May

2014


Editors:
Shahid Aziz
Mustaq Ali
Contents: Page
The Call of the Messiah 1
Question and Answer
by Dr Zahid Aziz 3
Oral Traditions in Islam and
Judaism by JustStoppingBy 5

The Call of the Messiah
by Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad,
the Promised Messiah and Mahdi
Denial of Hadith
We are, however, inclined to acknowledge and
admit that some Muslim scholars in the inter-
vening time have imposed wrong interpreta-
tions upon these Traditions and thereby had a
very bad effect on
people, so that
those persons who
were rational and
reflective such as
the Mutazilah
(those who believe
that all good is from
God and all bad is
from man), shook
their heads in dis-
gust when they
heard these irra-
tional interpreta-
tions and denied
the validity of the
Traditions altogether. But since this denial was
not based on any historical investigation and
research, but merely on the assumption that the
subject matter was irrational and unacceptable,
the validity of the Traditions could not be im-
pugned or even diminished in any way; on the
contrary, despite their rejection and denial,
Traditions of this kind had such a highly ranked
chain of transmission that even these people
could not discount and discredit this continu-
ous repetition and remained hopelessly bewil-
dered and stupefied. If those interpretations
that are put forward and applied today had
been propounded at that time, there would not
have been a single school of Islamic thought to
say no and disagree. But it is regrettable indeed
that the imposition of a literal significance on
every metaphorical statement or figure of
speech made these Traditions such a perilous
path to tread that no rational seeker after truth
could keep his footing on it. There is, therefore,
no blame or censure upon the Traditions.
Rather, it is clearly the indiscretion of those
who misinterpreted them and threw people
into a sorry state of error. Even in the hands of
the sceptics of the modern age who refuse to
accept the validity of Traditions there is no
other argument besides finding the meanings
propounded by
c o n t e mp o r a r y
Muslim scholars
unacceptable to
reason and logic
and repugnant
alike to Divine
practice and to the
Law of Nature. But
they could be ex-
empted and ex-
cused only as long
as the true and
correct meanings
that are in com-
plete consonance
and consistency with the Law of God had not
been disclosed to them. It would, therefore, be
May

2014

Webcasting on the worlds first real-time Islamic service at
www.virtualmosque.co.uk
2
May
2014

the Holy Quran has, as it were, gone up to the
highest heaven, while externally, the opponents,
due to misunderstanding and misconceptions,
have raised thousands of objections against
Is lam, casting a dark shadow over millions of
minds. How can it, therefore, be denied that a
great Reformer is badly needed in order to re-
vive and restore the pristine spirituality of Islam
and beat back the invaders from outside? It may,
however, be remarked that these days for the
defence of the faith are not the days for wielding
the sword, for our opponents, too, have not
launched any attack with sword or shell in order
to propagate their faith, but it has been carried
out with pen, paper and platform. It is, there-
fore, necessary that our attacks should also be
limited and confined to pen and platform, just as
Islam in its early days made no attack with the
sword against any nation until that nation first
wielded the sword against Islam. So it is not
only unfair and unjust to take up the sword at
this time in defence of religion but it is tanta-
mount to admitting that we are incapable of de-
feating the enemy with pen, platform and irrefu-
a sheer injustice and a shame if now, in the face
of rational interpretations, a chain of transmis-
sion of the first rank and the consensus and con-
cord of Islam and Christianity on this point,
these Traditions were summarily dismissed and
rejected. It is a necessary requirement that
those who refuse to accept those Traditions that
foretell the advent of the Promised Messiah
should first acquaint themselves with the fact of
their continuous repetition, as well as every sort
of proof attached to these Traditions, and that
they should next ponder over the solid truth
that the announcement is found not only in the
books of Hadith but also in the sacred scriptures
of the Jews, the Gospel of the Christians and the
Holy Quran, then last of all in the Traditions of
the Holy Prophet where it has been dealt with in
full detail. It is, therefore, plainly evident that all
these three communities have been putting
their faith in this news with complete trust and
conviction. The Divine Law of Nature, too, which
has the aim in view that at every time of crisis
and corruption an inspired reformer qualified
and fit to deal with the situation should appear
on the scene, vouches for and verifies this an-
nouncement. The calamities and afflictions
which plunder and pillage faith and face us at
every turn, and before which all the innovations
and evils of the last 1,300 years put together
pale into insignificance, also require and de-
mand that God Most High should set His heav-
enly forces in motion in order to bring aid and
succour to the true faith. What obstacles could
there be then, other than prejudice and unjust
self-interest, that stand in the way of this proph-
ecys acceptance?
A Reformer urgently needed
Is it difficult to believe that if God truly is, and if
religion, too, amounts to anything, then the
Di vine sense of honour invested in both would
see to it that an attack is mounted from the side
of the Living God equal to or even more forceful
than the one launched from the other side for
the propagation of unbelief and falsehood, so
that people may be induced to believe that God
is and that His religion is indeed true? Has there
been no opportunity up to this time to notice
that Islam is, in fact, in an utterly helpless condi-
tion? Internally, practical experience shows that
May
2014
3
heretic and a dajjal (Antichrist), in the same way
the scholars of the Muslim community should con-
demn the Messiah of the Islamic dispensation as
an unbeliever, a heretic and a dajjal. Moreover, it is
also necessary for the complete resemblance be-
tween the two systems that, just as the Messiah of
the Mosaic khilafat came at a time when the Jews
had fallen into moral decline, when great confu-
sion and chaos had overtaken their honesty and
fair dealing, fear of God and piety, mutual good-
will and tolerance, and when their rule over the
very country in which the Messiah had appeared
for their good and guidance had passed out of their
hands, in the same way, the Promised Messiah of
Islam should make his appearance at a similar
time of trouble and adversity for the community.
*

