliph Umar(ra) and named his sons as those of the prominent companions of his times. I am aware that few traditions speak of Ali(as) doing it under compulsion but I am not ready to believe that, knowing the steadfastness and strength of Ali(ra) character and ;lastly from your basis of finding this in the verse you had quoted above, then I can only quote another ayah from the same Surah Al-Imran:

"He it is Who has sent down to thee the Book: In it are verses basic or fundamental (of established meaning); they are the foundation of the Book: others are allegorical. But those in whose hearts is perversity follow the part thereof that is allegorical, seeking discord, and searching for its hidden meanings, but no one knows its hidden meanings except Allah. And those who are firmly grounded in knowledge say: "We believe in the Book; the whole of it is from our Lord:" and none will grasp the Message except men of understanding." (Quran 03:7) (Yusuf Ali's translation)

Let's all, for our own sake, UNITE and do away with our sectarian mindset, lest we suffer and die in the hands of unbelievers for being the followers of one true God - Allah (swt). When Zionists in Israel or communists in China or Shiv Sainiks in India, goes hunting for Muslims and rampaging their homes, they don't demarcate between Shias or Sunnis. Sunnah and Shi`a are Muslims who pray to the same God. Both believe in the same Qur'an, have faith in the same message of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and you are recommended to pray with the Iranian Muslims in their mosques sticking to your Sunni understanding of Islam as it is high time for the Muslim Ummah to appreciate all the segments of this Ummah and to have common understanding and appreciation of the Islamic faith.  The Qur'an calls us to unite and cooperate and avoid causes of dissent. Allah Almighty says: " And hold fast, all of you together, to the cable of Allah, and do not separate. And remember Allah's favor unto you: how ye were enemies and He made friendship between your hearts so that ye became as brothers by His grace; and (how) ye were upon the brink of an abyss of fire, and He did save you from it. Thus Allah maketh clear His revelations unto you, that haply ye may be guided.” (Al `Imran: 103) 

It does not mean that you are required to relax your understanding of the principles of Islam for the sake of unity of others but to live with them and appreciate what they have. Let's try to cooperate on our common interpretations and excuse each other in case of difference.”

Modesty in Islam

Islam is more than just a religion, it is a complete code of life. Among a number of things that the Islamic way of life encourages,

 modesty has a prominent place in Islamic society.  Modesty in Islam is considered a part of one’s faith as well as a way to save mankind from transgression. All of God’s prophets emphasized the importance of modesty in every Muslim’s life. Prophet Muhammad severely warned about immodesty by saying,

“Indeed from the teachings of the first prophets which has reached you is, ‘If you do not have shyness, then do as you please.” (Al-Bukhari)

Abdullah bin Masud narrated that prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as saying:”Shall I not tell you who is kept away from hell, and from whom hell is kept away? Everyone who is gentle, kindly, approachable and of an easy disposition. That’s what is called Modesty. The Muslim woman is beautified by her modesty in dress and manners, and guarded against indecent looks and behavior – even though she may be different from everyone else around her. Modesty is dignity, grace and adornment of a believer, given by the All-Wise Beneficent Allah (SWT), for the benefit of the Muslims and all mankind.”

Abdullah bin Musalm reported,prophet Muhammad (PBUH) as saying, “Modesty is a part of the teachings of the previous prophets, and anyone who lacks it may do whatever he likes.”

Modesty in Islam refers to turning away from false practices such as misbehaving with others and being conscious both in the public and private spheres of life. It covers aspects such as how a Muslim dresses up; safeguards his tongue from indecency; deals with people, and most importantly, how much he fears about his accountability in the court of God.

Modesty in Islam is judged by how well a person can control his temperament and save his tongue from vain talk. If he is unable to hold his anger, he may indulge in verbal abuse or physical torture towards others. As reported in Sahih Bukhari, Prophet Muhammad narrated that the strength of a person is not in throwing his opponents on the ground, but it is the ability to control his anger.

Any person with a strong faith does not like to disobey God or sin. Such a person is aware that Allah is everywhere and is seeing everything, so he stays away from sinning both in public and private. This kind of modesty in Islam is regarded as shyness due to awareness.

