HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sanelli@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Chris Sanelli)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: What is oldest copy of Qur'an in existence?
Date: 18 Nov 1992 23:59:47 GMT
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Reply-To: sanelli@symcom.math.uiuc.edu (Chris Sanelli)
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Summary: What is oldest copy of Qur'an in existence?
Keywords: oldest, copy, Qur'an
Originator: gwydion@spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu

I have a friend that told me the following about the Qur'an.  Is it
true?

He said that, as Mohammad spoke to scribes what he had been revealed,
they wrote it all down.  Then, shortly before he died, Mohammad verified
that what the scribes had written down was accurate (I guess the scribes
read the Qur'an back to Mohammad).  Then Mohammad died.  Shortly
thereafter, 7 copies of the Qur'an were made.  

Now, my friend says that the original Qur'an and 4 of these 7 copies are
lost.  But he says that the other 3 copies are still in existence, in
museums scattered around the world!!

Is this all true?  If not, what is the truth?

- Chris Sanelli (sanelli@symcom.math.uiuc.edu)
From: merchant@davidsys.com (Rukhsana Merchant)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Islam: One religion: no sects
Date: 23 Nov 92 01:08:17 GMT


>From: nadeem%igpho@uunet.UU.NET (Nadeem Malik)
>Subject:The Seal Of Prophets, Reply to Raheel Khan: R1
>Date: 21 Nov 92 21:45:39 GMT

	Islam: One religion, no sects.
>
>
>
>It should be made clear that only the modern day Muslim Scholars consider
>people who believe in continuity of Prophethood as not Muslim. But then,
>the Holy Prophet said that 72 out 73 sects in Islam in the latter days would be
>astray and only one would be rightly guided. So where does this leave us! Again
>

        And if ye have a dispute concerning any matter, refer it to
        Allah and the Messenger. (4:59)

        This is my path, so follow it.  Follow not other ways
        lest ye be parted from his way. (6:153)

And the words of Allah (swt) are true.

        Hold fast together by the Rope which Allah (streches out for
        you); and be not divided amoung yourselves.  Al-e-Imran 3:103

        As for those who divide their religion and break up into
        sects, you have 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 An'am 6: 159

        Obey Allah and His Messenger and fall into no disputes,
        lest you lose heart and your power depart.  And be patient
        and perseving; for Alllah is with those who patiently
        persevere.  Al Anfal 8:46

        By Allah! That is the standard Religion, but most men
        among mankind understand not.  Turn back in repentence
        to Him, and fear Him.  Establish regular Prayer, and be
        not among those who join gods with Allah;  those who
        spilt up their religion, and become (mere) sects, each
        party rejoicing that which itself.  Al Rum 30: 30-3

        The same Religion has He established for you that which
        He enjoined on Noah; that which We have sent by inspiration
        to you; and that which We enjoined on Abraham, Moses, and
        Jesus; namely, that you should remain steadfast in religion
        and make no division therin.  Al Shura 42:13

And the words of Allah (swt) are true.
  

>
>Nadeem Malik
>

-Rukhsana Merchant
From: umnoor@ccu.umanitoba.ca (Nasir Ahmed Noor)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: SERVICES available from ALT.SECT.AHMADIYYA
Date: 15 Nov 1992 22:24 PDT
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: romeo.caltech.edu
Originator: Mughal@Romeo.Caltech.Edu (Asim Mughal -Moderator)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    



>Newsgroups: alt.sect.ahmadiyya
>Subject: SERVICES available from ALT.SECT.AHMADIYYA

>This group is not moderated so feel free to post your differences, questions
>and concerns. Hopefully all will be answered. We take this total freedom
>approach because we believe that true concerns/questions/opposition about a
>religion/social group comes out only when there is no censorship and no
>stopping of any material of any kind. We also believe that true reservations
>about a religion/social gorup/sect exist as "flames" in people's hearts so
>if you dont answer those seemingly stupid "flames", you cant win their hearts.
>You can post any concern you may have about this sect but please do read
>the responses you get if you want to satisfy your self.

>Contribution are solicited from people of all religions.

I realized that alt.* hiearchy of newsgroups is not distributed to all
over the world so many of you would be left out from participating in it
just because your site does not support alt groups. Well you can ask your
sys.admin to carry this group. In the mean time, I offer following services
to the interested.

