"Why should we change our religion, it is full of blessing for us. Muhammad and his followers are merciful among themselves and severe against the disbelievers (Surah Fatah); the Quran is here to strike at the root of evil (Surah Tarikh). The disbelievers are filthy (Surah Taubah). Respect is only for Allah, the prophet and the believers (Surah Saaf). The believers have Allah as their protectors. We are in state of truce where we respect the life and property of the Kafirs, but during war if we are killed we go to Jannah, but if we are successful their property and wealth is ours, their women are our concubines, their children are our slaves. That is what you call the atrocities of Muhammad (PBUH). He is fully justified of what he did. The polytheist and the atheist live on the earth, breadth the airs, drink the water and consume the food—all of which belongs to Allah—should be punished. Muhammad (PBUH) is here to establish religion of Allah not to compromise. He may be oppressor for others. So what... So What???"
I have seen a most moderate and tolerant Muslim in my life who is my uncle in law. He is a very nice and decent person. I had a conversation with him on Islam. He is a science graduate in chemistry and Hafiz-e-Quran, a very religious and devoted Muslim. Since he is very knowledgeable on Islam, I thought at the outset that I would be able to make him understand the true nature of Islam, and hopefully he would liberate himself from Islamic bondage. But as the discussion progressed, I realized that he is the person who will ever be able to realize the damage Islam has caused to him. Here is the first piece of conversation, which is still running for nearly a year but the intensity has subsided now. Let us see the opinion of a moderate and liberal Muslim about non-Muslims? That will help us imagine what would be the opinion of fanatic fundamentalist Muslims. I have spilled almost entire FFI and Islam-watch on him, but to no avail.
My uncle (Let’s call him Nafees) wrote to me during a debate:
Abid: Muhammad was not a prophet but a conqueror. He also bore an illegitimate child, named Ibrahim, with Maria the Copt. What kind of prophet is he who is having sexual relationship without marriage? Why he waged so many wars? Did any other prophets like Jesus, Buddha do so to established peace and harmony, for making people virtuous or for teaching morality or spirituality?
Nafees: First you have to get in your jaundiced mind that blessing and good tidings are for those who believe in Allah and the beloved prophet. Equality and rights are not applicable to disbelievers. The beloved prophet was sent to enforce Allah’s laws not to please the UNO. If the law is not acceptable to the Jews the hypocrite and the Kafirs. Then to hell with them and all Islamic critics. Allah’s law is eternal; you cannot judge it by the parameter of human law. War booty is made legal by Allah. What is the problem with that? Those who wage war against Allah and the HOLY PROPHET are cursed and when they are defeated their life and property belongs to Muslims. Maria was the part of the war booty.
Abid: Muhammad’s choicest booty was Muslims’ mind. Muhammad has perverted your morals, reduced you to a brain-dead zombie, smashed your reasoning faculty and destroyed you humanity and conscience, and converted you to a man of Satan who think that to make people virtuous war is needed, booty is ethical and bearing child without marriage is legitimate. See what Islam has done to you. You will not realize anything until you are killed and your women are made concubines like the way Islam suggests. Maria was not part of war booty but Safiyah was. Maria was a gift to Muhammad from the Egyptian king. Safiyah was a wife of Muhammad but Maria was his concubine.
Nafees: “The literal meaning of Muhammad (pbuh) the one who is worthy of highest possible praise so your allegations are invalid. You cannot say Mr. Good is bad or high is low.”
Abid: What happened to Muslims’ mind that they come up with such silly arguments that a man must be good just because the literal meaning of his name is ‘decent’? There is a person in Jail, who was charged with theft. His name is Sharafat (nobility), please go to the Judge and plead for his release as his name is Sharafat; so he can never do ignoble deeds. Or worship the man whose name is Rahman (one of name of Allah), then he must be Allah, because his name is so. Having a name and deserving what that name means are completely different things, my dear. No parents name their child, which means something bad, ignoble, or unpleasant, although many of them thieves, robbers, murderers, corrupt. Then, why do you expect Muhammad’s parents brand him with something humiliating. Even if they knew that Muhammad is going to be horrendous criminal, they would name him with admiring words. Do you think all criminals in a Jail have awful names? When you could not prove nobility from the deeds of Muhammad, then you tried to prove he is good because his name has such as meaning. Ah! What Islam has done to you! Please stop doing Islamic gymnastic; else more people would leave Islam by your sincere effort. Do I need to explain to you even this that a person is not judged by his name but by his character and deeds?
Nafees: How sad that you have ruined yourself by following your own speculation. The holy prophet will always be praised despite your myopic eyes.
Abid: Tell me why shouldn’t I follow my own speculation and reasoning instead of following someone who lived 1400 years ago in an uncivilized land and barbarous culture. Even if I am wrong, I will get credit for using God’s greatest gift ‘Reason’ and I will be happy for choosing my own way and following my own conscience. But If I am right and you are wrong, just imagine what will happen; you will be penalized doubly, one for following a criminal and one for denying God’s greatest gift. Isn’t Satan always praised by his followers? So what if bigger devil is more praised?
Nafees: I cannot find anything but truth in the personality of the holy prophet (pbuh). Whatever you said about him (pbuh and his progeny) is understandable because no Kafir likes him.