According to Islam, modesty can be natural or acquired. Naturally, modesty is built into both men and women .An example of natural modesty is the innate desire to cover oneself. According to Holy Quran, when both Prophet Adam and Eve ate from the forbidden tree and were exposed to each other, they started covering themselves with leaves because they had an innate sense of modesty.

Modesty separates humans from animals. Modesty in Islam is tied to various traditions such as seeking approval before entering in room; following a proper dress code; enjoining the company of modest people and staying away from indecent acts.

Islam encourages one to lower his/her gaze and be saved from the Satan’s trap of being engaged in any indecency like fornication or homosexuality. Allah commands modesty in these words,

“Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty: that will make for greater purity for them: And Allah is well acquainted with all that they do.” (Holy Quran 24:30)

“And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof…” (Holy Quran 24:31)

The most important kind of modesty in Islam is that geared towards God. As Prophet Muhammad said: “God is more deserving than other people of shyness.” (Abu Dawood)

 It is a pity that in the current, so called “free” society, Islamic standards of purity and modesty face continual threat and criticism. Modesty is the most important part of Islamic morals and charatcteristics.

if a Muslim woman is mandated to wear hijab, then why is a Muslim man exempt from this obligation in Islam?’

The truth is that Muslim men are equally required to follow hijab.

The term “hijab” does not refer to a headscarf, but Islamically, in the broader sense, it encompasses modesty and chastity of men and women’s garments and guarding one’s gaze.  Guarding one’s gaze refers to avoiding  “checking out” the opposite gender, to walk humbly as not to attract any undue attention and to remain virtuous throughout life.  However, society specifically attached the word “hijab” to a fabric that appropriately covers the head.

When following hijab, men are required not to wear tight and revealing clothes or behave in such a manner where they are sexually objectifying themselves.  This is similar to requirements that must be upheld by Muslim women.  Men are obligated to cover themselves from navel to below the knee.  Though this is quite a loose definition of appropriate dressing, it is only allowed if there are no women present.

While a woman in Islam has a choice to earn money or not, men are required to financially support their families.  The belly-button to below the knee dress code is tolerable in particular circumstances such as for a man holding a blue-collar job as he works under extreme dry temperature and heat.  However, if a woman is working alongside him in this kind of terrain, he has to observe a strict dress code.

Men are to dress simplistically, so their clothing does not imply vanity and status of their wealth because pride and boastfulness are one of the biggest sins in Islam.  Moreover, they are forbidden to dress like a woman.  They also cannot wear gold jewelry or silk clothing while women face no such restrictions.

Another requisite is that men should lower their gazes when encountering a woman to avoid disrespecting her by having sensual thoughts of her.  Most importantly, he is expected to be respectful to others, not only physically but also verbally, especially with the opposite gender.

Men are also mandated not to shake hands with women whom they do not have immediate familial relationships.  For instance, mothers, sisters, wives and daughters are the ones a man can freely intermingle with.  This practice is followed by some Muslims but not all.   It does not mean that a Muslim man cannot talk to a woman at all.  It is permissible as long as it is done in public with a respectful distance between their bodies, and the conversation has to follow the rules of modesty, without any inappropriate intentions on the part of either man or woman.

Many Muslim nations, such as Saudi Arabia, tend to have separate spaces for both the genders in public spheres. Because this idea of separate spaces is unfamiliar in the western world, the perceived reasons for it are often misunderstood. Separating spaces by gender is done to create a culture of modesty that coincides with Islamic belief. Religiously there are no pre-marital relationships or physicality between men and women and maintaining respectful space and distance is a way of maintaining Islamically appropriate interactions.

In regards to growing a beard, the situation is parallel to a woman wearing a niqab (the face covering).  Some Muslims hold belief that it is at the discretion of an individual while others sees it as a compulsory form of hijab.

Another significant aspect of hijab is that men and women both have the responsibility to remain chaste before their weddings to maintain a healthy society.

So, although men do not wear headscarves, their hijab is parallel to women’s. Both men and women have equivalent obligations and duties to follow in regards to clothing, when socially encountering the opposite gender and guarding one’s purity until the marital vows. Islam by no means promotes or advocates sexism as it clearly states in the Qur’an that both the men and women are equal with comparable rights.