Allah has promised to those of you who

believe and do good that He will surely make them
Khalifaha in the earth as He made those before
them Khalifahs.
Question and Answer
by Dr Zahid Aziz
Question (sent by e-mail):
I wish to say from the outset that I am not a mem-
ber of either the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community or
the Lahore Ahmadiyya Movement for the Propaga-
tion of Islam. I am simply someone with an interest
in theology and religious philosophy who wishes
to gather the proper information to better my un-
derstanding. This is simply for personal research.
And please know that if anything I write or ask is
construed as offensive, inconsiderate or disre-
spectful, that is not my intention at all. I just wish
to acquire the correct information.
In researching the Ahmadiyya movement, I
have gotten numerous books written by both
groups within the movement and am currently
reading The Founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement
by Muhammad Ali. The book is well-written and
very precisely quotes the passages which clarify
any misconceptions those outside the movement
may have. But I have a question regards the differ-
ence in interpretation over Mizra Ghulam Ahmads
position as a subordinate prophet, mujaddid and
Mahdi (as the AMC believes) versus his being
solely the mujaddid and Mahdi (as the Lahore
Ahmadiyya does).
table arguments, for it is the habit of liars and
weak persons that when they fail in debate then
they become hostile and quarrelsome. To have re-
course to such violent conflict at the present time
would be giving a bad name to the true and glori-
ous religion of God Most High. Just bring to mind
and recall how the Holy Prophet (pbuh) suffered
all kinds of persecution for thirteen long years at
the hands of the unbelievers in Mecca, and ren-
dered them speechless only by means of decisive
arguments, and did not take up the sword until
after the enemy, unsheathing their swords, had put
many a noble soul to death. It is, therefore, un-
Islamic to meet verbal opposition with the sword
of violence. It may be the work of the mean-
spirited and weak, but not that of Islam.
Parallels between the Mosaic and
Islamic Dispensations
The prophecy of the Promised Messiah, as I have
stated above, is found not only in Hadith, but the
news has been transmitted in a very elegant way
by the Holy Quran also. It holds out a promise that
in Islam, too, a system of khilafat will be estab-
lished on the lines of the system that had obtained
in the prophethood of the Israelites*. This promise
obviously contains within itself the glad tidings of
the coming of a Messiah, for, on careful considera-
tion of the system of khilafat of the prophets of
Israel, we find that it started with Moses and came
to a close after 1,400 years with the advent of Jesus
the Christ, and that the Promised Messiah of the
Jews, the happy news of whose advent had been
communicated to them beforehand, appeared
1,400 years after those in the garb of the humble
and poor; and it is necessary for the completion of
this resemblance which the Holy Quran has estab-
lished between the two systems that every just and
fair-minded person should accept and admit that
just as there was a promise of the coming of a Mes-
siah at the end of the Mosaic dispensation, in the
same way, there is a promise of the coming of a
Messiah at the end of the Islamic khilafat. It is also
necessary for the complete similarity of the two
systems that, just as a Messiah appeared among
the Children of Israel after the 1,400 years of the
Mosaic dispensation had passed, in the same way
and after the same period a Messiah should make
his appearance in the khilafat of Islam; and just as
the Jewish divines condemned the Messiah of the
Mosaic system as (God forbid) an unbeliever, a
4
May
2014

