Arabic Translated Memes page

Learn the history of the Hijab and the sequence of events leading to the obligation of the Hijab as laid out in the hadith are as follows: Umar repeatedly asks Muhammad that Allah should reveal verses for the Qur'an pertaining to the veiling of women. No such revelation is sent down. Umar follows Muhammad's wives one night when they go out to relieve themselves (go to the toilet) and calls out to Muhammad's wife Sauda. Sauda goes home in a state of embarrassment and relates to Muhammad what has happened. Allah then reveals the hijab verse as Umar had wanted all along. Source of the hadith and sequence are here: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Hijab Umar later bragged that not once but at least three times, Allah said exactly what Umar wanted him to say! Hard to guess if he was so stupid not to realise how the game was being played. https://sunnah.com/bukhari:402 The story of the Hijab and how it came about many years into Islam and mostly because if Umar insistence added to the many issues that negate the concept that the Quran was already written from the start of time! And, like many other verses, proves that Muhammad was being influenced into what to write in the Quran based on events around him!! Still not sure Muhammad was writing the Quran? Try reading this: https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Convenient_Revelations https://abdullahsameer.com/muhammads-just-in-time-revelations/

#101reasonswhyweleft Islam Reason #26: Embryology Process You can read it easier here: https://exmuslimmemes.com/reason-26-embryology-process/ It may shock you to realise that this picture of the embryology process you see in the meme is shared among Muslims who read it and cheer with ‘allahuAkbar’ and ‘SubhanAllah’. Yet, as a researcher and scientist, it is entirely wrong! It is like someone posting a picture of an apple and saying here is an orange, and everyone celebrating the orange for being an apple! So, I had to correct this claim. Here are the verses according to Sahih International. Look out for the words in brackets. These do not exist in the verse but are added by the translators: Quran 23:13-14: legacy.quran.com/23/13-14 Then We placed him as a sperm-drop in a firm lodging. Then We made the sperm-drop into a clinging clot, and We made the clot into a lump [of flesh], and We made [from] the lump, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh; then We developed him into another creation. So blessed is Allah, the best of creators. First, feel free to read all the different translations of it: corpus.quran.com/translation.js… corpus.quran.com/translation.js… There are three fundamental mistakes: 1. Allah did not mention the role of the woman’s egg in human reproduction and appears to have no knowledge of it. This is not the only verse that fails to mention the important role of the female egg, but all 49 occurrences of the creation process in the Quran talk about sperm but nothing from the woman. The Quran makes the common misconception that only male semen is the ingredient of creation. Women are just ovens. The human ovum is very small, though visible to the human eye, and was only discovered in 1827. Its role is very important. It is the ovum that decides which sperm goes in and not the first sperm. But Allah only knows what a 7th-century desert dweller knows. At best, the Prophet mistakenly assumed women have some yellow light texture that makes out their semen (see Reason 24). 2. The lump turns into bones. Bones develop from within. Some apologists were so desperate they reinvented this translation to fix this big problem by adding words to Allah’s book. We identified Sahih International, which uses [from], and Shakir uses [in] as they are not found in Allah’s eternally correct book. What is common between those two is that Sahih International was written in 1997 and Shakir in 1958. These were the most recent two tafsirs where we see attempts to fix the errors of the Quran. All the others are pre-1955, with the oldest being 1920. 3. Finally, the bones get covered with flesh. As if to emphasise the mistake in step 2, the Quran goes on to show its lack of knowledge by suggesting after the bones are created, Allah covers the bones with flesh. And this particular point is very hard to explain as the word uses ‘فَكَسَوْنَا” has a very specific meaning in Arabic that means ‘cover / clothed / layer over’. This word cannot be twisted enough to mean anything else. Now, let us review the same verses and examine carefully steps 2 and 3. How did the lump become bones? How did the bones become covered with flesh? Here are the different translations of those two mistakes: Sahih International: “... and We made [from] the lump, bones, and We covered the bones with flesh...” Pickhall: “... then fashioned We the little lump bones, then clothed the bones with flesh...” Yusuf Ali: “... then we made out of that lump bones and clothed the bones with flesh...” Shakir: “... We made [in] the lump of flesh bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh...” Muhammad Sarwar: “... was turned into a shapeless lump of flesh from which bones were formed. The bones, then, were covered with flesh...” Mohsin Khan: “...Then We made out of that little lump of flesh bones, then We clothed the bones with flesh...” Arberry: “... We created of the tissue bones then We garmented the bones in flesh...”

