Muharram 10: ’Ashura: Commemorating Imam Hussain- The Prince of Martyrs

Re: # 115

HERE is the translation of this wonderfull sura from the glorious Quran;


In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

Say: He is God, the One and Only;

God, the Eternal, Absolute;

He begetteth not, nor is He begotten;

And there is none like unto Him.

Naqsh & Zee


An unadulterated Tauheed is the only thing that binds us like bricks in the wall (`bunyan al marsooss` in the words of Holy Prophet (pbuh)); and anything that weakens the Tauheed causes the schisms, as it is evident on this board.

Re: # 114

URS - I have been meaning to comment on this post. I agree with you about the core concept of tauheed and the fact that it brings the muslims all over the world together. In fact, that is a beautiful concept. On the one end, the concept of tauheed brings us together. But on the other end, there are issues and concerns where all Muslims do not see each other eye to eye. This should be acceptable as well. For if you won`t have the tolerance to accept different point of views among your own people, then there is no way that you will be open to entertaining people and opinions outside your own faith. In pluralistic societies, this will not take you anywhere. You will be creating more gaps than bridging the outstanding gaps. In addition, you will deprive yourself of the opportunity to learn as well as enlighten people who do not follow your faith.

What`s your take on that?

Re: # 189 ZahraJ

My take is this that, about 1200 years ago when Islam started spreading beyond the Arabian penninsula the early missionaries, preacers, and sufis did an informal ijtehad and allowed new converts to continue certain sultural practices of theirs to after baptizing the practices. This includes several Hindu marriage and death rites and their religious practices etc. For example Hindus have a religious practice of saying and counting mantra on date pits or on chickpeas when someone dies. The Muslim mujtahid of that time allowed this practice to new converts but by replacing mantra with Muslim prayers. Similarly, Hindu culture has a very strong religious practice of Bhajjan; as a matter of fact their religious practices are incomplete without singing and dancing. So Sufis baptized the practice into Quwwali. Elsewhere, the cultural practices of extreme form of pardah resulted in the current quagmire of pardah, niqab, and hijab. Over the time such practices (I must emphasize, `cultural practices`) have become a religion itself; which it is not. It was Ijtehad and new Ijtehad can replace an older Ijtehad.

So even though the ijtehad of that time can be sanctified as according to Qura`n and sunnah it has brought Muslims of different parts of world at odd with each other in current times. For example, a Morrocon Muslim has no clue what Quwwali is and similarly we wouldn`t understand the reason behind the female circumcision in Africa. So in order to counter these differences there is a world wide movement going on among Muslims to isolate the cultural practices that were allowed in faith from the pure unadulterated faith. A new informal ijtehad is underway. Those people who have a vested interest in keeping the status quo are afraid of this movement and try to malign it. Calling it rise of wahabism is just one such effort.

The proof of existence of such movement and how it is working is the North American model of Mosque. In these very mosques all people belonging to those very sects who would never ever go to each others mosque in their native lands stand shoulder to shoulder. No one minds if the guy standing next to you has wrapped his hands at the navel or at the chest. No one cares if someone is saying Amin in loud voice or in a whisper. There have been attempts to bring in the prejudices and jihalat of the old world here as well but an overwhelming majority of Muslims have rejected it.

I don`t know about Europe but the overwhelming majority of immigrants in North America have much higher rate of literacy then their European counterparts. In addition, it is a different time as well. The media and internet has eliminated the distances. Hence there is a greater need for uniformity and uniformity can only be achieved through going back to the basics. Whether we like it or not, this change is inevitable, the new order, and new ijtehad is bound to emerge, inshallah.

Re: # 192

In my last post, I wrote ``Those people who have a vested interest in keeping the status quo are afraid of this movement and try to malign it.`` Just to give you an idea what I mean by `vested interests`, consider this:

In Lahore, there is a shrine of Ali Hajweri, where hundereds of millions of people go every year. This shrine had an avarage daily income of Rs. 3-5 million, as they published sometime in mid 80`s. When I was young and ignorant I happened to visit the shrine once and I saw the room where they count the money (anyone could see it at that time). The room was about 10`x12` and there were about 6-8 people sitting on the floor who were sorting and counting money. Some other workers would bring sacks of money from different collection terminals and empty the currency right on the floor. The sacks were not ordinary sacks but one of those jute sacks used for storing wheat, commonly known as ``dou mann ki bori``. There was so much money on the floor that the people who were counting money inside were knee deep into it; not to mention the counted money stacked against the wall like bricks.