In the book mentioned above, Mr. Ali quotes
Mr. Ahmad as saying, My claim is to be a mu-
haddath, and this I have made by Divine Com-
mand. There is no doubt that muhaddathiyya
contains a strong part of prophethood (p. 67).
And he also quotes Mr. Ahmad as having said,
Be it known to all the Muslims that all such
words as occur in my writings to the effect
that the muhaddath is in one sense a prophet, or
that muhaddathiyya is partial prophethood or
imperfect prophethood, are not to be taken in
the real sense (p. 43).
So, it seems clear that Mr. Ahmad denied
being a prophet who could add more or new
ideas to what the Prophet Muhammad had re-
vealed, keeping his role as Seal of the Prophets
intact. But at the same time he writes that, at
least in a sense, his role as a muhaddath had
partial elements of the traditional role of proph-
ets in Islam. One the one hand, the Qadian
branch takes this to mean that Mr. Ahmad was a
subordinate prophet who, while not capable of
revealing new information and commandments
from Allah, was charged with continuing the
efforts of the Prophet Muhammad and enlight-
ening the ummah about misconceptions and
misinterpretations of the Quranic text. But on
the other hand, the Lahore branch interprets
this to mean that prophet can only be in the
sense of what Isa, Musa and Muhammad were as
Prophets: those who reveal new command-
ments.
My question is whether or not these two
interpretations are truly irreconcilable? From
my reading and understanding it seems that
both interpretations are close in how they view
Mr. Ahmad, as they deny he was a prophet who
could come after Muhammad, and had elements
of prophethood in a sense. So, is it wrong to sug-
gest that the idea of subordinate prophethood
and metaphorical prophethood are different
ways to express the same concept? Similar to
how one can say that they are feeling
irritatedand another person can say that they
are feeling annoyed? These two words essen-
tially relay the same concept but with different
terms.
I eagerly await your clarification on this
matter! And once again, if my question offends
you, that was absolutely not my intention.
Answer by Zahid Aziz:
Thank you for your enquiry. Please dont think
for a moment that your question is offensive to
us. In fact, we would welcome more such ques-
tions from people.
Firstly, please note that the concept of a mu-
haddas (if I may spell it as pronounced by us
rather than its strict transliteration) as being in
one sense a prophet is based on the Quran and
Hadith, and was mentioned by Muslim scholars
long before the time of Hazrat Mirza Ghulam
Ahmad. So he said nothing new about this con-
cept.
Secondly, the AMC [i.e., Qadiani Jamaat] hold
that Hazrat Mirza only claimed to be a muhaddas
till the year 1901, and that in that year he
changed his claim from muhaddas to prophet.
Therefore AMC are recognizing him as holding a
higher position than muhaddas.
You ask:
So, is it wrong to suggest that the idea of
subordinate prophethood and metaphorical
prophethood are different ways to express the
same concept?
That depends on what status one assigns to
subordinate prophethood. You write that what
AMC means by this term is:
On the one hand, the Qadian branch takes
this to mean that Mr. Ahmad was a subordinate
prophet who, while not capable of revealing new
information and commandments from Allah,
was charged with continuing the efforts of the
May
2014
5
Prophet Muhammad and enlightening the um-
mah about misconceptions and misinterpreta-
tions of the Quranic text.
But this is an incomplete description of what
they mean. It is clearly stated in the writings of
their first head, Mirza Bashir-ud-Din Mahmud
Ahmad, that Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad being
a prophet means that:
all those so-called Muslims who have not
entered into his Baiat formally, wherever they
may be, are Kafirs and outside the pale of Islam,
even though they may not have heard the name
of the Promised Messiah (English book: The
Truth about the Split).
In the same book, explaining why this is so,
he wrote:
The man who rejects a Prophet thus neces-
sarily becomes a kafir. Now, as Islam bases its
judgments upon what is patent and not upon
what is possible, it cannot but class as kafir such
as fail to accept any of the Prophets, even though
such failure may be due to their want of infor-
mation concerning him.
It was such views that brought about the
split in the Ahmadiyya Movement because the
Lahore Ahmadiyya pioneers held that according
to the teachings of Islam a Muslim cannot be
called a kafir and outside the fold of Islam and
they held that this was confirmed by Hazrat
Mirza, who also declared that no Muslim be-
comes a kafir by not accepting his claims.
The AMC doctrine that all other Muslims are
non-believers in Islam is not only a theoretical
belief but is manifested in their practical rela-
tions with other Muslims. For example, they re-
fuse to pray behind any other Muslim, even
though that Muslim may regard Ahmadis as
Muslims and be friendly towards them. They
refuse to hold the Islamic funeral prayer for any
other Muslim, even behind their own AMC
imam. For example, if an AMC members father
or mother is a Muslim but is not an AMC mem-
ber, and dies, and the AMC member wishes the
AMC to hold Islamic funeral prayers for the de-
ceased, the AMC refuses to do this on the basis
that the Islamic funeral prayers are only held for
Muslims who die and the deceased was a non-
Muslim.
I suggest that you read another book by
Maulana Muhammad Ali, entitled The Split, writ-
ten in 1918, which is at this link:
http://www.ahmadiyya.org/bookspdf/split/
conts.htm
You may also be interested in reading my
recent book (The True Succession) which I am
attaching here. You are welcome to discuss this
or any other issue with us.
Oral Traditions in Islam and
Judaism
(Editors Note: The following is an article taken
from the website Loonwatch.com under the de-
scription Original Guest Post and credited to
JustStoppingBy.)
Both Judaism and Islam rely on oral
tradi tions that explain and put texts into
con text and can help counter misperceptions
of the religions.
One of the sources of Islamophobia and Judeo-
phobia is the selective quoting of religious pas-
sages that, either taken out of their literal con-
text or without the context of how they have
been interpreted, suggest that the adherents of
Islam and Judaism repeat and harbor seemingly
harsh views. When the literal context is missing,
sometimes just referring to the preceding or
following verses is sufficient to counter any mis-
conceptions and let a stereotype go. In other
instances, the religions oral traditions may help
elucidate how adherents read those verses.
As Passover approaches, I want to highlight
two well-known (at least among Jews) portions
of the Jewish oral tradition that appear at the
Passover seder and how, in broad terms, they
relate to some well-known portions of the
Is lamic oral tradition because they are used by
adherents to help put other texts into context.
The Passover seder relates the story of the Jews
exodus from Egypt. Within the story, there is a
listing of the ten plagues with which the Egyp-
tians were smitten. As each plague is recited,
Jews either spill a drop of wine or use a finger
(more traditionally) or utensil to take a drop of
6
May
2014

