Middlesex

Title: Middlesex
Author: Jeffrey Eugenides

It's not a boring book. I must say it's interseting. But nevertheless not fully satisfying. That is because somewhere down the line I started comparing him with Salman Rushdie. It's very clear that he follows a style of writing similar to that of Rushdie. Further research confirmed that he was indeed very interested in Rushdie and his style. I happened to read a transcript of a conversation between him and Rushdie. Also about his visit to India and how he became fascinated with Rushdie's Midnight's Children etc. This book has almost all the elements of a Rushdian novel. And his fancy for the orient, the Islamic culture, India etc. like Rushdie is clearly reflected in this work. I'm sure he is a person with an Indian soul trapped in an English body. With all these features, how could someone not compare him with Rushdie? And the result is that, in spite of all these ingredients, he doesn't do it as good as Rushdie.

hands..

"The first time I went to an Indian restaurant in Canada I used my fingers. The waiter looked at me
critically and said, "Fresh off the boat, are you?" I blanched. My fingers, which a second before had
been taste buds savouring the food a little ahead of my mouth, became dirty under his gaze. They
froze like criminals caught in the act. I didn't dare lick them. I wiped them guiltily on my napkin.
He had no idea how deeply those words wounded me. They were like nails being driven into my
flesh. I picked up the knife and fork. I had hardly ever used such instruments. My hands trembled.
My sambar lost its taste."

- (Life of Pi)

War and Peace

Title: War and Peace
Author: Leo Tolstoy
Publ: Wordsworth Editions ltd. (1993)
ISBN: 1 85326 062 2

War and Peace. Not my kind of book. It is an epic size historical novel. It is about Napolean's invasion of Russia. Perhaps I have a basic dislike towards historic novels. As it is a novel, there are numerous fictional characters and the story of their relationships and family affairs. And since it is an account of an episode from history as well, there are real historic characters such as Napolean and Tsar and historic events and dates and stuff. Alas, I missed the novel for the history, and the history for the novel. Perhaps that's why I dislike historical fiction. Apart from the history and fiction, there is scattered here and there real non-fictional philosophy of Tolstoy on war, history, humanity and the world. I guess this is the part I liked more than the history and fiction. But this too needs a bit of trimming as it is extensively repetitive and lengthy in places and even dull at times.

As it is a novel, the narrative of war and related events from history looked kind of out of place. And since it is a report on history, the fictional part didn't look like a fully blown novel.

However, the author's sharp insight into human nature and characteristics and their clear depiction are commendable. The same was the feeling I had when I read Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen. That story seemed not that great to me, but her power of observation deep into human hearts and minds was greatly reflected in the book. That said, I now know that I love Charles Dickens's style far more than the plain straightforward style of realistic narration of Tolstoy and Austen.

Atlas Shrugged

Title: Atlas Shrugged

Author: Ayn Rand

I have read that Ayn Rand has written four books. And that Atlas Shrugged is her last book. She is considered to be the proponent of the philosophical theory called Objectivism. And it is said that it is in this last book of hers that she has presented her theory most extensively which has resulted in a culmination of all that she tried to tell the reader through her previous books. I have also read that it is through this book that she has been successful in concretely establishing her philosophical theory unlike her other books, and came to be well reputed to be a philosopher more than a writer. She has lived around a quarter of a century after this book was published, but didn't write another book. I guess she would have written more books had she not been known as a philosopher with the release of this work. Whatever, if she is a philosopher, then I would like to believe that she is a very immature one.