Now please tell me, would these people, who run this racket, invite people to righteous path of God or towards the grave worship of long dead people. Isn`t it in their interest to keep the people Jahil, ignorant, and superstitious? Wouldn`t they try to malign every voice that is raised against this clear shirk? I can understand an illiterate person but what about these supposedly literate people who are so much in love with their jihalat that they fail to recognaize the diffrence between shirk and Tauheed?

Thanks, Naqshbandi!

Naqsh and Zee

Fascinating stuff!

Does Islam/Quran also teach the concept ``Allah is the only true God/god?`` If so, what is this concept called?

Re: # 112

It is called Tawheed.

Naqshbandi,

I haven`t read any books. I just wrote what I`ve experienced and have come to believe as the truth.

Rgds.

I meant Zeemax` posts 105 and 107.

Linking that back to this article topic about Imam Hussain (upon him be peace), his noble father, the fourth caliph and first Imam, Sayyidina Ali ibn Abi Talib, the Saint of God, is reported to have said, ``I do not worship I God I cannot see`` and the ulama/sufis believe this to mean that Mawla Ali saw God --with the eyes of his heart not with the eyes of his head (that is impossible except for the Messenger sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam on the night of Miraj)--each time he did sajdah (prostrated in ritual prayer).

Allahu Akbar! It is also possible for saints to have spiritual visions of Allah and indeed the books of the saints [awliya] are full of such descriptions using figuratie language. Allah`s Habib sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam said, ``I saw my Lord in the most beautiful form`` and there are other hadith too. Imam Abu Hanifa--whose school of jurisprudence the majority of Muslims follow--is said to have seen Allah in his dream 100 times!

That is why Imam Ghazali described the sufi path as the only path of certainty.

Zeemax,

Masha Allah bro, I have to admit that alhough our understanding of Islam differs at times, I found your post 105 very succint and beautiful.

Kaalchakra,

Yes, the concept of Allah which Zeemax describes is definitely in the Koran (and the hadith too). Verses such as, ``Wherever you turn, there is the Face of God`` and, ``God is closer to the believers than their jugular vein`` are proof-texts for the foundations of the spiritual aspects of Islam aka tassawuf in Arabic and Sufism in English.

There is also the famous Hadith of the Prophet which is known as the hadith of Gabriel. It is very long but basically the Prophet described to Gabriel 3 layers of Islam: Islam, Iman and Ihsan with the last corresponding to the highest states of the Sufi saints and which the Prophet said was, `to worship God as if you SEE him and if you do not see him to know that He sees you`. i.e. it is a very immanent idea of God whereas the first stage, for the common Muslim, is ritualistic and God is very transcendent.

Similarities between the spiritual dimensions of Islam and aspects of Eastern religions have been studied by academics. The best book on the topic is probably Sachiko Muratas`, The Tao of Islam.

or the books of or beloved Shaykh Abu Bakr Siraj akl Din aka Dr. Martin Lings.

Afterthought to elaborate on the postscript to #107 ...

....Conduct and Conduct alone....

..... that prescribed conduct is not all goody goody Reader`s Digest conduct of rescuing stray dogs from oncoming trains. It includes pretty nasty stuff.

Cheers.

#106 by kaalchakra

Yaar Kaalchakra ... you pose very profound questions.

It was just an advice to ZahraJ who really wanted to know if it was OK to visit Temples and Churches. I just told her it was fine as long as she believed in `Tauheed`. I have paid respects to inanimate Moortis in my Hindu friends` homes while staying with them just as their own family several times. I`ve also prayed in Churches as well as sat with Budhist monks in Thailand. My best and dearest friends are Jews.

Tauheed means `Oneness with God`, or in other words ``A Single Unified Reality of Everything``. As you may see on my Interactor Profile page here, Einstein agreed.

Islam in its deepest understanding is nothing but `Tauheed`. That is the core and the sole belief (Allah) for those who can discover that reality through arduous experience and it isn`t easy. That`s the stuff of people like Dr. Muhammad Iqbal, and there`s nothing mightier than that. People who get there easily, perform miracles.