1. I can compile and save all articles in their entirety and send those to
   people interested ... every one or two days. For that, you have to do
   following...
   a). Send  me your request and email address to be included in mailing
       list.
   b). I will save every article that appears and send it to you every
       two days. (If traffic is greater then every day).
   c). Cutoff time will be 10pm centeral standard time.
   d). Conversly, if you want to post any article or response to any article
       then you can send it to me and I will post it with your name on it.
       For this:
               You MUST be a member of mailing list (see above) and
               I PROMISE to post ALL articles sent to me (ofcourse only
               those which satisfy above condition).

Thanks for your interest.

Nasir Ahmed Noor
umnoor@ccu.umanitoba.ca
noor@muug.mb.ca
From: Roland "H.Watson" <rhw@chaser.co.uk>
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Reply To Dr. Siddiqui
Date: 24 Nov 1992 00:27:16 GMT
Organization: MIT Artificial Intelligence Lab
Reply-To: Roland "H.Watson" <rhw@chaser.co.uk>
NNTP-Posting-Host: wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Originator: gwydion@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu

I thank Dr. Siddiqui for his reply to my article and once again I will answer
all his objections. However, in accordance with his wishes, I shall forward
my reply to his private e-mail address rather than submit it to the newsgroup.
I would also ask anyone wishing to receive a copy of my reply to e-mail their
e-mail address to me expressing such a wish.

I agree that our debate does not have much to do with Islam except at a few
points which could be expanded upon individually at later dates on this
newsgroup.

I also agree with Dr. Siddiqui that I do not expect to be convinced by his views
and neither he by mine. My primary concern is to demonstrate that the views that
Dr. Siddiqui has borrowed from liberal/atheistic scholars are at worst wrong and
at best not the only reasonable interpretation of the subject.

You must remember also that the same "tools" that these so-called scholars apply
to the Bible they will readily turn on the Qur'an, and they will triumphantly
proclaim that the Qur'an is a modified amalgamation of selected Judaeo-Christian
traditions (this is in fact what some of them do say). The only thing sacred to
many of them is human reason.

Our common ground, I believe, is that it is divine revelation which is the prime
director in our lives. If human reason produces arguments which claim to render
a divinely revealed directive illogical or unecessary, then human reason is
wrong. Unfortunately, we have different sources of revelation - the Bible or the
Qur'an. Though they overlap at many points, they do not overlap enough and there
our paths diverge.

So, I will leave it at that, but the debate continues.


Regards,

Roland Watson (rhw@chaser.co.uk)


Xref: sparky soc.religion.islam:1904 soc.culture.arabic:4989
From: rached@euler.eng.ohio-state.edu (rached)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam,soc.culture.arabic
Subject: The Meanning of Deen
Date: 19 Nov 1992 00:12:21 GMT
Organization: The Ohio State University Dept of Electrical Engineering
Reply-To: ahmad@dsg.cs.tcd.ie
NNTP-Posting-Host: spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Originator: gwydion@spiff.gnu.ai.mit.edu

I am posting this message for a brother who has trouble posting it to
the network.

rached
-----------------Message Follows-----------------------------------



From ahmed@dsg.cs.tcd.ie Tue Nov 17 10:53:38 1992
Received: from longvalley.dsg.cs.tcd.ie by everest.eng.ohio-state.edu (4.1/3.910501)
	id AA26549; Tue, 17 Nov 92 10:52:29 EST
Received: from longhall.dsg.cs.tcd.ie by longvalley.dsg.cs.tcd.ie id aa14009;
          17 Nov 92 15:52 WET
To: rached
Cc: ahmed@dsg.cs.tcd.ie
Subject: Re: follow failed 
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 15:51:53 GMT
From: ahmed@dsg.cs.tcd.ie
Message-Id:  <9211171552.aa14009@longvalley.dsg.cs.tcd.ie>
Status: OR

Assalamu Alaikum.
I failed to send this directlty to SRI, would you please submit it for
me ? Jazakullahu Khairan.

Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: MONITOR: soc.culture.arabic

In <15NOV199223325671@romeo.caltech.edu> rached@blanc.eng.ohio-state.edu 




>]Article: 7512 of soc.culture.arabic
>]From: faris@sarcasm.trl.OZ.AU (Aziz Faris)
>]Subject: Re: SOC.RELIGION."ISLAM".AHMADIA
>]Date: Thu, 29 Oct 1992 02:32:38 GMT

>In article <1992Oct28.191034.9403@dsg.cs.tcd.ie>, ahmed@dsg.cs.tcd.ie (Ahmed 
-Habbash) writes:
>|> As a side talk:
>|> 
>|> If you think Islam is only some rites, then you mean something else.
>|> 
>|> Islam is not just a religion, it is DEEN, which means law. 
>|> 
>|> Ahmed

>Since when did the arabic word Deen (Religion) mean Law?. Also does this
>mean that Judaism and Christianity are not Deens?. from where you are
>writing (heart of Catholic country) many people can get very upset.
> 
>A.Faris

In fact there was a reply to this message, but any way, I just repeat it
again:

In Surat Yousoph in the Qoran, " and thus We made a scheme for Yousoph,
otherwise, he wasn't able to take his brother under the Deen of the King
"
The word Deen here means a law or a System. It has nothing to do with
faith or rites.

Christianity and Judaism are Deen also. Judaism has a law, and
Christianity is supposed to follow that law, as Jesus (pbuh) clearly
stated. 

If you feel that these two religions have no law, then they are not the
original ones, they are just stripped down versions.

Ahmed El-Habbash
From: alex@math.idbsu.edu (Alex Feldman)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Mosque in Idaho
Date: 15 Nov 1992 23:28 PDT
Organization: California Institute of Technology
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: romeo.caltech.edu
Originator: Mughal@Romeo.Caltech.Edu (Asim Mughal -Moderator)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    


Hi.  I realize Arab != Muslim, but this seemed like the best group to
ask.  I have heard that a mosque recently opened in Idaho, I assume
near here since about a quarter of the state lives here.  Also,
recently, one of the grocery stores in Boise started maintaining a
kosher section in the store, but they don't know anyone in the Muslim
community here, and neither do I.  I would like to let the community
know about the new section

How does one nose out a new mosque?  Is there someplace I can
call/write who will give me a local address?

Thanks.
--
	--alex			alex@math.idbsu.edu
From: rached@blanc.eng.ohio-state.edu (rached)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: MONITOR: alt.sect.ahmadiyya
Date: 16 Nov 92 20:11:00 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology
NNTP-Posting-Host: romeo.caltech.edu
Originator: Mughal@Romeo.Caltech.Edu (Asim Mughal -Moderator)
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


Assalkamu Alaykum

There are many erroros in translating verses from the Quran in the
following article. Anyone cares to correct them ?


rached


---------------------------------Monitored Article----------------


Article: 23 of alt.sect.ahmadiyya
From: njamil@nyx.cs.du.edu (Nasir Jamil)
Subject: Re: If Jesus is Dead ...
Date: Tue, 3 Nov 92 13:01:10 GMT

In article <1992Nov1.201314.18732@prism.poly.edu> ahussain@prism.poly.edu (Arshad Hussain) writes:
>
>Assuming Jesus is dead,  how did the belief of his being alive flourish among 
>muslims?? Any historical justification??
>

	The very first concenses in Islam made it clear that Jesus was
	dead. It was right after the death of the Holy Prophet Muhammad
	(p.b.o.h) when Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleas with him) go 
	so emotional out of greif that he pulled his sword out and
	announced that whoever would say that Muhammad (pboh) was dead,
	he will kill him. When Hazrat Abubakr heard about this, he came
	to the seen and recited this verse of Quran:

		"And Muhammad is only a Messenger. Verily, ALL Messengers
		have passed away before him. If then he die or be slain,
		will you turn back on your heels? And he who turns
		to Allah at all, And Allah will certainly reward the 
		grateful."  Chapter 3, Verse 144.

	Hazrat Umar (rz) at once changed his mind and faced the fact. 
	Neither he nor anybody else who was present argued, that wait
	a minute... Jesus in still alive in heaven. Why not Muhammad
	(pboh).

	Now this is real history. Where did the idea of Jesus being
	alive in heavens came to the Muslims is hard to decide. I think
	it came when the Muslims started ignoring the true teachings of
	their religion and started ignoring what is written in the Quran
	and just started giving lip service to Quran and Islamic teacings
	they could not face the attacks of Christianity with proofs, they
	fabricated the idea of Jesus being raised to heaven alive. 

	This kind of false and fabricated idea without base was one of
	the reasons for the need and advent of Mahdi and Promised Massiah.
	He was to come and bring back the true teachings of the Holy Quran
	back to earth. Thats what he exactly he did. 