One might think that this book is about glorifying capitalism, greed, blind profit-making, selfishness or egotism, and is anti-communist, anti-socialist etc. But as mentioned above it is a new theory called Objectivism which is a foolish combination of all the above. The protagonist of this story, Dagny Taggart is an individual with great intellectual brilliance and self confidence coupled with enormous capability to undertake industrial ventures and make them a success. In her view, the fruit of one's hard work is to be enjoyed by one alone. It need not be shared with anyone. Not even with the government in the form of payment of taxes. It looks so stupid when we live in a democracy. Because in a democracy, the government is not an external agent; it is formed by people and its funds come from what people contribute to it. Apparently Rand is trying to say that there is no need to help others in any way with one's earnings and there is no need of dependance of anyone on anyone else. And the underprivileged are looked upon with hatred. Even indifference could be justified in the case, but not hatred and contempt. Rand seems to say that if someone has not got enough, it is because he/she has not worked hard enough. If this is true, the contempt could be justified, but I guess it is not always true. And how is it justified that a big manager in the steel industry cannot give some money to his old mother to buy the grocery just because she doesn't earn anything? Does the author mean to say that she also has to work hard and become some manager in some industry so that she can buy her grocery? It is very clear that the author has an axe to grind and is very prejudiced. It seems that she doesn't like some characters and tries to portray them negative solely because of it. I strongly have  a feeling that there must have existed some people similar to them among her own family members or close relatives and she is trying to vent the hatred for them through the portrayal of those characters. A great example is Jim, the brother of the protagonist Dagny Taggart. To the reader, he must look like a person with a very good heart, because he has a lot of good characteristics that people generally feel proud of. Despite being a manager of a great organization, he is humble to all and free from any tendency to discriminate people on stupid grounds. And Rand wants to portray him as negative. But she employs very weak and silly reasons to prove him bad. And I guess she has utterly failed in the endeavour. He never looked negative to me. And I loved Dr. Pritchett very much too whom she has considered negative for his words that the aim of philosophy is not to explain the meaning of life but to prove that it hasn't any. But I have loved him for these words. His dialogues are very stimulating to me.

Even though Rand seems to oppose dependance of one person on another without paying for it, Dagny Taggart falls in love with people now and then at the drop of a hat. And when it happens she is so childish and stupid and becomes obsessed and overdependant on the male for satisfying her desire. In the moments of love there is no thought of business or Objectivism or profit-making or the industry. The depiction of the love scenes looks too bollywoodish. It all looks so silly and not suitable for the theme of the plot. It all looks so out of place. Which again brings to me the feeling that she is stupidly trying to live her unfulfilled life through the book. Perhaps she has never been satisfied enough sexually in her own life the way she wanted. In the story, Dagny has three love affairs which is too much for a book like this.

In general the book contains characters which can be easily grouped into two. Good characters and bad characters. But all in the view of the author. All characters that the author supports are strong in character and the ones opposed are weak. But there is no doubt that the author has been greatly successful in creating figures with great strength in character. It could be considered an ultimate model for writers when creating protagonists with great will power, confidence and mental strength. Among the good characters (according to the author), I have loved Ragnar Danneskjold and John Galt for the uniqueness in their individuality. And among the bad ones (again according to the author), I have greatly loved Dr. Pritchett the philosopher. The book has given me the feeling that Ayn Rand is a writer of great ability with a wide range. I saw three books in this one book. The first one is constituted by all those parts which are so dry, dull, trying and tiring and devoid of much happenings and discussions, which pervades the major bulk of this bulky book of more than one thousand pages of fine print, nevertheless driving the plot in some way. A great bulk from the beginning of the book is nothing but this. Which means an average reader tends to abandon the book without going much far, thinking the entire book is the same dull story. In fact, I had tried reading the book two years ago hearing it was a philosophical book, but abandoned reading after completing a great part and sensing no philosophy at all. But in this second reading, I have discovered that on the sixth chapter, all of a sudden, it becomes very lively. It's the wonderful portrayal of a party scene where many of the great personalities from various realms of society like arts, science, philosophy and industry meet each other and exchange ideas and ignite stimulating discussions. It is where Dr. Pritchett first appears. While reading all those pages, I was really wondering if it is the same author that has written them. But such instances were like occasional oases in the vast dry desert, at least in the first three-fourths of the book. Other two greatly stimulating instances were the portrayal of Dagny embarking upon her new railroad and train service and the discovery of the special motor that has been abandoned and lay rusted in the wilderness. But the last one fourth of the book is the least boring and displays a constancy of style. and it is in this last part that the things in the first three fourths start making sense. In short, the book is interesting towards the end with a lot of happenings and peculiar twists and turns. Apart from these two styles of dull narration and stimulating happenings in the plot, there is this third style, the childish and immature one when it comes to romance and love, which has been already mentioned above. It makes one feel as if the book has been written by three different authors. I have got this feeling while reading The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn by Mark Twain. Huckleberry Finn and Tom Sawyer are characters in the book. But since the book is mainly about Huck, Tom appears in very few portions. But wherever Tom appears, things get so energetic and exhilarating. Otherwise I didn't find the book very interesting. It is as if even though the same author has created both characters, Tom defies the author himself and goes his lively way to add colours to the pages, and gets out of the control of the author.

