Thank you Sina

First, I would like to state that I did not challenge you to a debate. It was Ben Malik who sent me an email bearing this title, 'A Challenge to Debate `Ali Sina', and then he forwarded my response to him to you bearing the title that he chose. I am not looking for a debate with you, but a scientific discussion, as much as our mutually busy schedules permit.

That is perfectly understood and I really appreciate you wanting to have a scientific discussion instead of debate. That shows you are a critical thinker and apply logics in your studies. This means we both will put aside any belief that we may have and approach the subject without any attachment to it and preconceived ideas. This is a further indication of your maturity and open mindedness, a trait, unfortunately not very common amongst the Muslim debaters.

Second, I would like to point out that indeed, I did read your responses to my earlier emails. Yet, I chose not to answer your various claims about Muhammad, the Quran and Abu Jahl (Abul-Hakam), because it is not my desire to debate you or waste my time or yours on endless discussions. Thus, the words 'absurdity', 'terrorists' and the like are neither needed, nor appropriate.

I agree. Let me withdraw those words for now as this would be determined after our discussion is over and not before it begins. I simply expressed my impression of the Quran. But this debate may well determine my impression is wrong and hence those adjectives should be withdrawn for now.

I need evidence, proof and specific examples. Then, you will get my answer based on evidence, proof and scientific research. You need to be scientific and bring forth specific charges, one issue at a time.

Otherwise, you will be starting to abuse me from the onset, while I am trying to find out what troubles you about Islam and try and offer satisfactory answers to you. You are dealing with a Muslim who deeply believes in his faith and loves and respects Allah, the Quran and Muhammad. Is it not better for you to respect this and refrain from using these awful words to describe my religion? I do not mind that you state specific charges, but please void them of harsh words of judgments, because it is unbecoming in a civil debate.

Yes I agree. I will state my chares one at a time with enough support to demonstrate they are not mere insults and slanders but real charges. For example instead of calling Muhammad a highway robber that may be interpreted as insult, I charge him of highway robbery and provide enough historic data from reliable Islamic sources to back up my claim. If you refute a charge I will withdraw that charge and acknowledge my error and move on to the next charge. If at the end you prove me wrong on all the charges, then obviously my entire claim against Muhammad becomes meaningless and I will make a public announcement and withdraw all the contents of my site leaving this debate and the admission of error in the home page so people who had seem my site in the past and come back in the future can see I was corrected. This will help them not be misled because of my errors.

Third, Here is but some of what I understood from your last reply, which was rather broad in nature, and thus, difficult to address in one email.

1. You are from Iran and you used to be a Shiite, yet you said: "Most of the Iranians… are not real Muslims in the true sense of the word." Thus, it is fair to restate that you never were a Muslim. This is what you said, "If you want to show I have never been a Muslim to begin with, you are absolutely right." If this is the case, why are being portrayed as a 'Muslim' who left Islam, and do you have a hand in this portrayal?

You are right here. I have never been a Muslim technically. In other words I never in my life agreed with what Muhammad did and taught. However, nominally that was what I was called. So calling myself a Muslim was a mistake. But that was not my decision. I was told I am a Muslim because I was born to Muslim parents. I also had created a romantic and utopian concept of Islam in my mind, which was palatable to my constitution that was not realistic. For example I assumed that Islam improved the status of women, that there is no compulsion in religion, that the Quran contained answers to all the human questions, that the prophet was a holy man, etc. etc. When I read the Quran it became clear to me that I was wrong. My suspicion was confirmed when I read the biography of Muhammad and some Hadiths. It became clear to me that discrimination, odium, violence, misogyny, and terror are part of Islam. I learned that Muhammad lived a less than holy life and that Islam advanced through violence and terror. When I learned the real Islam, I could not agree with any of it and hence I stopped calling myself Muslim.

Now you say I should not call myself an ex-Muslim because I was never a Muslim. Probably you are right. What do you think I should call myself? How about an ex-deluded?

So far you have been right consistently. Yes indeed the origin of the Sufism should be sought in Hinduism. As I said Sufism is a borrowed philosophy and you are smart to point out that it has been borrowed from Indian mysticism.

3. On Sufism and Iran , you said the following:

· "Iranian Muslims are distinct from the typical Muslims, the kind you find in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan . Iranians adore their great poets and their poets invariably were Sufis. So Sufism has left an indelible mark on the way Iranians perceive Islam." I guess you are talking about a segment of the Iranian society, because you cannot have possibly polled the entire country of Iran and found this sweeping statement to be scientifically true. You should have stated that this is your personal view, which is shared by many Iranians. To state that 'Iranians' are like this or that, you need to present scientific and precise evidence. Otherwise, you should only portray this as your impression and point-of-view.

You are right again. I was being a little hyperbolic. But your observation is more scientific and precise.

Jalal Abualrub