The correct process is that around the 6th or 7th week, the cartilage starts developing from within the foetus. It is already part of the foetus. It does not need to be covered with flesh. What about the Tafsir, did they get it wrong too? One thing to note about the classical Tafsirs such as Al-Tabari, Ibn Kathir, and Al-Qurtubi, none of them bothered to focus on the bone part but rather focused on other issues. For example, Ibn Kathir writes a whole page about these verses but passes this part with: “(And We clothed the bones with flesh) meaning: We created for that what would cover it, strengthen it, and strengthen it” That is, it. But some of the others, more modern, have “tried” to fix this. I have to emphasize “tried” because in the process, they butchered the verse. For example: Tafsir Muyassar: Then We created the sperm as a clot, meaning: red blood, then after forty days We created the clot as a lump, meaning: a piece of flesh equal to what could be chewed, so We created from the soft lump bones, and covered the bones with flesh, then We created another creation by breathing the spirit into it, so blessed be God, who perfected everything He created. Tafsir Al-Sa'adi: “{Then We created the semen} that had settled before {a clot} i.e. red blood, after forty days being a sperm, {so We created the clot} after forty days a {Chewed meat is created} i.e. a small piece of meat, as small as it could be chewed due to its smallness. {Then We created (from) the chewed} solid bones, which had entered the flesh, according to the body’s need for them. {So We covered the bones with flesh} meaning: We made the flesh a covering for the bones, just as We made the bones a support for the flesh, and that was in the fortieth day...” Tafseer Al-Baghawi: “... It was said: There are forty days between every (stage of) creation. (So ​​We clothed the bones with flesh) meaning We clothed him, (Then We created him as another creation) The commentators differed regarding it, and Ibn Abbas said: Mujahid, Al-Sha’bi, Ikrimah, Al-Dahhak, and Abu Al-Aliyah: It is the breathing of the spirit into it. Qatada said: The plant of teeth and hair. Ibn Jurayj narrated on the authority of Mujahid: It is the maturity of youth. On the authority of Al-Hasan, he said: male or female...” quran.com/23:14/tafsirs/… (All these are in Arabic, so use the translator) The conclusion you get from reviewing the Tafsirs is that the scholars had no clue what was going on here. They were filling the gaps with whatever came to mind. So, finally, we go to the Hadith to find a possible fix. But nothing explains the bone part. In summary, all you get is different reiterations of this: Narrated 'Abdullah bin Mus'ud: “Allah's Apostle, the true and truly inspired said, "(The matter of the Creation of) a human being is put together in the womb of the mother in forty days, and then he becomes a clot of thick blood for a similar period, and then a piece of flesh for a similar period.” sunnah.com/search?q=thick… Which explains why the Tafsirs went with forty-day process but could not find a way to explain the remaining parts of the verses. ----- Issue 26.1: Islam failed to identify a woman’s egg as being an integral part of the process. The Quran did not address it, suggesting the woman’s role is just an oven. And if you have any doubt about that, the Prophet in the Hadith above refers to the process as ‘a human being is put together in the womb of the mother in forty days, and then he becomes a clot....etc’. Issue 26.2: Bones are not created from a lump and then the bones are covered with meat. This description does not match the process. Bones are cartilages that grow from within the meat. From the first instance they appear, they are already surrounded and covered by flesh. Had the Quran not mentioned ‘and/then we covered the bones with flesh.’ This would no longer be an issue. The Prophet was simply mistaken in his understanding of the process and reflected the knowledge that was available back then. ------ Apologist Excuses:

Issue 26.1: In short, this is presentism. You are imposing the knowledge we have now to judge what would have been said back to them. Had the Quran mentioned women having an egg back then, it is possible the Prophet would have been ridiculed with the suggestion that women are chickens of some sort. Also, the Quran never denied women have a role in the process. Of course, they did. >> Our response: It is the Islamic Dawah and the Quran that ask us to challenge it for mistakes. And this is a very important emission that is not only linked to this verse. Men put in their dough (semen), and women are responsible for baking it right. The Quran did not have to go all the way as to say the woman has an egg but to say she contributes to the process from her organs/lump/sperm. It would not have been farfetched as the Prophet already mentioned women have some contribution in the form of yellow semen. Giving any credit to women in the process would have been scientifically more accurate and put them on equal footing with men. Issue 26.2: Many of the translations and even the tafsirs misplaced the use of the letter “ف” by suggesting it means ‘then’. The more accurate term for ‘then’ is “ثُمَّ” which is used at the start of Quran 23:13. Thereafter, the verse uses “ف” , which in this context means “and”. This is significant, as it changes the meaning to suggest that ‘after’ the sperm drop is lodged securely, “and” the development of the clinging clot, “and” lump of flesh, bones, “and” the bones being covered happen all roughly together. This indicates that there were no stages here. And therefore, no mistake in the process. They all happened at once. >>Our Response: In Arabic, the letter “ف” can be used to say then or and, depending on the context. In the context of this verse, five out of the seven translators used ‘then’ because the verses are clearly listing a process. This is not unique to the translators. Most Arabs and even all the Tafsirs we saw suggest there are stages in the way the verses are presented. Even people sharing the meme and shouting AllahuAkbar can see the stages. But even if we were to completely dismiss the stages, there is one word that no one can remove from the Quran that pinpoints a process: ‘فَكَسَوْنَا” (F-Kasouna) has a very specific meaning in Arabic that means ‘cover / clothed / layer over’. As much as some may try to fix this part, it simply does not work. To say ‘then we covered the bones’ or ‘and we covered the bones’ is a scientific error either way. In both cases, it does not work. ------- Final Thoughts: When reflecting on how the Quran explained the process of embryology, you can see the hallmarks of 7th-century knowledge. And this is why the issue with the embryology process does not stop here. If apologists had tried every trick in the book to fix these verses, they had to deal with a whole different challenge when addressing two background stories linked to them. Two historical figures from Islamic history challenged the Prophet over Quran 23:13-14 – Nadr Bin al-Harith, an Arab Physician who studied in Persia and Abdullah Ibn Saad Ibn Abi Sarh, one of the Prophet’s most trusted scribes. The background to Quran 23:13-14 and their stories is discussed next in Reason 27.

If there is any useless job in the world, it has to be the role of a #Dawah, sheikh, or mufti in Islam. Even Muhammad mocked the role of priests in other faiths as nothing but crooks. Muhammad never defined any role along the lines of Dawah, Sheikh, or Mufti. Muhammad insisted that the Quran is easy to understand. The term Sheikh is Arabic for "old man" used to it refers to elder men who be the only person in the tribe able to read the #Quran or memorize it. So when people like Dr Joker Zakri become rich and own properties worth millions from nothing other than playing a role that Muhammad dismissed as crooks. Are you surprised that he is investigated from stealing donations when they found millions of dollars in properties in his name and family name? You also have a whole Dawah movement in the West focused on bringing in 7th century desert dweller dream mentality of underage marriages, killing people because they reject Islam (apostates) or making up lies and deception to bring people to Islam. And while they accuse others of "cashing on leaving Islam" they are the ones creating clickbait titles and video with ads! Did you see Ali Dawah promoting a brand of Halal cat food? 😅 But that is not all. Did you know, they also take "cash" from every donation. You think we are making this up? They follow the example of Muhammad who took the "Khumus" from all donations. Khumus translates as (one fifth) or 20%. So, imagine this. Every time Zakir Naik was getting a million dollar from a rich Gulf person, he was taking $200,000 for himself and this is the LEGAL bit alone. Those Dawah can also invest the remaining money and use it whichever way they want - provided in the end they donate it. But we know human nature and greed takes over. The same thing those three leading clowns of the Western Dawah movement are doing. For sure it starts with strong belief. As #AliDawah once said: "sometimes we join Islam for the wrong reasons but stay for the right reason." So, if you think that one day they will figure out Islam is wrong and leave, think again. They can use the same logic to milk it. Now they are making good money, Ali is not going to be stupid enough to go back to driving an Uber car, is he?

sperm) is thick and white and the discharge of woman is thin and yellow; so the resemblance comes from the one whose genes prevail or dominate. sunnah.com/muslim:311 There are several of scientific errors in this Hadith but we will just focus on the one for this topic. Issue 25.1: The Quran got the source of the sperm completely wrong. It went with ancient and cultural beliefs. It further made a huge mistake in assuming the women’s chest area (or medal area) has anything to do with the process. We appreciate that the verse does not say that women have sperms, only the Hadith says this and thus the tafsirs went with this explanation. However, if we suggest the sperm is only male – it also does not come from the man’s backbone and ribs. --------- Apologist Response: Issue 25.1: The Quran refrains from mentioning human reproductive organs. So, you do not see mention of the penis, testicles, vagina, women’s breasts, and others in the Quran. So, when the Quran says between backbone and ribs, it is talking about the region where the sperm is created without mentioning the sexual organs – which would have been crude to write in humanity’s eternal book. Also, the Quran does not state that women produce sperm. This inference is wrong and could have been confused by the Hadith or cultural beliefs. Therefore, it should not be seen as a mistake from the Quran. The Hadith by Sahih Muslim is not graded so that one could question its authenticity. >> Our Response: While you are correct that the Quran does not mention reproductive organs, it also does not have to mention anything in relation to the origin of the sperm. The verse would have read perfectly fine had it just said, “ejaculated from a man”. It is better not to say anything than to be vague and wrong. In fact, we found the word sperm has been mentioned 49 times in the Quran. With all other 48 times that the word sperm is presented, it was not mentioned where the sperm came from: Quran 75:37, 53:46, 23:13, 16:4, 76:2, 56:58, 53:46, 80:19, 36:77, 23:13, 18:37 and more. In nearly all these cases, the Quran was making the same case as Quran 86:5-7, asking humans to consider who they came from as a sperm. To mention a wrong source of the sperm indicates that the author of the Quran (most likely the Prophet) was simply repeating the ancient knowledge of that time. And this is further proven in the Hadith. Have you found another Hadith that correctly labels the source of sperms? That would counter the Hadith we provided, but there isn’t. -------- Final Thoughts: The Quran further promoted a misconception about the source of sperm across the Middle East. Even today, if you ask an average Arab as to where the sperm is created, they will say it comes from their backbone. Thus, many read the Quran and come across this verse believing it to be scientifically accurate or even scientific miracle! In the next reason for leaving Islam, we continue the biology theme and we look at the embryology process.