And the characters I hated most are Dagny and Rearden.

Homo Faber

Title: Homo Faber
Author: Max Frisch

Publ: Harvest
ISBN: 0-15-642135-6


Walter Faber has a very simple, rational and individualistic view of life. I am so happy to have read this book. The time spent on reading it has been enjoyable. There  are only a few books with that quality. There are books that are great and yet boring. And there are books which are not enjoyable while reading, but gives a good  feeling in retrospect. This book is not one of them. Thanks to Maja, who calls me Faber, as she acknowledges my resemblance to him in character and idiosyncrasies, I  have discovered a great book and a great author. If it had not been for her, perhaps I would never have known Max Frisch or Homo Faber.

The simple and straightforward style of narration is so captivating. The entire story is a report from Faber about things that happened in the past. Which means that  at any point, the protagonist, who is the narrator too, knows beforehand what he is about to say. The central theme is that Faber, while on a voyage, happens to have a brief affair  with a girl much younger to him, who later turns out to be his own daughter from the relationship with his old girlfriend who he left years ago while she was pregnant, on the  understanding that she would abort it. No, this is not a spoiler. Because the narrator himself reveals it at a very early stage! Which means there is no room for suspense in  the plot. And that's the greatness of this book. Any author would have employed to full capacity the element of suspense to thrill the reader with an engaging read. He could  well have narrated the entire story with his having the affair with the girl and all the events taking place and finally described how he discovers at the last moment that  she was his daughter. The author has shockingly abandoned that possibility. Instead at the very beginning of the encounters with the girl, Faber says how could he have  known that this girl was his daughter. He has killed all the possibilities of the plot. And yet he has managed to create a marvel of story-telling. This is his greatness. It reminds of M. T. Vasudevan Nair's comment about  Basheer that 'great words of Malayalam have ran after him crying and imploring him to take them', but he abandoned them mercilessly and created magic with the simplest of words of the 
language, not pretending to be an intellectual, writing very thin books.

Recently one of my Facebook friends had shared a quotation explaining the criterion to tell a good book from a bad one: 'Strip the book of its story/plot if any. And still if there is anything remaining, it is a good book.' That's exactly true about this book. I remember reading about Khaled Hosseini that he taught creative writing. He must have taught great techniques and tricks to students on how to create an 'unputdownable' book. I am sure he has employed the same in his own books which have been international best sellers. But that's all about producing a book. Homo Faber is about creating awesomeness from thin air..

മത്തങ്ങ..

“സ്വർണ്ണവർണ്ണമാം മത്തങ്ങേ നീപ്പോയ്
കണ്ണു നീലിച്ച പെണ്ണിന്റെ കത്തിയാൽ
കറുകറെ നുറുങ്ങി പയറോടു ചേരൂ
നല്ല നാവുകൾക്കെരിശ്ശേരിയാകൂ”

- എൻ. ജി. ഉണ്ണികൃഷ്ണൻ
(മണ്ണാങ്കട്ട)

പാഠം..

“കുരുവി ഗോപി ബോർഡിലേക്കു നോക്കി. ഗുരു എല്ലാം കഴിഞ്ഞപ്പോൾ എഴുതിയതാണ്‌: പഠിപ്പിക്കേണ്ടത് കഴിഞ്ഞു; ഇനി പഠിക്കേണ്ടതേ ബാക്കിയുള്ളൂ.

അതിന്റെ അർത്ഥമൊന്നും അവനു മനസ്സിലായില്ല. അതും പതിവുപോലെ നോട്ടുബുക്കിൽ കുറിച്ചെടുത്ത് അവൻ ആശ്വസിച്ചു.”

- (കുരുവി ഗോപി)

Arrangements..

“Arrangements in case of death: all written evidence such as reports, letters, loose-leaf notebooks, are to be destroyed, none of it is true. To be alive: to be in the light. Driving donkeys around somewhere (like that old man in Corinth)—that’s all our jobs amount to! The main thing is to stand up to the light, to joy (like our child) in the knowledge that I shall be extinguished in the light over gorse, asphalt, and sea, to stand up to time, or rather to eternity in the instant. To be eternal means to have existed.”