wine from their cup and discard it on a plate or
napkin. It is not clear how far back the common
explanation for this ritual goes, though it is at
least as far as Rabbi Yitzhak Ben Yehuda Abar-
banel, or Don Isaac Abarbanel. (14371508)
who wrote,
The custom is
to drip drops
of wine out of
the cup when
counting the
plagues to in-
dicate that our
joy is not
whole because
on our account
an entire peo-
ple was pun-
ished. Even
though the en-
emy deserved
that defeat, it does not cause us real joy.
My guess is that the explanation, if not the
tradition itself, developed over time. A likely
reason is that Jews saw a difficult text, or one
that can have multiple interpretations, and
wished to emphasize the interpretations that
resonated with their view of their religions mo-
rality. A similar portion of oral history that
works its way into many seders is a midrash, or
interpretation of the Torah, found in the Talmud
that describes what was happening in Heaven as
the Red Sea closed over the Egyptian army that
was pursuing the Children of Israel: The minis-
tering angels wanted to chant their hymns, but
the Holy One, blessed be He, said, The work of
my hands is being drowned in the sea, and shall
you chant hymns? As is the case with many
midrashim, some Jews take this as a literal reve-
lation and others as a story made up later to
provide a moral lesson. For my purposes here, it
does not matter which it is. Rather, what mat-
ters is that hundreds of years after this midrash
was first recorded, Jews find it worthwhile to
retell every year because it provides context for
our understanding of an important Jewish text.
Turning to Islam, I would like to highlight a
few portions of its oral history. One I take from
an essay by Imam Shamsi Ali, who writes, Our
oral history records Muhammads last sermon as
containing the following guidance: Even as the fin-
gers of the two hands are equal, so are human be-
ings equal to one another. No one has any right, nor
any preference to claim over another. You are
brothers. I chose
this quote not be-
cause of its mean-
ing, but because of
how Imam Shamsi
Ali explicitly ties it
to the oral history.
Still, an Internet
search shows that
this is indeed a
popular quote, ap-
pearing in numer-
ous locations. That
should not be sur-
prising given that
it is the type of
quote that should
resonate with Muslims when thinking about the
moral messages provided by Islam, with the equal-
ity of human beings being one of those messages.
A second piece of the Muslim oral tradition was
cited by Arsalan Iftikhar in his interview with Loon-
watch: we should be reminded of a well-known
Islamic parable that tells the story of the Prophet
Mohammed and his interactions with an unruly
female neighbor, who would curse him violently
and then dump garbage on him from her top win-
dow each time he walked by her house. One day,
the prophet noticed that the woman was not there.
In the spirit of true kindness, he went out of his
way to inquire about her well-being. He then went
on to visit his unfriendly neighbor at her bedside
when he found that she had fallen seriously ill.
This is indeed a well-known parable, found fre-
quently on the web, including in comments at
Loonwatch.
But, here is one potentially surprising thing
about this particular story: it is not clear that it is
authentic. While there are similar stories, some
investigations of this particular one have yielded
results such as I have not found a basis for this
specific incident in the books of hadeeth or reliable
works of prophetic biography, and it seems as
May
2014
7
though this story has become popular on the
tongues of people without any source to support
it, and Allah knows best as well as although
the record of this particular incident is found in
almost all the books of Seerah or biography of
the Prophet (saws) and is oft-repeated by the
Muslims, to the best of our knowledge there is
no record of this specific incident in any of the
authentic and established Books of Sunnah. And