For those who cannot get there because of limitations of intellectual capacity, next level is the prescribed code of conduct which is less arduous, but leads in the same direction.

And for those who can do neither of the above, they can just follow rituals, say La Ilaha Illalah, pray five times a day, fast in Ramzaan, go for Hajj, and that`s ok too as long as they do it with sincerity and not to deceive themselves or anyone else.

Your next question, yes, this is the concept of God presented in the Quran.

And thirdly no, it does not reflect the average Muslim`s understanding of God. But you see, it doesn`t have to, in order to have committed followers. There`s blind Faith in Quran as well.

It is rather difficult to explain, but my best attempt would be that it says if you really want to know, you can. But if you can`t, there`s someone up there who`s telling you what it is all about and you don`t have to lose any sleep over it. Just do it and you`ll be OK. That is Blind Faith. And it works upon hundreds and hundreds of millions quite effortlessly.

I`ve written before on how immensely powerful just the intonation of the Quran is, let alone the meaning. Quran inspires just by recitation without even needing to tell what it means to non-Arabic speakers. This is the power of the Quran. It is a living miracle to this day.

Hope I succeeded in addressing your questions. I`ll be very glad if I did.

Cheers.

(P.S. To answer in advance your follow-up question as to in which of the three categories do I fall? It is the second. Conduct and Conduct alone. Can`t aspire for the first.)

``God is one and nothing seperates any animate or inanimate object from God, and that includes yourself.``

Zee, vow, is that the concept of God as presented in the Quran? I ask because it sounds too Eastern, and is quite different from the way people of semitic traditions practically appraoch the subject of God. Also, do you think it reflects an average Muslim`s understanding of God?

ZahraJ,

If you believe in Tauheed ... i.e. God is one and nothing seperates any animate or inanimate object from God, and that includes yourself, then you can go to anyone`s place of worship and pay your respects.

Rgds.

Zahra,

I have failed to follow your perspective … and no one asked you to jump in these skirmishes anyway. You warned me against condescending prophets. I have explained that prophets of all faiths are extremely respectable for me and I cannot imagine maligning them or their followers in any way. However, I have maintained, if you look closely, it is the “ullema” who have maligned and abused Mirza Sahib and Ahmadis … and violently persecuted the Ahmadi-Muslim community.

I poke fun at views of ullema only when their verdicts are used to validate persecution of Ahamdis and hatred and violence against others. Hateful propaganda has consequences. Read #103 from Kulharee. Every now and then I hear about Ahmadis being martyred in mosques, homes, shops and streets. I can cite numerous accounts of mobs attacking mosques and houses of Ahmadis in towns and villages in Pakistan. None of this gets reported due to fear of repercussions from mullah. Many more Muslims (from other sects) are killed and hurt owing to general sectarian violence stemming from ullema’s fanatic teachings. It’s not just Ahmadis, but everyone suffers.

Problem lies not with what I wrote, but somewhere else. And if you still want to pursue who is maligning who … and who is hurting who … start with Naqsh … the very author of this article …. who does not tire of talking about taqwaa and ways to achieve nearness to the divine. Refer to #101 for some details. Also question Urstruly and zeemax on their views that Ahmadis are engaged in anti-Pakistan and anti-Islam activities. What is the basis of such claims? … I remain curious. Also ask abu_safwaan about his hatred for Ahmadis … there seems to be no rhyme or reason for what he feels. Why does law of Pakistan make it illegal for an Ahmadi to practice Islam?

Is this what Islam teaches us? Are these the examples set by the dear Prophet of Islam (pbuh). These are the questions you should be asking. And your questions should be directed towards the ummah and custodian of its faith, and not me. And if you still don’t get it, I have little idea of what you were trying to achieve …

Sattar - I did read what you wrote. My question had a different perspective in mind. By writing it in black and white, I am in the process of getting further clarity. I am sorry but I cannot distract myself from jumping into your ongoing skirmishes. My apologies if you mistook my earlier post addressed to you. I sensed sarcasm there. I guess there was a reference to the context and perhaps I did not pay much attention to it. Let me carry on with my delusions. To each their own :)