At Dubai scholars we teach the students to have a vivid imagination towards current affairs around us and become the young leaders of tomorrow.
Likewise, on 19 th march the Islamic Department along with the English Department put forward an intense debate on whether Jihad leads to violence. It was a very professional and international model of
what a real debate is like.
To start with there were 2 teams that were made prior to the debate which were arranged class wise and the teams were given 3 days to prepare and gather the information they would need to debate. The seating arrangement had the audience in a semi- circle with the esteemed judges, Rayyan Abbasi,
Oudad Hakim and Hasnain Khimani guided by Mrs. Farhana, right behind them and there were also
stations provided for the against and the in favor of the topic teams.
The first statement made by every speaker before speaking was, “What we say now should not be used
against us in the future.”
The team in favor of the topic consisted of Mehdi, Yasha, Aliza and Asad as the main speakers from an 8-
member team and the opening and closing speaker was Mehdi, allotted with a 1-minute speaking time.
The opening statement stated, “Islam is indeed a religion of peace but if today you go to Syria and use
the word Jihad, they will immediately get scared and these terrorists use the word jihad as an excuse to
behead people.”
The team against the topic consisted of Mihir, Saud, Qasim and Hussain Aziz as the main speakers from a
15-member team. The opening statement was made by Mihir and the closing statement was made by
Qasim, both allotted 1-minute speaking time. The opening statement made was, “In Islam Allah and the
Prophet have prohibited to judge anyone whether they call themselves Muslims or not, we can’t judge
whether they are Muslims or not.”
Likewise, on 19 th march the Islamic Department along with the English Department put forward an intense debate on whether Jihad leads to violence. It was a very professional and international model of
what a real debate is like.
To start with there were 2 teams that were made prior to the debate which were arranged class wise and the teams were given 3 days to prepare and gather the information they would need to debate. The seating arrangement had the audience in a semi- circle with the esteemed judges, Rayyan Abbasi,
Oudad Hakim and Hasnain Khimani guided by Mrs. Farhana, right behind them and there were also
stations provided for the against and the in favor of the topic teams.
The first statement made by every speaker before speaking was, “What we say now should not be used
against us in the future.”
The team in favor of the topic consisted of Mehdi, Yasha, Aliza and Asad as the main speakers from an 8-
member team and the opening and closing speaker was Mehdi, allotted with a 1-minute speaking time.
The opening statement stated, “Islam is indeed a religion of peace but if today you go to Syria and use
the word Jihad, they will immediately get scared and these terrorists use the word jihad as an excuse to
behead people.”
The team against the topic consisted of Mihir, Saud, Qasim and Hussain Aziz as the main speakers from a
15-member team. The opening statement was made by Mihir and the closing statement was made by
Qasim, both allotted 1-minute speaking time. The opening statement made was, “In Islam Allah and the
Prophet have prohibited to judge anyone whether they call themselves Muslims or not, we can’t judge
whether they are Muslims or not.”
An interesting rebuttal made by the against team accused the opposite team for using a wrong ayaat by
shifting and missing out on a few important words. Another rebuttal made from the team for the topic
was that the team against had quoted, “all terrorists who do ‘jihad’ are not Muslims.” The opposition
rebutted stating an ayah from the Quran that “In Islam Allah and the prophet have prohibited to judge
anyone whether they call themselves Muslims or not we can’t judge whether they are Muslims or not.”
At the end of the day, it was a nail- biting debate and the team in favor of the topic won by 4 points
mainly due to their strong rebuttals.
There is always room for improvement and since this was the first ever professional debate for the 10 th
graders, their suggestions for as to what to improve were; the time limit could have been more, and the
number of speakers should have been greater as well. Another thing the students did was constantly
read from the paper so, next time inshallah, it would be much better to not constantly from the paper, when you don’t speak with the paper it is more appealing and forceful to make sure your point stated is understood.
This debate was a way to make the students understand a topic as delicate as Jihad in a much better way through a debate rather than write a test on the topic in which more than 50% of the students wouldn’t comprehend the topic.
shifting and missing out on a few important words. Another rebuttal made from the team for the topic
was that the team against had quoted, “all terrorists who do ‘jihad’ are not Muslims.” The opposition
rebutted stating an ayah from the Quran that “In Islam Allah and the prophet have prohibited to judge
anyone whether they call themselves Muslims or not we can’t judge whether they are Muslims or not.”
At the end of the day, it was a nail- biting debate and the team in favor of the topic won by 4 points
mainly due to their strong rebuttals.
There is always room for improvement and since this was the first ever professional debate for the 10 th
graders, their suggestions for as to what to improve were; the time limit could have been more, and the
number of speakers should have been greater as well. Another thing the students did was constantly
read from the paper so, next time inshallah, it would be much better to not constantly from the paper, when you don’t speak with the paper it is more appealing and forceful to make sure your point stated is understood.
This debate was a way to make the students understand a topic as delicate as Jihad in a much better way through a debate rather than write a test on the topic in which more than 50% of the students wouldn’t comprehend the topic.
“Since it was the 1 st time for me to be a part of a debate, it excelled my expectations. The judges and the
speakers did a great job and I hope to do this again.” Yasha
“The debate was really interesting and intuitive as this debate was on a very controversial and sensitive
topic. Both teams had really good speeches and rebuttles, wish we could have more of these types of
debates, honestly.”-Mihir
speakers did a great job and I hope to do this again.” Yasha
“The debate was really interesting and intuitive as this debate was on a very controversial and sensitive
topic. Both teams had really good speeches and rebuttles, wish we could have more of these types of
debates, honestly.”-Mihir
Written by- Bisha 9B
Edited by - Mishita 9A
Compiled by Aryan
Edited by - Mishita 9A
Compiled by Aryan