#101reasonswhyweleft Islam Reason #25: Sperm Originates from the Backbone and Ribs It is visually easier to read it from here: https://exmuslimmemes.com/reason-25-sperm-originates-from-the-backbone-and-ribs/ When you find the Quran repeating cultural and ancient myths about human biology, you have to stop and ask – how can this come from an all-knowing god? This is going be the theme of the following few “Reasons for leaving” Islam. The question is: Was the Quran providing groundbreaking knowledge or just repeating what was known back then? Are there some serious scientific mistakes? With that in mind, let us read these verses: Quran (86:5-7): legacy.quran.com/86/5-7 So let man observe from what he was created. He was created from a fluid, ejected, Emerging from between the backbone and the ribs. Sperm is not created between the ribs and backbone, and this was copied from ancient beliefs. For example, ancient Egyptians believed that sperm is produced in the backbone. This conviction was apparently based on their understanding of the anatomy of bulls. Egyptian texts even highlighted the close relationship between the backbone and the creation of life. jstor.org/stable/30027646 In many Middle Eastern countries, the expression for climaxing after ejaculation is that ‘your back came”, again a historical and cultural misconception that linked climaxing to the sperm produced from the backbones. What does science actually say? You will find all the sources saying: Sperm is produced by the testes and is stored in the epididymis. There is absolutely no link to the backbone or the ribs. britannica.com/science/semen healthline.com/health/how-is-… If you go with the Tafsir of these verses, you will find them repeating these same misconceptions. But to make things worse, they ALL suggest that the ‘ribs’ is in reference to women’s ribs which has its ‘own’ female sperm that is yellow and light texture as opposed to the man’s sperm that is white and thick. Ibn Kathir writes: “...meaning, the backbone (or loins) of the man and the ribs of the woman, which is referring to her chest. Shabib bin Bishr reported from Ikrimah who narrated from Ibn Abbas that he said, "The backbone of the man and the ribs of the woman. It (the fluid) is yellow and fine in texture...” Al-Wasit Tafsir writes: “...the water that comes out of the man and pours into the woman’s womb. The backbone: is used to refer to the vertebrae of the back in relation to the man, and the ribs: the plural of rib, which are the bones that are at the top of the woman’s chest, and they express it by saying the place of the necklace on the woman...” Al-Qurtubi writes: “That is, this water came out from between the back, that is, the backbone...Al-Abbas’s saying: It (sperm) is transferred from the back to the womb to the chest. [Imru' al-Qais] said: It is thin, white, not overgrown, its ribs are polished like a jingle, and the backbones are on the man's side, and the ribs on the woman's side. Ibn Abbas said: “The ribs”: the place of the necklace. And on his authority: what is between her breasts...” Keep in mind that the latter two are in Arabic, so use the Translator: quran.com/86:7/tafsirs/e… The Quran repeats ancient misconceptions regarding women having semen, too. Hippocrates, Galen, and Aristotle theorised that women have sperm that is of poor quality. web.stanford.edu/class/history1… And in case you thought we were just making random speculations here, see how the Hadiths confirm it: Anas b. Malik reported that Umm Sulaim narrated it that she asked the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) about a woman who sees in a dream what a man sees (sexual dream). The Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) said: In case a woman sees that, she must take a bath. Umm Sulaim said: I was bashful on account of that and said: Does it happen? Upon this the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Yes (it does happen), otherwise how can (a child) resemble her? Man's discharge (i. e.