Ramadan Special: Tales of Sufi Wisdom

Naqsbandi ..nobody can hijack these great aulias great deeds...

our future generations will feel proud over them....for thier great effort for islam...

my article on the miracles of the saints has been hijacked by geopolitics again! Aaagh!!!!

hamid writes "he gave you the opportunity but you just didn't have it in you to make the passing grade .."

The White man gave me the "opportunity" to be his second rate slave and get some crumbs and benefits while bowing to him. I chose the path of independance, where I challenged the elite,that went to Harvard and MIT on their face and walked out victorious- no 6 figure income can ever accomplish that....

As for tahmed, the sob is a hypocrite and when stumped feigns being decent and civilized (while rallying for the Iraq war in which over 1.2 million innocents have been killed according to recent surveys). And Manto, the effing twerp, all he wants is to worship the dead criminal MAJ, who is a total non factor in Pakistan these days except as cultural legitimation for siding with the neo-colonials and the US elite in their "enlightened moderation" and "democracy" even as they butcher people at will and wheel and deal behind the scenes in order to control this land which has become the whore of the West, a disgrace not only to the Muslims but to all free people everywhere.

Dawah-i-dil

begum

we would love to see how much love you have in your heart for an idolator??

Re: # 277

masadi,

..... tahmed and manto are gentlemen and too polite to put you where you belong ..... so, let me remind you that you are a miserable fool and a nincompoop full of poop ...... you are a failure who couldn't make it in the great land of opportunity where my sprinkler guy's son has made it to the harvard business school and where you had to subsist on government cheese and community college wages ........ don't take it out on the white man - he gave you the opportunity but you just didn't have it in you to make the passing grade ......... shame on you !

thanks, mantolives, for your words of support. It is indeed true that strong language is no substitute for weak arguments.

Tahmed,

Masadi resorts to such language because he can't win arguments through logic. It is only natural that the frustrated professor resorts to what he knows best.

I think it is all Jinnah's fault really... had he not made Pakistan... Masadi would be a mere hawaldar in some far flung army unit during la ree la(left right left).

masadi #277

you call me a "miserable fool" - you are entitled to your opinion.

you call me a "damn criminal". Expressing one's opinion does not make one a criminal. Except in a dictatorship.

you use the above abusive language because you dont agree with my statement that the 1964 civil rights act was a giant step forward in race relations. I dont argue with abusive posters - and so wont waste time with you except to say that you are entitled to your views.

No I am just not convinced of that entire line of argument...

Re: # 273

Now you are being smart after the fact; which is something that everybody can do.

tahmed writes "And muslim countries find it much harder to progress beyond their obsolete traditions than truly progressive societies like the US did after the above video was made, when it took a giant step towards national integration as a result of the civil rights act of 1964."

This miserable fool, how he never misses an opportunity to say the hamd o naat of his objects of worship the US system and its elite. No "giant step" was taken in 1964, the civil rights efforts were coopted and its major figures killed by deceit and we see what happened thereafter, till today we see over a third of young African American youth incarcerated, having several times the likelihood of being lynched- executed by this white Criminal Justice System, having unemployment double that of whites, poverty almost double that of whites, life expectancy much less than whites and job segregation that segregates them in low paying janitorial jobs, as well as housing segregation that is of the highest percent anywhere in the developed world. What great steps please explain, and no first generation immigrants if they happen to be of color can compete at par with the whites this is just part of the "great american celebration" mythology. And to add to that what this damn criminal tahmed does is he blames the blacks for race based politics when they are vicitims of racism, he is in fact blaming the victims for the crimes of the ruling white elite who have set a system that allocates life chances based on skin color. Not only that he then has the audacity to blame dependant countries, underdeveloped countries of not progressing because they have such exclusionary traditions- no tradition can equal how the white race, its elite have oppressed the colored folk all over the world both during colonization (which this miserable immoral fool supports) and thereafter......Beware of such enemies of the people

"Ironic isn't it that the sufis almost completely supported the Pakistan Movement"

manto, I am so very glad you said that. There are so many things one simply does not say (clearly) lest too many people have their cherished illusions borken into a million pieces all at the same time.

"... while those with the straitjacket view of Islam stood against Pakistan Movement abusing Jinnah as Kafir"

Re: # 236

Jayp

"The problem comes only when the book is said to contain all the truths and other religious people are to be killed."

Ironic isn't it that the sufis almost completely supported the Pakistan Movement ... while those with the straitjacket view of Islam stood against Jinnah abusing him as Kafir. Your pathetic understanding of history has so many holes in it that it looks like swiss cheese.

I'd say little knowledge is dangerous and you are the most dangerous of those who possess little knowledge.