- (Homo Faber)

കുരുവിഗോപി

പുസ്തകം: കുരുവി ഗോപി
ഗ്രന്ഥകാരൻ: എ. വിജയൻ
പ്രസാ: സാഹിത്യപ്രവർത്തക സഹകരണസംഘം

കുരുവി ഗോപി. ഞാൻ വായിച്ച ആദ്യത്തെ പുസ്തകം. ഇപ്പോൾ വർഷങ്ങൾക്കുശേഷം രണ്ടാമതും വായിക്കാൻ അവസരം ലഭിച്ചു.

പ്രദേശത്തെ കുഞ്ഞുലൈബ്രറിയിൽനിന്ന് നവാബ്‌ മാമാക്കു പുസ്തകം എടുത്തുകൊണ്ടുപോയി കൊടുക്കുന്നത്‌ എന്റെ പതിവായിരുന്നു.വായിച്ചുകഴിഞ്ഞ പുസ്തകം അദ്ദേഹം എന്നെ ഏൽപ്പിക്കും. അതുമായി ലൈബ്രറിയിൽ പോയി അതവിടെ ഏൽപ്പിച്ചാൽ ലൈബ്രേറിയൻ മറ്റൊരു പുസ്തകം തരുന്നു. എന്നിട്ട്‌ എന്നെക്കൊണ്ട്‌ ഒരു റെജിസ്റ്റെറിൽ ഒപ്പിടീക്കുന്നു. ഇതായിരുന്നു രീതി. ഇത്‌ അനുകരിച്ച്‌ ഞാനും വീട്ടിൽ കൂട്ടുകാരൊത്ത്‌ ലൈബ്രറി കളിച്ചു. പക്കലുണ്ടായിരുന്ന പൂമ്പാറ്റ, ബാലരമ, മലർവാടി എന്നിവയെല്ലാം ഒന്നിച്ചുകൂട്ടി ആവശ്യക്കാർക്ക്‌ നൽകി ഒരു നോട്ടുബുക്കിൽ ഒപ്പിടീച്ചു. അപ്പോഴാണ്‌ "ഇന്നാ, നിന്റെ ലൈബ്രറിയിലേക്ക്‌ എന്റെ വക ഒരു പുസ്തകം." എന്നും പറഞ്ഞ്‌ ഒരു പുസ്തകം നീട്ടിക്കൊണ്ട്‌ ഉപ്പ കടന്നുവന്നത്‌. പൂമ്പാറ്റയും ബാലരമയും വായിച്ചുനടന്ന എനിക്ക്‌ അങ്ങനെ ഒരു 'ശരിയായ' പുസ്തകം വായിക്കാനൊത്തു. പിന്നീടെപ്പോഴോ ആ പുസ്തകം എന്റെ പക്കൽനിന്ന് നഷ്ടമായി. കുറച്ചുവർഷങ്ങൾക്കുശേഷം അതിന്റെ ഒരു കോപ്പിക്കായി വളരെ അന്വേഷിച്ചെങ്കിലും എവിടെയും ലഭിച്ചില്ല. അവസാനം ഇപ്പോൾ ലഭിച്ചിരിക്കുന്നു.