Allah Alone Knows Best. As with the midrash
on the angels preparing to rejoice, for my pur-
poses it does not matter if this story is authen-
tic. The fact that this story is so popular even
without it being found in what may be called the
reliable or authentic hadith or Books of Sunnah
only strengthens the point that Muslims repeat
this story not because they are forced to be-
cause it is part of canonical literature that must
be repeated, but, rather, they repeat it because
its message resonates with their view of the mo-
rality of Islam.
Another reason that I chose the quotation
provided from Imam Shamsi Ali is the further
observation provided by his co-author, Rabbi
Marc Schneier, in one of his essays in the same-
book. Rabbi Schneier writes, Most Jews and
most Muslims, however, are simply unaware of
the good news that the other side has an oral
tradition that moderates the sometimes harsh
language of the written law. The ignorance
among the majority in both faiths allows the
demagogic purveyors of hate to peddle their
poison virtually unchallenged.
Compare this with a statement by one such
demagogic purveyor of hate, Deacon Robert
Spencer, who has written, Rabbinic Judaism
ever since the destruction of the Temple had
evolved non-literal ways to understand such
commands, while in Islam such literal interpre-
tation is still very much alive. In fact, Spencer is
misleadingly inaccurate on both counts: Judaism
had evolved non-literal ways of interpreting
problem texts before the destruction of the
Temple, and there are both literal and non-
literal interpretations of problem texts very
much alive in Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. It
is the latter point, however, that is the more im-
portant. By suggesting solely that there are lit-
eral interpretations of problem texts in Islam,
Spencer hides the existence of similar interpre-
tations in Judaism and Christianity as well as the
many Muslims who highlight stories such as
Muhammads concern for a woman who would
throw trash on him (whether the story is liter-
ally true or not) as a lens through which they
interpret any texts that could be read to call for
retaliation for aggressive acts. As Imam Shamsi
Ali writes in one essay, The guidance found in
scripture is not meant to be taken only literally.
Our stance is that though the Quran is some-
times exact, to extrapolate the wisdom in its
passages, we need not see the texts as simply
static, literal words.
Strikingly, the Quran has no problem citing
Jewish Oral Law. Because of that, We decreed
upon the Children of Israel that whoever kills a
soul unless for a soul or for corruption [done] in
the land it is as if he had slain mankind en-
tirely. And whoever saves one it is as if he had
saved mankind entirely. And our messengers
had certainly come to them with clear proofs.
Then indeed many of them, [even] after that,
throughout the land, were transgres-
sors. Quran 5:32. The reference may be
to Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:5 (Therefore was the
first man, Adam, created alone, to teach us that
whoever destroys a single life, the Bible consid-
ers it as if he destroyed an entire world. And
whoever saves a single life, the Bible considers it
as if he saved an entire world. Furthermore, only
one man, Adam, was created for the sake of
peace among men, so that no one should say to
his fellow, My father was greater than yours)
or potentially other similar references such
as Jerusalem Talmud, Sanhedrin 4:1 (22a).
Whether one believes an Islamic interpretation
that Quran 5:32 was revealed to Muhammad, or
a secular one that the ayah repeats something
that Muhammad heard, this ayah shows a conti-
nuity of belief and a tie between the oral Jewish
tradition (which by that point had been written
down) and written Muslim tradition.
Yet for some demagogic purveyors of hate,
as Rabbi Schneier calls them, this is not a sign
that Muslims view the Quran as part of a con-
tinuous revelation sometimes referencing Jew-
8
May
2014