Achyuth Patwardhan, one of the Socialist stalwarts in the Congress, has given a remarkably candid and self critical analysis of the Congress Party vis-a-vis Khilafat: 'It is, however, useful to recognise our share of this error of misdirection. To begin with, I am convinced that looking back upon the course of development of the freedom movement, THE 'HIMALAYAN ERROR' of Gandhiji's leadership was the support he extended on behalf of the Congress and the Indian people to the Khilafat Movement at the end of the World War I. This has proved to be a disastrous error which has brought in its wake a series of harmful consequences. On merits, it was a thoroughly reactionary step. The Khilafat was totally unworthy of support of the Progressive Muslims. Kemel Pasha established this solid fact by abolition of the Khilafat. The abolition of the Khilafat was widely welcomed by enlightened Muslim opinion the world over and Kemel was an undoubted hero of all young Muslims straining against Imperialist domination. But apart from the fact that Khilafat was an unworthy reactionary cause, Mahatma Gandhi had to align himself with a sectarian revivalist Muslim Leadership of clerics and maulvis. He was thus unwittingly responsible for jettisoning sane, secular, modernist leadership among the Muslims of India and foisting upon the Indian Muslims a theocratic orthodoxy of the Maulvis. Maulana Mohammed Ali's speeches read today appear strangely incoherent and out of tune with the spirit of secular political freedom. The Congress Movement which released the forces of religious liberalism and reform among the Hindus, and evoked a rational scientific outlook, placed the Muslims of India under the spell of orthodoxy and religious superstition by their support to the Khilafat leadership. Rationalist leaders like Jinnah were rebuffed by this attitude of Congress and Gandhi. This is the background of the psychological rift between Congress and the Muslim League'.

and

'Since the Khilafat agitation, things have changed and it has been one of the many injuries inflicted on India by the encouragement of the Khilafat crusade, that the inner Muslim feeling of hatred against 'unbelievers' has sprung up, naked and unashamed, as in years gone by'.

and

A terrible and gruesome fallout of the disastrous Khilafat experiment of Mahatma Gandhi was the Moplah Rebellion in Malabar District in 1921. According to the Report of the ENQUIRY COMMITTEE OF SERVANTS OF INDIA SOCIETY, the number of Hindus murdered by Moplah Muslims was 1500, the number of Hindus forcibly converted 20,000 and the value of property looted about Rs three crore. When the national and local leaders appealed to the virulently anti-Hindu Moplah Muslims in the name of Mahatma Gandhi to follow the ways of peace and non-violence, they replied bluntly with Islamic fervour: 'GANDHI IS A KAFIR, HOW CAN HE BE OUR LEADER?' Dr Anne Besant declared: 'The Moplah Muslim marauders murdered and plundered abundantly, killed or drove away all Hindus who would not apostatize. Somewhere about 100,000 people were driven from their homes with nothing but the clothes they had on, stripped of everything'. She also accused all the Khilafat religious preachers for all this terrible atrocities. J Campbell, chief of the Intelligence Department, Government of India, held the Khilafat leaders squarely responsible for inciting racial hatred resulting in Moplah carnage.

http://www.newstodaynet.com/2006sud/06aug/2208ss1.htm

Mahatma Gandhi's attempt to harness the feeling for the cause of national independence backfired and led to the uprising in Kerala known as the Moplah Rebellion. It took the British several months to put it down at the cost of thousands of lives.



Moplahs were very much part of the grand Khilafat Movement that Gandhi was spearheading and Gandhi kept apologising for them


The Dravidian Moplahs had directed their revolt with class venom against some Aryan high-caste Hindus with property as well as Britishers: Brahmanical elements tried to use that to spark a crisis in Hindu-Muslim relations all over India. Gandhi tried to hold a balance: like the U.S. press and the Negro nationalists who read it he stressed that the Moplah uprising could be made part of a united drive for independence by Indians of all sects.But he was also aware of the pan-Islamic dimension: in a December 1921 call to the British to suspend their attacks against the Moplahs, he was to observe that the Moplahs saw themselves as fighting for a religion with methods they considered religious: Yogesh Chadha, Rediscovering Gandhi (London: Century 1997) p. 254.


And lets not forget the Tehreek-e-Hijrat Fatwa that Gandhi's right hand man Azad gave to Muslims which gave Muslims two options "JEHAD" or "HIJRAT".

The Muslim Ulema, thinkers and activists called for the boycott of foreign goods and non-cooperation with the British government. Meetings were organised in order to rally the masses to support these issues. The meetings were organised under the banner of Mo’tamar al-Ansar (The Workers Conference) and various newspapers such as Al-Hilal of Maualana Abul Kalam Azad and The Comrade of Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar. Both Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad and Maulana Maulana Mohammad Ali Jauhar were put behind bars for publishing anti-British articles in their newspapers. The latter spent four years in prison between 1911 and 1915CE.


The allegiance of the Muslim intelligentsia of India at that to the Khilafah is unquestionable. Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad summed up their view when he wrote in his newspaper al-Hilal on 6th November 1912 that the Ottoman Sultans possessed the only sword which Muslims had for their protection. Insofar as the “caliphate was essentially a religious integration of the shari’a�, it became “necessary by revelation, is of God’s institution and that obedience to its authority is farz, or positively commanded�.


