Was Mutilation of Dead Bodies of Indian Soldiers Correct as per Islam?

Discussion in 'Religion & Culture' started by afako, Apr 3, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. afako

    afako Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    882
    Likes Received:
    654
    Over Pakistani soldiers' killing and mutilating dead-bodies of Indian soldiers, Muslims are claiming that mutilation of dead-bodies is prohibited in Islam. But this is a sacred tradition in Islam, which was initiated by Prophet Muhammad himself.

    TAQIYYA - THE DECEPTION CONSPIRACY IN ISLAM

    The following are a few news-headlines for the past few days in India over Pakistan army’s killing Indian soldiers in border skirmishes and mutilating some of the corpses.

    Pakistan kills 2 Indian soldiers in J&K, 1 body mutilated: Indian Army

    Mutilation of bodies of Indian soldiers 'inhuman', Pak attack 'highly provocative': Antony – The Economic Times

    Pakistani Barbarism At The Border – India Today

    Jawans' mutilation: Intercepted call reveals Pak army units congratulated each other on Indian soldiers' killing – India Today

    Indian Army reiterates that Pakistan ‘mutilated and beheaded two of its soldiers’ – News Track India

    Killing, beheading and mutilating the dead-bodies are the tradition of the Arabs that Islam carried on from the early days of it. Unfortunately, this fact is unknown to the “Infidels” and the ignorant moderate Muslims. The learned mullahs of Islam and Islamic terrorists on the other hand know this fact very well. It is very unfortunate that the same learned mullahs from India condemned this hideous crime as brutal and states that such acts are prohibited by Islam.

    Are they saying the truth?

    Is this another lie from the Muslim scholars?

    Generally, common infidels believe that all religions teach peace and nothing but peace. :rofl: That is not true at least in the case of Islam. These misinformation are another Islamic traditional ‘deception scheme’, called Taqiyya.

    MUTILATION OF DEAD-BODIES IS THE CUSTOM PREVAILED IN MUHAMMAD’S FAMILY

    Islamic books written by modern Muslim scholars and the mullahs are very active in hiding the truth about Islam, which they understand are not reasonable to civilized people. They may hate or give respect to the same character, whenever they feel it as feasible. Abu Sufiyaan is one among such characters. Friday mosque goers might have heard his name in the sermons. According to mullahs, he was an evil Quresh leader, who waged wars against Muhammad and killed many Muslims. He was more or less like a devil to pious Muslims. Abu Sufiyaan’s wife was Hind bint Utbah.

    To know about the mutilation of dead-bodies, let us turn back the pages of Islamic scripture, which leads to the days of Muhammad himself.

    RELATION BETWEEN ABU SUFIYAAN, HIND, HAMZA & MUHAMMAD

    Muhammad’s grandfather Abdul Muttalib had several children out of his multiple marriages according to the Arab customs. As Muhammad was Abdul Muttalib’s grandson through his Abdullah, so as Abu Sufiyaan through Harith, his another son. So, Abu Sufiyaan was Muhammad’s cousin. With sound family background, Abu Sufiyaan became the leader of Muhammad’s tribe – the Quraish. He also became the custodian of the Kaaba. It was the pagan temple with 360 idols at Makka and a covetous source of income for the custodians, collected from devotees from all over Arabia.

    On the other hand, the ill-fated orphan Muhammad became a shepherd, insulted by others on his poor status. The offended, grown, greedy Muhammad was determined to grab the custodianship of the rich-revenue-generating Kaaba from Abu Sufiyaan. To challenge mighty Abu Sufiyan, Muhammad needed immoral support which he could obtain only by bribing. To achieve his goal, he trapped the wealthy entrepreneur woman Khadeeja by marrying her. The “cold war” began with that, and in due course, it regenerated into surprise raids.

    MUHAMMAD’S COUSIN-IN-LAW HIND, MUTILATED MUHAMMAD’S UNCLE HAMZA

    Islamic scriptures never mention the relationship of Muhammad with the Quraish leaders. They are one way or other related to Muhammad. According to Islamic scriptures, Quraish leader Abu Sufiyaan’s wife (Muhammad’s cousin-in-law) Hinda lost her father, uncle and brother at the battle of Badr, aggressively launched by Muhammad. So, she took an oath to take revenge on Muhammad’s (also her husband Abu Sufiyaan’s) uncle Hamza ibn Abdul Muttalib, who supposedly killed her father and brother. To succeed in her oath, she motivated her black-slave Wahshy Ibn Harb to murder Hamza. She offered her Wahshy his freedom and her jewelry in return if he managed to murder Hamza. Wahshy succeeded in doing so in the Battle of Ohud, which was fought with mutual agreement between Muhammad and Abu Sufiyaan. Hind, who had accompanied by the Meccan warriors to Ohud, is claimed to have opened the belly of Hamza and chewed up his liver as a prominent sign of revenge, before spitting it out. Others also mutilated the Muslim corpses, making garland of ears and noses.