Abid: Evil never sees another evil as wrong. A thief never scorns another thief, a smuggler never reprimands another smuggler, and a rapist never scolds another rapist. Islam is a blindfolding black cloth which Muslims have covered their eyes with. Just because darkness of the Islamic dungeon is similar to the colour of the blindfold, you think both are reasonable. If you cannot find anything, then it doesn’t mean that the ultimate truth is what you believe while for finding the truth one should always be tentative and open to criticisms, as certitude shuts all doors of learning and truth, with sincere and consistent endeavour to find it. Furthermore, you should be able to prove to others, what you believe; else all you believe would be no better than a false notion. You think so and praise him because you are spelled and brainwashed by the satanic verses of the Quran. Tell me: Isn’t Satan praised by his followers and worshippers? So what if bigger devil is also praised. You people venerate someone who not venerable. If you really want to prove him a good person then give some evidence at least from Hadiths, if not logical evidence. Will you please assert your premises with some evidences, reasonable or at least from your Islamic sources? It is a congenital propensity of Muslims to assert without evidence.
Nafees: Do you think you are more knowledgeable and wiser than proficient and prolific Maulanas like Maududi, Iqbal, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, Abul Kalam Azad et al., who were great scholars and propagators of Islam and were PROUD Muslims.
Abid: No, I don’t think so. But I do think that I am the best person to decide what is right and what is wrong. I can’t leave my faith and decision about my life and death on someone else. God does have given me enough intellect and conscience to judge what is right and what is wrong, what is moral and what is immoral, and how should I behave with my co-inhabitants of this earth and how I should not. These names are great but still not greater than those others who also walked on earth, Mother Teresa, Mahatma Gandhi, Buddha, Abraham Lincoln, Vivekananda, Mahavir, Einstein, Isaac Newton, Bertrand Russell, Andrew Carnegie, Gutenberg, Charles Babbage, Bill Gates, Benjamin Franklin, Winston Churchill, Thomas Jefferson, J.F. Kennedy, Marcus Aurelius, Michael Faraday, David Hume, Charles Darwin, Francis Crick, Francis Bacon, Mark Twain, GB Shaw, Leo Tolstoy, William Shakespeare, Roger Bacon et al. They never accepted Islam to be a true religion. Some of them even denounced Islam and Muhammad. Are you wiser than them or you having more credentials than they have/had. It is evident how little wisdom you got from reading the Quran that you put down your faith and knowledge on the knowledge of someone else and the truth for you rest on their judgments. Even if I put truth on the judgments of others, then why it has to be Maududi or Maulana Azad, not on Vivekananda or Bertrand Russell?
Forget about those intellectual giants, those western Islamic scholars who were master of Islamic literatures, like Ignaz Goldziher, Gerd Puin, Thomas Carlyle, William Muir, Montgomery Watt, Karen Armstrong, John Espito (Author of Encyclopedia of Islam), Thomas Patrick Hughes (Author of Dictionary of Islam) et al. never embraced Islam. Why? In spite of knowing all about Islam and Muhammad, in spite of their praising Muhammad and Islam, they never converted to Islam. Doesn’t it leave a very deep question mark?
You think Syed Ahmed Khan was a great scholar and intellectual figure. He was a Quranist. Then why aren’t you? Why Maududi’s views differ from rest of Maulanas? Why views among all great Ulemas differ so widely from each other? Why there are so many sects and schisms among Muslims only? First decide among yourselves and tell me, who is the greatest and truest of all Ulemas, then I will stop criticizing Islam and I will embrace it?
Abid: At one end, the Quran says there is no compulsion in religion (Quran 2:256) but at the other, Muhammad wants to burn the houses of those who do not come to pray and commands Muslims to beat their children above a certain age when he does not pray. Isn’t it a compulsion in religion?
Nafees: ‘No compulsion in religion’ for Kafirs but once you accept Islam as your religion you have to abide by it.
Abid: Then why there is verse like kill non-believers wherever you find them (2:191, 4:89, 4:91 and 9:5). And what about the law of killing an apostate as per the Quran? Aren’t these ‘compulsion in religion’?
Abid: Why can’t you see the evil of your religion and wickedness of your prophet is beyond me. Why don’t you follow other decent religion like Buddhism or Hinduism instead of following a rapist, pedophile and killer?
Nafees: Why should we change our religion, it is full of blessing for us. Muhammad and his followers are merciful among themselves and severe against the disbelievers (Surah Fatah); the Quran is here to strike at the root of evil (Surah Tarikh). The disbelievers are filthy (Surah Taubah). Respect is only for Allah, the prophet and the believers (Surah Saaf). The believers have Allah as their protectors. We are in state of truce where we respect the life and property of the Kafirs, but during war if we are killed we go to Jannah, but if we are successful their property and wealth is ours, their women are our concubines, their children are our slaves. That is what you call the atrocities of Muhammad (PBUH). He is fully justified of what he did. The polytheist and the atheist live on the earth, breadth the airs, drink the water and consume the food—all of which belongs to Allah—should be punished. Muhammad (PBUH) is here to establish religion of Allah not to compromise. He may be oppressor for others. So what... So What???
Abid: ??? (This time Abid was left answerless, speechless, dumbfounded)