പക്ഷെ, വർഷങ്ങൾക്കുമുൻപ്‌ ആദ്യമായി വായിച്ചപ്പോൾ എനിക്ക്‌ വളരെയൊന്നും മനസ്സിലായില്ല. എന്നുവെച്ചാൽ കുരുവികളോടും പക്ഷിമൃഗാദികളോടും ചങ്ങാത്തകാരനായ കുരുവിഗോപിയുടെ കഥ ഇഷ്ടമായെങ്കിലും എഴുത്തുകാരൻ അതിലൂടെ നൽകാനുദ്ദേശിച്ച സന്ദേശമൊന്നും മനസ്സിലാക്കാനുള്ള പ്രായവും പക്വതയും അന്നില്ലായിരുന്നു. കുരുവിഗോപി 'കാകാ' എന്നുവിളിക്കുമ്പോൾ കാക്ക വരുന്നതും, 'കൂകൂ' എന്നുവിളിക്കുമ്പ്പോൾ കുരുവി വരുന്നതും, ഗുരുകുലത്തിൽ ഗുരുവിന്റെ നരച്ച താടിമീശകളിൽ പുരട്ടാൻ കറുത്ത മശി തയ്യാറാക്കുന്ന കുരുവിഗോപിയും എല്ലാം ഓർമ്മയുണ്ടായിരുന്നു. എങ്കിലും ഇന്നിപ്പോൾ വായിച്ചപ്പോഴാണ്‌ ആ പ്രായത്തിൽ വയിക്കേണ്ട പുസ്തകമേ അല്ലായിരുന്നു അത്‌ എന്ന് മനസ്സിലായത്‌. കുറഞ്ഞപക്ഷം മുതിർന്ന കുട്ടികൾക്കുള്ളതാണ്‌ അത്‌. കുട്ടികളല്ലാത്തവർക്കാണ്‌ അത്‌ പൂർണ്ണമായും ഉൾക്കൊള്ളാൻ കഴിയുക. ഹാരിപോട്ടറുടെ കഥകൾ കുട്ടികൾക്കുള്ളതാണെങ്കിലും അവ മുതിർന്നവർ അത്രതന്നെ ആസ്വദിക്കുന്നു എന്ന് പലരും എന്നോട്‌ പറഞ്ഞതോർക്കുന്നു.

പാവം അനാഥനായ കുരുവിഗോപിക്ക്‌ ഗുരുകുലവിദ്യാഭ്യാസം കഴിയുന്ന ദിവസത്തിൽ പോകാനൊരിടമില്ല. കൂട്ടുകാരൊക്കെ വീട്ടിൽ തിരിച്ചെത്താനുള്ള പ്രതീക്ഷയിൽ ആഹ്ലാദിക്കുമ്പോൾ കുരുവിഗോപിക്ക്‌ അവന്റെ ജീവിതയാത്ര ഏകനായി തുടങ്ങേണ്ടിവരുന്നു. കയ്പ്പു നിറഞ്ഞ വ്യത്യസ്ത ജീവിതാനുഭവങ്ങളിലൂടെ അവൻ പ്രയാണം തുടരുന്നു.

മുതിർന്നവർ കുട്ടികൾക്ക്‌ വായിച്ചുകൊടുക്കേണ്ട കഥ.

You..

"You, whom I have always loved and never found"
- (Atlas Shrugged)

You and me..

"

"You are going back to the outer world because I will be there."

"Yes."

"I do not want you to go."

"You have no choice about it."

"You are going for my sake."

"No, for mine."

"Will you allow me to see you there?"

"No."

"I am not to see you?"

"No."

"I am not to know where you are or what you do?"

"You're not."

"Will you be watching me, as you did before?"

"More so."

"Is your purpose to protect me?"

"No."

"What is it, then?"

"To be there on the day when you decide to join us." 

                                                                                   "

- (Atlas Shrugged)

Nature...

"We must begin by giving man land and plenty of it. No matter what the excuse, a civilization that deprives man of land is wrong. But suppose in a future civilization every man is able to own an acre of land, then he has got something to start with. He can have trees, his own trees, and rocks, his own rocks. He will be careful to choose a site where there are already full grown trees, and if there are not already full-grown trees, he will plant trees that grow fast enough for him, such as bamboos and willows. Then he will not have to keep birds in cages, for birds will come to him and he will see to it that there are frogs in the neighborhood, and preferably also some lizards and spiders. His children will then be able to study nature in Nature and not study nature in a glass case. At least his children will be able to watch how chickens hatch from their eggs and they need not be woefully ignorant about sex and reproduction as the children of "good" Boston families often are. And they will have the pleasure of watching a fight between lizards and spiders. And they will have the pleasure also of getting comfortably dirty."

- Lin Yutang, 1937

(The Importance of Living)

Isoceles...

'Narrated Anas:
A Jew crushed the head of a girl between two stones. The girl was asked who had crushed her head, and some names were mentioned before her, and when the name of the Jew was mentioned, she nodded agreeing. The Jew was captured and when he confessed, the Prophet ordered that his head be crushed between two stones.'

