It is Never OK to Hit a Woman

In addition to #354, here’s some more on Maudoodi’s views. Pretty scary stuff this guy wrote …

… ummah is going to the dogs … and the faithful are engaged in intellectual masturbation, debating who is who is not a Muslim. Big deal gents! It`s now time to grow up ...

abu miaN, this is what you should be worried about. But if I were you, I`d first consider changing my screen name ... just a thought. Where the hell are you from, anyway ...?

Urstruly, c`mon now, did water really flow from Prophet`s fingers ... ??? I know there are these ahadith ... but seriously. And is Issa-ibne-Marriam really residing above clouds …? Enlighten us. We Chowkies would hate to be among the disbelievers when he descends down to earth … I heard the penalty is pretty stiff …

+++++++

More on apostasy and Islamic revolution - by Maudoodi ...

“Whenever death penalty for apostasy is enforced in a new Islamic state, then Muslims are kept within Islam’s fold. But there is a danger that large number of hypocrites will live alongside them. They will always pose a danger of treason.

My solution to the problem is this. That whenever an Islamic revolution takes place, all non-practicing Muslims should, within one year, declare their turning away from Islam and get out of Muslim society. After one year all born Muslims will be considered Muslims. All Islamic laws will be enforced upon them. They will be forced to practice all of the obligatory duties (faraid) and optional duties (wajibat) of their religion and if anyone wishes to leave Islam, he will be executed. Every effort will be made to save as many people as possible from falling into lap of disbelief (kufr). But those who cannot be saved will be reluctantly separated from society forever. After this purification Islamic society will start afresh with Muslims who have decided voluntarily to remain Muslims.

Maudoodi, Murtad ki saza Islami qanoon mein (“Punishment for Apostates in Islamic Law”), Lahore: Islamic Publications Ltd, 1950, page 80-81.

abu_safawaan (#368):

You are mixing up many issues, confusing them altogether. Think carefully and avoid rambling.

Issue I have raised here is distortion of Islam at the hands of ullema, who have turned Islam into a violent, hate-filled ideology. I cited misuse of ahadith as well as views of Maudoodi in this context.

Instead of addressing these issues, the issue raised was views of Ahmadi-Muslims. This was a distractive method used by Urstruly, and you are only furthering this insanity.

It is one thing to consider a person non-Muslim … but it is a different issue altogether to make it a crime for him to practice Islam. It is this criminalization (and violent persecution) that I have criticized as the issue was raised.

It is not Ahmadi-Muslim beliefs, but violent views of your ullema that are causing havoc in Islamic world today. Your contention that Ahmadis are distorting Islam more is a misplaced idea. The house is on fire and you are busy remodeling the kitchen!!

Bush, Thackray are not Muslims … agreed. But they never claimed to be Muslims either. That’s the difference between them and Ahmadis.

Majority of a nation deciding what is good for them is one issue. However, this decision does not necessarily reflect right and wrong in a moralistic framework. US constitution discriminating against African-Americans did not make the Constitution right. It only made it legal to discriminate against African-Americans. Similarly, inhabitants of Mecca also collectively decided to discriminate against and persecute Muslims. This however did not make the discrimination against and persecution of Muslims right.

I hope this answers your concerns about ‘democracy’ and collective choice of the people.

+++

Declaring someone non-Muslim, legally or otherwise, against their wish violates principles of Quran in my view. If a nation collectively wants to violate Quran, that’s their choice. But let’s not call this choice ‘Islam’. It is far from what Islam teaches us.

Declaring Ahmadis non-Muslim, followed by criminalizing their practice of Islam, shows how low ummah has sunk … all in the name of Islam. This is distortion of profound teachings of Islam and what our dear Prophet (pbuh) taught us all his life.

I am quite satisfied in accepting Mirza Sahib as a prophet of Allah. I believe in Allah Almighty, in Quran, in prohethood of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) … and consider myself a Muslim. I offer salaat, pay zakaat and charity, fast during Ramadan, would like to perform Hajj someday …

My understanding is that Allah Almighty will raise prophets as He sees fit. Islamic teachings suggest continuation prophethood. You may disagree, and that’s fine by me. We may discuss it further as appropriate, but that’s not the issue here …

The issue here is distortion of Islam at the hands of ullema, who have turned Islam into a hate-filled ideology. This distortion of Islam continues to perpetuate cycle of destruction and death on a massive scale in different parts of the world. All this, and not Ahmadi-Muslim bliefs, should be causing you anxiety. I hope this is clear … is it ...?

+++

Urstruly (#369), aa`dab a`arz qibla ... I hope you are feeling better (ahem, ahem)
...

Re: # 376saroya

[Read: Ideas & Opinions - Albert Einstein]

i am talking about philosophy not science and einstien.

[Both statements suggest freedom from control or influence of others - on this we agree]

hhhhhmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

---

.

well ,my statement sugessts freedom from control not influence of others.

Best.

Re: # 375

1. [Read any introductory book on philosophy.]
Read: Ideas & Opinions - Albert Einstein

2. [It is a brave soul indeed that chooses independence from the mob.]
[The real brave soul is always ready to live with mob and still able to organise itself.


Both statements suggest freedom from control or influence of others - on this we agree

Re: # 373saroya

[I really doubt they were trying to answer the question of existence]

Read any introductory book on philosophy.


i had used the term ``existence``in the technical sense.

#374saroya

The real brave soul is always ready to live with mob and still able to organise itself.

#372saroya

thanx for the link.

cheers

It is a brave soul indeed that chooses independence from the mob.

Re: # 322

[All Western philosophical movements have failed to answer the question of existence]

I really doubt they were trying to answer the question of existence.

