Protest in New York!

Sorry for taking up this space, but this is important:

ATTENTION PAKISTANI PROFESSIONALS:

Dastak - Network of Pakistani Professionals would like to invite you to their monthly ``Networking Night.``

Thursday, September 28th

Time Hotel

224 W 49th St.

(between 8th and Broadway)

New York City

(212) 246 - 5252

Doors open at 6:30pm sharp

COMPLIMENTARY ADMISSION TO ALL

Age 21 and over: Please bring your business card

Professional/Business attire recommended

RSVP via email by 9/26 at rsvp@dastak.org

for more information, visit Dastak online at:

www.dastak.org

re: fairdinkum

Worthy or not, where I come from its customary to address the descendants of Banu Hashim as Shahjis :-).

How`s our hockey team doing?

janjua,

I am not worthy of the title you used to address me.
Ok, perhaps Muawyiah was a bad example :)

Regarding Hamidm`s posts.

There are many people at chowk who belong to one class or another, but Hamidm is a class by himself. Somebody mentioned his posts should be collected and posted as a separate column, that will be a great idea. He posseses a great skill where irony of the subcontinent is blended with his wit, and his dotted style. As Dost-Mittar mentions, he does not need any defense. But Hamdim, if Pakistanis are mad at you, you can write more about we the monkey-worshippers across the border. We really do not mind (here taking the liberty of the hardliners); But do not stop:)

Re: fairdinkum

``Shias openly declare some of the sahaabas to be hypocrites who converted to Islam after the fall of Mecca. There are some big names included in the list of sahaabas who are directly or indirectly drawn in, by shias, in the category of hypocrites – Hazrat Ameer Moaviah is one such name. They also dispute the righteousness/spiritual position of first three Caliphs of Islam. They consider them political leaders of Islamic empire rather than successors of Prophet Mohammad (S) in the spiritual sense.``

Shahji I don`t know what Shias believe, but I would consider Ameer Muawyiah`s revolt against Ali as a counter-revolution to Islam. The decline of Islam in the spritual sense started with the murder of Usman & Muawyiah openly accusing Ali responsible for it. Muawyiah`s father was Abu Sufyan who along with Abu Jahal were the worst enemies of Muhammad & Islam. He was one of the planners of Muhammad`s assasination before Hijrat to Mecca and the leader of Kuffar at Uhad. Abu Sufyan and his family converted to Islam on the day before the conquest of Mecca. And at Siffin many sahabas (shian-i-Ali/companions of Ali) openly taunted him on this fact. We all know about the illustrious son of Muawiyah-Yazid. Muawyiah is also accused of poisoning Hassan and conspiring to murder Ali. The battles of Jamal & Siffin (the first civil wars) were the turning point.

Khokan #155

In religious matter Pakistan and India has no comparision constitutionally. If Pakistan can be compared, it should be with other Muslim countries. Many of them has Islam as a state religion.

It includes pragmatic country like Malaysia and orthodox like Saudi Arabia.

Can you make Hinduism the religion of India? Although you can elect RSS/BJP, but cannot make Hinduism the religion of India. Apart from the beaten slogan of Democracy and Secularism, can you tell me any other reason why it cannot be done? If you cannot give, I can give you.

Re: OMAR1947 et al

Omar, and to the rest of the Pakistanis, please stop quoting Jinnah`s speech of September 11, 1947. Those words are about as meaningless, given the present political-social-cultural context of Pakistan, as the words of our consititution protecting our phantom civil rights.

That speech will not change an iota of reality in Pakistan and what Pakistan, as a nation, needs is deeds and not words!

The fact that Jinnah died one later, on September 11, 1948, should tell you something about the importance of that speech!

Ciao!

Excerpt from M.A Jinnah`s Speech to Constituent Assembly, August 11 1947

If you change your past and work together in a spirit that everyone of you, no matter to what community he belongs, no matter what relations he had with you in the past, no matter what is his colour, caste or creed, is first, second and last a citizen of this State with equal rights, privileges, and obligations, there will be on end to the progress you will make.

I cannot emphasize it too much. We should begin to work in that spirit and in course of time all these angularities of the majority and minority communities, the Hindu community and the Muslim community, because even as regards Muslims you have Pathans, Punjabis, Shias, Sunnis and so on, and among the Hindus you have Brahmins, Vashnavas, Khtaris, also Bengalis, Madrasis and so on, will vanish. Indeed if you ask me, this has been the biggest hindrance in the way of India to attain the freedom and independence and but for this we would have been free people long long ago. No power can hold another nation, and specially a nation of 400 million souls in subjection; nobody could have conquered you, and even if it had happened, nobody could have continued its hold on you for any length of time, but for this. Therefore, we must learn a lesson from this. You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place or worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State. As you know, history shows that in England conditions, some time ago, were much worse than those prevailing in India today. The Roman Catholics and the Protestants persecuted each other. Even now there are some States in existence where there are discriminations made and bars imposed against a particular class. thank God, we are not starting in those days. We are starting in the days where there is no discrimination, no distinction between one community and another, no discrimination between one caste or creed and another. We are starting with this fundamental principle that we are all citizens and equal citizens of one State. the people of England in course of time had to face the realities The people of England in course of time had to face the realities of the situation and had to discharge the responsibilities and burdens placed upon them by the government of their country and they went through that fire step by step. Today, you might say with justice that Roman Catholics and Protestants do not exist; what exists now is that every man is a citizen, an equal citizen of Great Britain and they are all members of the Nation.