Nasir Jamil.
From: L.Newnham@bradford.ac.uk (Leonard Newnham)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: Budhisim / Islam, TRAPPED GIRL
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:02:11 GMT
Organization: University of Bradford, UK


jodar@chaph.usc.edu (Abdul Qadir) writes:
>
>If a person becomes apostate, (turns away from Islam), they are
>no longer a member of Islamic society.  In effect, they have cut
>themselves off from their family.  Other than this, and the fact
>that they will no longer recieve any help from Allah (SWT), (and
>will go to Hell), there is no direct punishment in this life. 
>(Only Allah (SWT) can punish people for spurning His Grace and
>Mercy to them.)
>
>HOWEVER, if a person turns apostate THREE TIMES, it is the duty
>of all muslims to kill them on sight, as they are renegade. 
>(ie.  There is no longer any possibility that they will revert 
>to Islam.)
>

I am somewhat confused by what seems to be a contradiction between
these two paragraphs.  I.e. apostasy is not an offence unless  it is
done three times.

Could you please expand upon the second paragraph?  It sounds a little
intolerant to say the least.  Specifically:

1.  What does 'turn apostate three times' actually mean?  Does it include
stating three times that Allah does not exist, or does one have to
renounce Islam, then become Islamic again, then renounce it, return to
it, and so on.

2.  According to the Little Oxford Dictionary, renegade means
'deserter of party or principles'.  Presumably this is what you mean
by the word, so why does this state makes a person so dangerous that 
they must be killed on sight?  Why not just forget about these people,
after its their eternal life that they are throwing away?  

3.  There are many atheists around that will denounce the existence of
Allah as many times as anyone wants.  There is NO chance at all that many
of these will ever accept Islam.  Should these people be killed on
sight as well?

Some clarification would be welcomed.

Thanks,

-- 

Leonard               e-mail:  L.Newnham@bradford.ac.uk
From: exuasqa@exu.ericsson.se (Asem Qaddoura,xt-dk,1209)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: Words Feminists find Demeaning!
Date: 16 Nov 92 20:59:21 GMT
Organization: Ericsson Network Systems, Inc.


AsSalam-Alaikum brothers/sisters:

I only have one thing to say, my name is listed below, but I did not right any
of the articles or part of the articles shown below.  I remember that I wrote
an answer to this subject, but it was NOT what you see below.  In an Islamic
state if one is a muslim and does not pray, then he is considered a FASIQ (bad
person), if he denies the prayer as a part of the religion, then he is not
a muslim.  Allah knows best, you may correct me (only on the above) if I am
wrong.




In article 716404728@flounder.cs.duke.edu, ahmed@ecs.umass.edu () writes:
>In article <26773@life.ai.mit.edu>, ekrem@vlsivie.tuwien.ac.at (Ekrem Saban) writes:
>> In article <26575@life.ai.mit.edu> exuasqa@exu.ericsson.se (Asem Qaddoura,xt-dk,1209) writes:
>> 
>> Perhaps, I understood the question wrongly, but if not, the answer is
>> that the husband is a good Muslim if he acts good against his
>> women/children. If not, he will not be punished: therefore, being good
>> is not a law of Sharia (like praying five times a day: if not, you
>> will be forced in an Islamic state). 
>> 	  ^^^^^^
>
>Assalamualaikum,
>	Excuse me!! Nobody can force one to pray. Salaat is obligatory.
>It is one of the duties of a muslim to ALLAH(swt). Such obligations are
>between the person and Allah. Others may advice. It is only the social
>duties that the state can regulate.
>
>Jazakallah ... khaleel.
QUIT
gulate.
>
>Jazakallah ... khaleel.
From: hsameti@sunee.uwaterloo.ca (Hossein Sameti)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: TALK: Islam and the Year 2000
Keywords: Talk, Islam
Date: 21 Nov 92 21:28:53 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Waterloo



<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>
<>									<>
<>			   University of Waterloo			<>
<>			Muslims Students Association			<>
<>			 	 ( M S A )				<>
<>									<>
<>======================================================================<>
<>									<>
<>	Presents:	ISLAM AND THE YEAR 2000 			<>
<>									<>
<>	By:		Dr. SALIM  MANSOUR				<>
<>			Professor of Political Studies			<>
<>			University of Western Ontario			<>
<>									<>
<>	DATE:	Monday November 23rd 					<>
<>	TIME:	6:30 p.m.						<>
<>	PLACE:	Room 2083,PAS Building (Psychology), U of W		<>
<>									<>
<>======================================================================<>
<>									<>
<>			     All Are Welcome				<>
<>			   Refreshments Served				<>
<>									<>
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><>