The Khilafat Movement


In September 1919, Maulana Muhammad Ali and his brother Shaukat Ali, together with Maulana Abdul Kalam Azad, Dr. Mukhtar Ahmed Ansari, and Hasrat Mohani, started a new organization, the Khilafat Movement (1919-1924). Their avowed aim was to use whatever leverage they had to protect the Khilafah. They organized Khilafat Conferences in several northern Indian cities. It is noticeable that the scholars and activists that were part of the Khilafat movement came from different schools of thought and backgrounds, for example Maulana Abul Kalam Azad was known to be a ‘ghayr taqleedi’ (non-taqleedi – who believed Taqleed to Mazahib is prohibited) and Maulana Mahmood Hasan was Deobandi who are followers of the Hanafi Mazhab yet they were united in the objective of working for the maintenance of the Khilafah.


In 1919, the Bombay Khilafat Committee agreed on two important organisational goals: “first, to urge the retention of the temporal powers of the Sultan of Turkey as Caliph, and second to ensure his continued suzerainty over the Islamic holy places.�

Delivering the presidential address at the Calcutta meeting of the Bengal Provincial Khilafat Conference in 1920, Maulana Azad discussed the importance of Khilafah he declared, “the purpose of this institution was to organise and lead the Muslim community in the right path, to establish justice, to bring about peace, and to spread God’s word in the world. For all this it was absolutely necessary for the caliph to possess temporal power�. Maulana Azad had no doubt that “without an Imam, their lives were un-Islamic and that they would be damned after death�.


Maulana Azad published a book in 1920 called Masla-e-Khilafat (The Issue of Khilafah), he stated: “Without the Khilafah the existence of Islam is not possible, the Muslims of India with all their effort and power need to work for this�.

In the same book page 176 Maulana Azad said, “There are two types of ahkam shariah, the first is related to the individual like the commands and prohibitions, the fara’id (obligations) and wajibat in order to perfect oneself. The second is not related to the individual but is related to the Ummah, nation, collective obligations and state politics like the conquering of lands, political and economic laws�.

According to Peter Hardy, Maulana Azad believed that, “The Muslim who would separate religion and politics for Muslims is an apostate who works silently�.


The loss of political power in India and the threat posed by a combination of forces to the temporal authority of the caliph, was so worrisome for the leaders of the Muslim community that some of them felt compelled to issue fatwas ‘in favour of migration (hijra)’ from India.


Maulana Abul Kalam Azad issued a fatwa which was published in the daily Ahl-e-Hadith of Amritsar on 30 July 1920. In his fatwa he urged Hijrat from India as an alternative to non-cooperation with the British. (YLH's note: Was the Hijaz Born Azad a "Wahabi"... note "Ahle-Hadith)

Maulana Abdul Bari’s fatwa said, “every Muslim residing here should adopt non-cooperation but if (that is) impossible, should proceed for hijrat�. Maulana Shaukat Ali issued a statement on behalf of the Central Khilafat Committee, “expressing the hope that all dedicated Muslims would stay in India and work for the non-cooperation. Only if it did not succeed would they consider resorting to hijrat�. The impact of the fatwa was electrifying and thousands of Muslims preferred to leave the Dar al harb of India where their religious rights symbolized in the position of the Turkish Caliph was being infringed.


And most amazing was the fact that Gandhi's encouragement led to Deobandi ulema creating the Jamiat ulema Hind ... which in its numerous forms and heads plagues South Asia even today... and all these groups are spin offs of the same.


All this came about before Two Nation Theory and Jinnah's conversion to Muslim separatism. Give credit where its due... or are you so shameless as to continue to deny the facts?

Re: # 229

So in other words the Pir was proving the dishonesty of an imposter nabi by bluffing like crazy?

Now while I can appreciate your argument on a secular level even though I still don't see how it would constitute Mirza's assent to such obnoxious standard of evidence... On a religious level this whole bluffing business becomes very suspect.

#270

Chalta "The representation of your authentic Islam is evident all the way from philippines to the US. Where ever there is a sizable minority of authentic muslims, there is conflict. Such ideology doesn't seem very practical at all, regardless of your hopeful wishes."

How many of Islamic people By and large much much larger no Muslims ( majority misrepresented by you}are content just as many a Hindus.The fact Hindus did not spread out side Indian Peninsula b/C Himalayas ..The three sides water and before that British Mastered Navigation to explain Why Hindus could not venture outside .Its not some esoteric voluntary decision but geographical limitation.

Much lager number of Muslims from One End of The World To other are living just as peacefully as Indians .If few Philines are added to Southern Thai few And even Palestinians and Alkieda the leaves vast number of Muslims far outnumber the nonpeacful but so are Naxal ,LTTE ,Bodo are not represntative of larger Indians.The afghanistan & iraq is differernt case all together for obvious reason