- Sahih Bukhari 3:596


*                  *                    *




'Narrated Subaia bint Al−Harith: That she was married to Sa`d bin Khaula who was from the tribe of Bani
`Amr bin Luai, and was one of those who fought the Badr battle. He died while she was pregnant during Hajjat−ul−Wada`.' Soon after his death, she gave birth to a child. When she completed the term of deliver (i.e. became clean), she prepared herself for suitors. Abu As−Sanabil bin Bu'kak, a man from the tribe of Bani `Abd−ud−Dal called on her and said to her, "What! I see you dressed up for the people to ask you in marriage. Do you want to marry By Allah, you are not allowed to marry unless four months and ten days have elapsed (after your husband's death)." Subai'a in her narration said, "When he (i.e. Abu As−Sanabil) said this to me. I put on my dress in the evening and went to Allah's Apostle and asked him about this problem. He gave the verdict that I was free to marry as I had already given birth to my child and ordered me to marry if I wished." '

- Sahih Bukhari 5:326

- 

liar...

Narrated `Uqba bin Al−Harith: "When An−Nuaman or his son was brought in a state of drunkenness, Allah's Apostle ordered all those who were present in the house to beat him. I was one of those who beat him. We beat him with shoes and palm−leaf stalks."

- (Sahih Bukhari Vol.3, hadith 509)






Narrated Um Kulthum bint `Uqba: That she heard Allah's Apostle saying, "He who makes peace between the people by inventing good information or saying good things, is not a liar."

- (Sahih Bukhari Vol.3, hadith 857)

Wives...

Narrated `Urwa from `Aisha: The wives of Allah's Apostle were in two groups. One group consisted of `Aisha, Hafsa, Safiyya and Sauda; and the other group consisted of Um Salama and the other wives of Allah's Apostle. The Muslims knew that Allah's Apostle loved `Aisha, so if any of them had a gift and wished to give to Allah's Apostle, he would delay it, till Allah's Apostle had come to `Aisha's home and then he would send his gift to Allah's Apostle in her home. The group of Um Salama discussed the matter together and decided that Um Salama should request Allah's Apostle to tell the people to send their gifts to him in whatever wife's house he was. Um Salama told Allah's Apostle of what they had said, but he did not reply. Then they (those wives) asked Um Salama about it. She said, "He did not say anything to me." They asked her to talk to him again. She talked to him again when she met him on her day, but he gave no reply. When they asked her, she replied that he had given no reply. They said to her, "Talk to him till he gives you a reply." When it was her turn, she talked to him again. He then said to her, "Do not hurt me regarding Aisha, as the Divine Inspirations do not come to me on any of the beds except that of Aisha." On that Um Salama said, "I repent to Allah for hurting you." Then the group of Um Salama called Fatima, the daughter of Allah's Apostle and sent her to Allah's Apostle to say to him, "Your wives request to treat them and the daughter of Abu Bakr on equal terms." Then Fatima conveyed the message to him. The Prophet said, "O my daughter! Don't you love whom I love?" She replied in the affirmative and returned and told them of the situation. They requested her to go to him again but she refused. They then sent Zainab bint Jahsh who went to him and used harsh words saying, "Your wives request you to treat them and the daughter of Ibn Abu Quhafa on equal terms." On that she raised her voice and abused `Aisha to her face so much so that Allah's Apostle looked at `Aisha to see whether she would retort. `Aisha started replying to Zainab till she silenced her. The Prophet then looked at `Aisha and said, "She is really the daughter of Abu Bakr."

- Sahih Bukhari Vol:3, hadith:755

Ihram...

' Narrated `Abdullah bin Abu Qatada Al−Aslami: That his father said, "One day I was sitting with some of the Prophet's companions on the way to Mecca. Allah's Apostle was ahead of us. All of my companions were in the state of Ihram while I was a non−Muhrim. They saw an onager while I was busy repairing my shoes, so they did not tell me about it but they wished I had seen it. By chance I looked up and saw it. So, I turned to the horse, saddled it and rode on it, forgetting to take the spear and the whip. I asked them if they could hand over to me the whip and the spear but they said, 'No, by Allah, we shall not help you in that in any way.' I became angry and got down from the horse, picked up both the things and rode the horse again. I attacked the onager and slaughtered it, and brought it (after it had been dead). They took it (cooked some of it) and started eating it, but they doubted whether it was allowed for them to eat it or not, as they were in the state of Ihram. So, we proceeded and I hid with me one of its fore−legs. When we met Allah's Apostle and asked him about the case, he asked, 'Do you have a portion of it with you?' I replied in the affirmative and gave him that fleshy foreleg which he ate completely while he was in the state of Ihram .'