	Muslim Students Association,
	University of Waterloo
From: rhw@chaser.co.uk (RolandH.Watson)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Reply To Dr. Siddiqui
Date: 23 Nov 92 20:27:31 GMT



I thank Dr. Siddiqui for his reply to my article and once again I will answer
all his objections. However, in accordance with his wishes, I shall forward
my reply to his private e-mail address rather than submit it to the newsgroup.
I would also ask anyone wishing to receive a copy of my reply to e-mail their
e-mail address to me expressing such a wish.

I agree that our debate does not have much to do with Islam except at a few
points which could be expanded upon individually at later dates on this
newsgroup.

I also agree with Dr. Siddiqui that I do not expect to be convinced by his views
and neither he by mine. My primary concern is to demonstrate that the views that
Dr. Siddiqui has borrowed from liberal/atheistic scholars are at worst wrong and
at best not the only reasonable interpretation of the subject.

You must remember also that the same "tools" that these so-called scholars apply
to the Bible they will readily turn on the Qur'an, and they will triumphantly
proclaim that the Qur'an is a modified amalgamation of selected Judaeo-Christian
traditions (this is in fact what some of them do say). The only thing sacred to
many of them is human reason.

Our common ground, I believe, is that it is divine revelation which is the prime
director in our lives. If human reason produces arguments which claim to render
a divinely revealed directive illogical or unecessary, then human reason is
wrong. Unfortunately, we have different sources of revelation - the Bible or the
Qur'an. Though they overlap at many points, they do not overlap enough and there
our paths diverge.

So, I will leave it at that, but the debate continues.


Regards,

Roland Watson (rhw@chaser.co.uk)
From: eoahmad@ntu.ac.sg (Othman Ahmad)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Re: WHy muslims are allowed to kep four wives at a time?
Date: 16 Nov 92 23:52:54 GMT
Organization: Nanyang Technological University - Singapore


Servant of the Universe!! (smc2103@hertz.njit.edu) wrote:
: Assalam_O_Alikum !!!!!!
: 
:                       I was asked this question and i was stuck.... can 
: anyone please throw a light on this in the light of Islam for me ?
: 
:    " Why are men allowed to marry four women and the women to marry one person
:  at a time?" . Your views , comments and suggestions are welcome !!!!!
:                                                     Thanks .
If your first wife does not object and there are women who wants to be the
other wives, why not? Provided you can afford it of course.
	The reverse is not allowed because of genetic problems.
HOw can we trace the father of the child?
 So far, not
many women want to do it, it is the men who have much more tendency to want
to have more than one wives. Any evidence to the contrary? 

There are other reasons such as excessive sexual desires of some men, or maybe
their higher expectations or fantasies.
	I see evidence of this even in cultures where they are not allowed
to have polygamy by law, not by culture. The chinese culture allow polygamy,
not Malaysian law. The wife was willing to allow her husband look for 
prostitute because she cannot satisfy him.
	I heard cases of professional women, looking for women as the 
second wives for their husbands. It was published in a tabloid.

The number of women usually exceed the number of men, due to wars and even 
diseases. I seem to recall that men die younger.

--
Othman bin Ahmad, School of EEE,
Nanyang Technological University, Singapore 2263.
Internet Email: eoahmad@ntuix.ntu.ac.sg
Bitnet Email: eoahmad@ntuvax.bitnet
From: ahh@shoshin.Corp.Sun.COM (Aslam Haswarey)
Newsgroups: soc.religion.islam
Subject: Islamic Bookstore
Date: 19 Nov 1992 17:53:34 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Reply-To: ahh@shoshin.Corp.Sun.COM
NNTP-Posting-Host: wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu
Originator: gwydion@wookumz.gnu.ai.mit.edu

Assalam-u-alaikum,

This may be a FAQ, but...

Does any one know of a Islamic bookstore in the San Francisco Bay area?


wasalam



---


-Aslam Haswarey
{786}


Xref: sparky soc.religion.islam:1945 soc.culture.pakistan:17046 soc.culture.iranian:10224 soc.culture.arabic:5072 soc.culture.bangladesh:6172 soc.culture.bosna-herzgvna:596 soc.culture.indian:37924