Most movements, or groups of people of similar persuasion, tend to be subjective on any issue if it does not agree with their philosophy.

Re: # 367

Further examples of `objective consideration` located at

http://www.chowk.com/show_article.cgi?aid=00007558&channel=university%20ave&start=0&end=9&chapter=1&page=1

Enjoy!!

Re: # 367

None at all it would seem!!!

Re: # 369

Urstruly Sahab,

``Inamal aamalo bin-niyaat``

Re: # 368

Good thoughts but I take exception to you repeatedly addressing them as ``Ahamdis``. There is a unanimous fatwa from all ulema of Pakistan that they must not be addressed as `ahmadis` because even in inuendo it hints towards their association with our Prophet Mohammad Ibn Abdullah (pbuh) whose one of the given name was Ahamad (pbuh). We should be careful about these little things.

Re: # 361

You can`t expect to keep preaching to us about how injustice have been done to ahmedis because they have been declared non-Msulims when they are infact NON-Muslims and then write a meaning less sentence like, `` i hope you can appreciate this`` and then expect me to wither away. Ullema`s might have distorted Islam to lesser degre but when when every joe blow and his khala start claiming that they are recieving revelations from the ALL MIGHTY, thats distortion at its utmost.

This claim that noone has the right to decide who is muslim and who isn`t sounds noble but i think i can claim with some surity that from the surface it looks like that George Bush is not a muslim, Bal Thakray is not a Muslim, Daniel Pipes just might not be a muslim, anyone and everyone that doesnt believe in the basic creed of our faith which i explained in my earlier post can not be considered a muslim, that doesnt mean he or she should be any less of a citizen, i truly believe that but having said that when the majority of Americans decided that they have reasons to pass a draconian law like patriot act because they felt it was for the good of their country, in the same manner any country`s majority should have the right to govern their lives. Put a hand on your heart and tell me if there was a fair and free refrendum today in pakistan regarding giving qadiyanis permission to openly propogate their religion, what do you think the response would be? When we become champions of democracy then we must not be selective. You have all the liberty of propogating your religion in in England , USA and almost the entire world. It doesn`t look like its sweeping the masses, but thats besides the point. You have every right to criticize our ullema, no one is stopping you, but if you claim that Mirza Ghulam Ahmed Qadiyani is the messanger of Allah swt, then expect a quandry, and don`t get frustrated.

Re: # 366saroya

[Biases restrict objective consideration of any issue]


objective consideration??????????

is there any???????????????????

Re: # 360, # 363

Biases restrict objective consideration of any issue.

Urstruly (#339)

To wrap things up … my explanations of “bhaghi” did not get through your thick skull … and you’ve been losing sleep over this for a long time now.

I had explained that root word “baghi” connotes oppressed, misguided, those from whom Allah’s blessings have departed. It is somewhat similar to Urdu word “baghi” … which suggests rebel, radical, dissenter etc.

I cited 3 Arabic references in support. But you demanded that I post scanned images of Arabic pages. I told you to buzz off, since your stubbornness is not my problem.

Here’s the link to our debate. You have mixed up your references which I explained to you in detail. Your stubbornness was followed by frustration and resignation. You have now slipped into denial … (not the river in Egypt). Dr. Sohail would have a field day with your case!

Click [Response to false accusation]

+++

I hope you have better things to keep you busy, you loser …

khurram (#362),

Short question, long answer … you better read all of it :-)

You indeed, I accept possibility of a recorded ahadith being unauthentic if it negates Quran. I am of the opinion that Prophet (pbuh) did not violate teachings of Quran.

As I understand, there are several avenues to understanding Quran. First and foremost, one must have humility and a sincere desire to discover truth. One should read, think, ponder, consult references (including ahadith!), pray to Allah Almighty for guidance …

+++

Some Quranic commandments are relatively simpler, and are consistent with universal standards and general human consciousness. These include emphasis on honesty, civility, how to conduct one’s self, how to treat others, etc.

If a hadith says something radically different from such Quranic commandments and does not sit well with one’s own conscience, it is wise to put that hadith on hold without rushing to judgment. This is the point of examples I cited earlier (#307).

A physics professor may very well be an atheist (or a religious devout!). However, one can still learn a thing or two about physics from him, without necessarily subscribing to his views. A person has to satisfy his own quest for truth. According to Quran each person will be responsible for his own thoughts and actions.

+++

Some Quranic verses make heavy use of metaphors, communicate deeper ideas, and hence, are difficult to grasp. Some Qruanic verses acknowledge this attribute of Quran itself. Perhaps such verses aim to encourage readers to reflect deeply, or hold deeper truths that will continue to unfold with passage of time …

When trying to understand such verses, one must make use of ideas of others as reference points to better his own understanding. These verses however, cannot be rightfully used to validate extremist ideas, in my view.

+++

After all is said and done, there is yet another way of viewing all this …

If you are wondering whether a straightforward idea may be slowly, imperceptibly stretched into a hideous ideology, my answer is ‘yes, indeed’ (esp. given that ’straightforward’ and ’hideous’ may very well be relative, somewhat abstract terms).

A book is as fragile as the mind reading it; any idea can be twisted to mean anything. And perhaps that’s part of the human dilemma … knowing when to say “when”, knowing when it is “enough”, and knowing when “more” is still needed.

Human existence is far too complex to be governed by hard and fast rules. On the other hand, rules that acknowledge human dilemma and are flexible enough to accommodate it, may be malleable enough where they may be stretched to fit somewhat radical notions. And therein lies the heart of the matter …

So after all is said and done, I see human heart as the seat of the divine … human mind as the battleground between god and satan. Enemy is not out there, but lies within. ”Satan is like blood running through one’s veins …” I recall reading a ahadith …