- Sahih Bukhari: Vol.3, Hadith 744



'Narrated As−Sa'b bin Jath−thama: An onager was presented to Allah's Apostle at the place called Al−Abwa' or Waddan, but Allah's Apostle rejected it. When the Prophet noticed the signs of sorrow on the giver's face he said, "We have not rejected your gift, but we are in the state of Ihram." (i.e. if we were not in a state of Ihram we would have accepted your gift)'

- Sahih Bukhari: Vol.3, Hadith 747

In and Out..

'The Prophet ordered: "Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, show respect to all foreign delegates by giving them gifts as I used to do." '

- Sahih Bukhari, Vol:4, hadith:393

Judgement...

Narrated Zaid bin Khalid and Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "O Unais! Go to the wife of this (man) and if she confesses (that she has committed illegal sexual intercourse), then stone her to death."

- Sahih Bukhari: Vol.3, hadith 508


Narrated Um Salama: (the wife of the Prophet) Allah's Apostle heard some people quarreling at the door of his dwelling. He came out and said, "I am only a human being, and opponents come to me (to settle their problems); maybe someone amongst you can present his case more eloquently than the other, whereby I may consider him true and give a verdict in his favor. So, If I give the right of a Muslim to another by mistake, then it is really a portion of (Hell) Fire, he has the option to take or give up (before the Day of Resurrection).

- Sahih Bukhari: Vol.3, hadith 638

`Abdullah bin `Umar..

Narrated Mujahid:

Ursa bin Az−Zubair and I entered the Mosque (of the Prophet) and saw `Abdullah bin `Umar sitting near the dwelling place of Aisha and some people were offering the Duha prayer. We asked him about their prayer and he replied that it was a heresy. He (Ursa) then asked him how many times the Prophet had performed `Umra. He replied, 'Four times; one of them was in the month of Rajab." We disliked to contradict him. Then we heard `Aisha, the Mother of faithful believers cleaning her teeth with Siwak in the dwelling place. 'Ursa said, "O Mother! O Mother of the believers! Don't you hear what Abu `Abdur Rahman is saying?" She said, "What does he say?" 'Ursa said, "He says that Allah's Apostle performed four `Umra and one of them was in the month of Rajab." `Aisha said, "May Allah be merciful to Abu `Abdur Rahman! The Prophet did not perform any `Umra except that he was with him, and he never performed any `Umra in Rajab."

- Sahih Bukhari, Vol-3, hadith-4




Narrated 'Ursa bin Az−Zubair: I asked `Aisha (whether the Prophet had performed `Umra in Rajab). She replied, "Allah's Apostle never performed any `Umra in Rajab."

- Sahih Bukhari, Vol-3, hadith-5



Narrated Qatada:
I asked Anas how many times the Prophet had performed `Umra. He replied, "Four times.
1. `Umra of Hudaibiya in Dhi−l−Qa'da when the pagans hindered him;
2. `Umra in the following year in Dhi−l−Qa'da after the peace treaty with them (the pagans);
3. `Umra from Al−Ja'rana where he distributed the war booty."
I think he meant the booty (of the battle) of Hunain. I asked, "How many times did he perform Hajj?" He (Anas) replied, "Once. "

- Sahih Bukhari, Vol-3, hadith-6

Caliphs..

'Narrated Marwan bin Al−Hakam: I saw `Uthman and `Ali. `Uthman used to forbid people to perform Hajj−at−Tamattu` and Hajj−al−Qiran (Hajj and `Umra together), and when `Ali saw (this act of `Uthman), he assumed Ihram for Hajj and `Umra together saying, "Lubbaik for `Umra and Hajj," and said, "I will not leave the tradition of the Prophet on the saying of somebody." '

- Sahih Bukhari Vol.2, hadith 634

Conversion..

Narrated 'Aisha:
"The day of Bu'ath was a day (i.e. battle) which Allah caused to take place just before the mission of His Apostle so that when Allah's Apostle came to Medina, they (the tribes) had divided (into hostile groups) and their nobles had been killed; and all that facilitated their conversion to Islam."

- Sahih Bukhari: Volume 5, Book 58, Hadith 267