Ahmadiyya Anjuman Ishaat Islam Lahore (UK)
The first Islamic Mission in the UK, established 1913 as the Woking Muslim Mission
Dar-us-Salaam, 15 Stanley Avenue, Wembley, UK, HA0 4JQ
Centre: 020 8903 2689 President: 020 8529 0898 Secretary: 01753 575313 E-mail: aaiiLahore@gmail.com
Websites: www.aaiil.org/uk | www.ahmadiyya.org | www.virtualmosque.co.uk
Donations: www.virtualmosque.co.uk/donations
ish and Christian scrip-
tures. Instead, these
Islamophobes claim to
find further proof of
plagiarism of apocry-
phal Jewish literature;
this time in the Jewish
Mishnah Sanhedrin or
title a section of an anti-
Islam screed Plagiarism
in Quran, citing the
same passages. If only
the Quran had managed
to avoid the charge of
plagiarism by introduc-
ing the text by saying
something like We de-
creed upon the Children
of Israel. Oh wait, it did!
Presumably, the dema-
gogic purveyors of hate
would not be satisfied
with anything short of a
footnote and embedded
hyperlink in the text
when it was compiled over 1,300 years ago.
Certain Islamophobes who accuse the
Quran of plagiarism in this verse, despite the
explicit reference to a decree to the Children of
Israel, seem less concerned with how Jesus
statement in Matthew 7:12 (So in everything,
do to others what you would have them do to
you, for this sums up the Law and the Proph-
ets.) does not reference Tobit 7:15 (And what
you hate, do not do to anyone) or a well-known
(among Jews) saying of Hillel the
Elder (traditionally c. 110 BCE, died 7 CE): That
which is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow.
That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explana-
tion; go and learn. One notable demagogic pur-
veyor of hate, Ali Sina, has written, There is
nothing in the Quran and Hadith that would
make us believe that Islam is compatible with
the Golden Rule. Actu-
ally, Wikipedia provides
a dozen quotes from the
Quran and Hadith that
are variants of the
Golden Rule. The one
that struck me the most
was one that echoed Hil-
lel: A Bedouin came to
the prophet, grabbed the
stirrup of his camel and
said: O the messenger of
God! Teach me some-
thing to go to heaven
with it. Prophet said: As
you would have people
do to you, do to them;
and what you dislike to
be done to you, dont do
to them. Now let the
stir rup go! [This maxim
is enough for you; go and
act in accordance with
it!] Kitab al-Kafi, vol.
2, p. 146.
All three of the Abrahamic faiths thus not
only cite the Golden Rule in some form, but have
traditions citing it as a maxim that sums up the
morality of their religious texts or beliefs. It is
only by being selective in what they cite from
the written and oral traditions that the dema-
gogic purveyors of hate could hope to obscure
this commonality. Instead, it is worth taking the
time to review the full range of the traditions of
each religion, notably those cited repeatedly by
their adherents because they resonate with
their view of their religions morality. And then,
it is time to let the stereotype, and the stirrup,
go.
(Reproduced from:
http:www.loonwatch.com/2014/04/
oral-traditions-in-islam-and-judaism/)