From: nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Nabeel Ghuzlaan)
Subject: Re: Open Letter To ALL Debators (*THE* Muslims!!)
Organization: Carleton University
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 18:30:59 GMT

umnoor@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Nasir Ahmed Noor) writes:

>Asslam-o-Alaikum (to those who want to take it).

   I'll take it, thanks.

>It's been about 2 months sinse this new session of Debate started. 
>A carefull study of the debate and all articles would yield a rather
>curious phenomenon. I write here my observation for your information:

>This is how the debate is going:

>I painstakingly come up with arguments in my defence will all the 
>appropriate references and what you gentlemen do is just leisurly
>reject every thing with one line (words may change but meaning stays the
>same) and that is
>   "this Hadith is most probably corrupted" or

   Did you try to quote Sahih Hadiths and we said they are corrupted? We
have the right to doubt the reliablility of nonsahih Hadiths.

>   "this is not what God wanted to say" or

   We do not say so, we just say that you are quoting a verse and then dump
your opinions out withouth their having any relation to the verses you
quote, you just try to make it look logical not matter how you go out of
the context and meaning.

>    you do not agree with my interpretation.

   If we agreed then it would be over, how can we agree to contradictions to
Islam?

>Rather surprisingly, NO ONE comes up with a counter argument or CORRECT
>hadith to convince me.

   Yes, we did. We quoted a couple of Sahih Hadiths and you looked as if
you did not read them. What can you do, poor guy? The Hadiths are clear
and Sahih, you can't "interpret" them as you always do with quotations
from cheap books and indefinite "scholars".

>A couple of days ago, a gentelman posted two articles by Maulana Maududi.
>I kept searchng in both articles for any valid reference. (From
>Hadith or Quran).

   That is between you and him, I, myself, do not know much (or little) about
Maudoodi and I do not quote him or rely on his opinions.

>This is now my *call*. I challenge you all to give me Hadith or
>Quranic Ayya that proves me false in my beliefs and proves Hazrat
>Ahmad false in his claim.

   Where were you when I quoted the Hadith of the Prophet with Ali before
Tabouk and the Hadith about the prophets of Israel? Why did not you reply?
[Pardon me, I am not as talented as you in reposting articles, you go read
my reply to your so-called reply serves all article.]

>Here are the rules....SET BY YOU FELLOWS:

>I wont accept any Hadith not considered reliable unanimously and not
>listed in Sahih Bukhari or Sahi Muslim. If you guys enter such Hadiths
>not listed in these two books or are not considered 100% valid and 
>corruption free, I will be also allowed to enter such.

   You are the one who quotes from books that most people do not know whether
they exist and scholars saint-of-the-saints and such big names whom nobody
ever heard of. We just quote Hadiths from Bukhari and Muslim, and more
importantly, we quote them AS IS, we do not corrupt them on the way as
you did with your Hadith about the Messiah.

>LETs see whats the basis of your claim that Hazrat Ahmad was an imposter
>(Nau-zo-billah).

   Because, the Prophet and Koran declared that there would be no prophets
after Muhammad and we do not know that Jesus Christ is a dummy variable
name which you can substitute anybody in it like :

    messiah(x);    	/* make x Messiah  */
    mahdi(x);      	/* while we are at it, make him also Mahdi */
    prophet(x);    	/* make him a prophet to gain more followeres */
    while (1) lie();    /* the only way to support the above functions */
    return 0;           /* the program never gets here but it is a good
                           habit to have it /
}

>Very Best Regards and Good Luck,

   Thanks a lot.

>Nasir Ahmed Noor
>umnoor@ccu.umanitoba.ca

**Nabeel