    When Muhammad saw this, he was so furious that he promised: ‘If Allah gives me victory over the Quraish (his own tribe) at any time, I shall mutilate thirty of their men!’ His angry Muslim disciples too promised: ‘By Allah, if we are victorious over them we shall mutilate them in a way which no Arab has ever mutilated anybody.’ (Al-Tabari, Vol. 7, p. 133)

    MUHAMMAD’S DOUBLE STANDERD – REWARD FOR (COUSIN) THE BITTER ENEMY

    After the fall of Mecca to Muhammad’s army, the leaders of the opposition camp Abu Sufiyaan and his wife Hind were cornered. According to Muhammad’s customs, they deserve death. But the selfish, Arab imperialist Muhammad always applied double standards towards his own family members. So, instead of punishing Abu Sufiyaan, especially his wife Hind, he reward them by appointing Abu Sufiyaan, Muhammad cousin, the governor of Najraan for leading the opposition camp in wars for the long ten years against Muslims. Abu Sufiyaan and Hind are now in the list of “Sahaaba”, the pious companions of Muhammad.

    Although Muhammad spared Abu Sufiyaan and his wife of killing and mutilation of their dead-bodies, when they surrendered meekly and embraced Islam, the above hadith clearly indicates prevalence of barbaric custom of mutilation of dead-bodies in Arab culture. And Muhammad disciples engaged in mutilating dead-bodies under Muhammad’s command on other occasions. There are several ahadith, which reveals this fact. In fact, even before Hind's vengeful mutilation of Hamza's dead-body in Ohud, Muslims have done it in Badr. Let us take a look a number of such incidents that happened under the command of the pious prophet:

    1) QURAISH WISEMAN ABU JAHL’S DACAPITATED HEAD PRESENTED TO MUHAMMAD

    During the surprise attack on the Meccan caravan at Badr, Muhammad wanted to look for Abu Jahl, the wiseman from the opposite camp, who knew the greedy intentions of Muhammad.

    At the end of the battle, the Prophet wanted to look for the archenemy of Islam, Abu Jahl. And,

    ‘Abdullah bin Masood found him on the verge of death breathing his las… Ibn Masood then cut off his head and took it to Allah’s Messenger who, on seeing it, began to entertain Allah’s praise: Allahu Akbar.’ (Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum, Chapter: The Battle of Badr, p. 267)

    2) MUHAMMAD’S MISTREATMENT OF THE DEAD-BODIES AT BADR

    People of the desert knew well about the value of water wells. Muhammad didn’t spare the water wells too.

    When the prophet ordered that the corpses of the polytheists be dropped in to a well… He stood over the bodies of twenty-four leaders of Quraish, who had been thrown into one of the wells and started call them by name and by the names of their fathers… (Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum, The Battle of Badr, p. 271)

    3) TEARING APART A WOMAN LEADER UMM QHIRFA

    Women should not be the leader of any state is the policy of Muhammad. Yet, in his days, Umm Qhirfa, an old lady, was the chieftain of a tribe. She was killed in an unspeakably barbaric manner by a band of Muslims, sent by Muhammad.

    “A riding party led by Zayd set out against Umm Qhirfa in Ramadan. During it, Umm suffered a cruel death. Zyad tied her legs with rope and then tied her between two camels until they split her in two. She was avery old women. Then they brought Umm’s daughter to the Messenger. Umm’s daughter belonged to Salamah who had captured her. Muhammad asked Salamah for her, and Salamah gave her to him.” (Al-Tabari, Vol: 8, p. 96)

    4) MUTILATING THE APOSTATES

    This incident explains that how the great Prophet mutilated the apostates of Islam.

    Narrated Anas: The Prophet cut off the hands and feet of the men belonging to the tribe of Uraina and did not cauterize (their bleeding) till they died. (Sahih Al-Bukhari. Vol: 8, Book 82, Number 795.)

    5) PUNISHMENT FOR ASKING RIGHTS DURING THE (IMMORAL) BOOTY DISTRIBUTION

    Tabari 9:34:

    “Khuwaysirah came and stood by the Prophet as he was giving gifts to the people and said, ‘Muhammad, I have seen what you have done today.’

    ‘Well, what did you see?’

    He said, ‘I don’t think you have been fair.’

    Allah’s Messenger became angry. ‘Woe to you! If justice is not to be found with me, then with whom is it to be found?”

    “Umar ibn al khattab said, ‘Muhammad, allow me to kill him.”

    Ishaq 595:

    "The Apostle said, 'get him away from me and cut off his tongue.'"

    Is Mutilation of Dead-Bodies Prohibited in Islam?

    I had already covered that here:

    http://defenceforumindia.com/forum/politics-society/46298-why-heads-were-choped-off.html
     
  2.  
  3. Decklander

    Decklander New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2012
    Messages:
    2,654
    Likes Received:
    4,043
    Location:
    New Delhi
    Re: Was Mutilation of Dead Bodies of Indian Soldiers Correct as per Is

    @Mods, What was wrong in my post when I stated that islam is a religion of slaves and wants complete surrender to it. There can be no interpretation or any meaning attached but to follow the Quraan as it is? You deleted my posts. Now what? If we do not allow discussion on such topics, how will we evolve? was your act not same as islamic dictatorship?

    I too can quote many more such examples which clearly establish that islam is neither a peaceful religion nor it ever was. What I wrote about malecchaas is how their advent in modern times has been predicted in our puraanas. Infact mahamada & Ahamada are mentioned by name in them as being the self declared prophet of such people who will bring untold misries to the people of earth.
     
    MAYURA, Das ka das and Vishwarupa like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page