Now I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State.

Re: fairdinkum, Urstruly, Kant Patel

The way I read sattar2`s post, I think he was saying that there`s nothing in the Quran that says Muhammad was the last prophet.

This doesn`t seem like a faith-based/unprovable hypothesis to me. Either there are claims in the Quran that Muhammad is the last Prophet or not. (okay, if there are statements that are interpreted variously... that would again make it faith based... but let us see what those statements are.)

He states that Ahmedis accept that the Quran is final/complete/unchangeable word of God but dispute that Muhammad was the last prophet... but since the Quran in no way implies that Muhammad is the Last Prophet, objections to their (Ahmedis`) ``muslimhood`` are ``extra-quranic``.

It seems fair to me that Ahmedis can claim that the majority is indulging in unfair ``bundling`` and that they(Ahmedis) can demand to see proof that the Muhammad is indeed stated to be the final prophet in the Quran.

Re Temporal (#145):

Here are some comments according to my understanding of prophethood and Ahmadiyyat.

A prophet is someone who is recipient of revelations from God Almighty. These revelations can be in several forms, some of which are: infusion of a divine idea in the mind, revelations through the faculty of hearing, in the form of dreams, through the agency of an angel (say Angel Gabriel). I understand that revelations through Angel Gabriel are reserved exclusively for law-bearing prophets, and since the Law has been completed (i.e. Quran), the door to this mode of revelations has been closed forever. However the possibility of other modes of revelations is still open, and non-law bearing prophets to come will continue to receive revelations through these modes.

This definition is fine and dandy for someone who claims to be a prophet. But as I understand it, the issue you are raising is how do the others decide if a claimant of prophethood is true or not.

The answer lies in common Muslim belief that a false claimant of prophethood does not flourish in his goal and does not escape divine punishment. This principle is explained in the Quran, where referring to Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him), is stated: “If he had fabricated any saying and attributed it to Us, We would surely have seized him by the right hand and then surely We would have severed his life artery, and not one of you could have held Us from it” (69:39-48). Here Lord Almighty has promised that He’d square off the account with anyone who fabricates lies against Him.

Another important point is regarding the life-style and character of the claimant of prophethood. Prophets lead a spotless and righteous life, and are known for it, even before they claim to be prophets. I understand that in Quran is stated something to the effect that prophets have been raised from among you. This message, among other implications, seems to hint that if you have known a person to be righteous, and swear by his honesty, then his claim to prophethood deserves serious consideration and further inquiry. This seems to explain why Prophet Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon him) asked the people of Quraish if they believed in his truthfulness. When people responded in affirmation, Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him) proceeded to give them the message from Allah.

But it does not end here. Arrival of a prophet is, at least in some cases, foretold in earlier scriptures etc. Prophets enjoy divine support throughout their lifetimes. They are gifted with signs that support their truthfulness (these signs may be called “miracles”, although it is important to understand that miracles do not violate laws of nature). Based on divine revelations prophets are able to make grand prophecies, which are fulfilled either during their lives, or later. Their prayers have a very high acceptance rate. Their initial followers are typically deprived from a material standpoint, are persecuted, but eventually overcome the opposition and establish rules for running a society that are based upon truth, compassion, and utmost belief in Oneness of God. Prophets make bold statements in support of truth, enjoy success in their lifetimes, their mission is never frustrated, and they set stellar examples for their followers.

Reflection, pondering over, combined with prayer, pleading Allah Almighty for guidance will always resolve the issue whether a person is a true prophet or not. Although none of this would be needed and things would be “easier”, if say, the true claimant of prophethood grew orange horns on his head overnight. But for whatever reasons, this does not happen. When Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him) was mocked by people and was asked to go to heaven and bring them some proof, he (peace and blessings be upon him) replied that glory be to my Lord. This reply implies that providing such proofs is not consistent with Majesty and Grandeur of the Lord. One has to exercise intellect and prayers to understand the divine message.

Speaking of signs in support of prophets, I think that one of the signs mentioned in the Bible about the Second Coming of the Messiah is about the sun and the moon becoming dark. Quran also hints at this by stating in Sureh-e-Qiamah “And the moon is eclipsed. And the sun and the moon are brought together”. A hadith quoted of Prophet Mohammed (peace and blessings be upon him) hints at the lunar eclipse on the first night in the month of Ramadan, and solar eclipse on the middle day in the month of Ramadan, signs that have not appeared since the beginning, as a show of divine support for the Mahdi. Mirza Ghulam Sahib (peace be upon him) claimed to be the Mahdi and Messiah in the year 1891 AD and the aforementioned eclipses occurred in the month of Ramadan in the year 1894 AD. This is but one of many divine signs attesting to the truthfulness of the Promised Messiah.

Accepting or rejecting a prophet is up to each individual. Islam does not profess coercion in these matters. People sometimes expect “miracles” (beyond the limits of physical laws) from prophets. Stories get spun. Stories about Adam and Eve being first humans living in paradise, Moses parting the Red Sea, Essa physically ascending to the skies and on and on. At the time of Prophet Jesus, people were expecting the 2nd coming of Prophet Elijah, who had supposedly ascended to the skies in his physical form earlier, as a forerunner to the Messiah. When Jesus (peace be upon him) was asked about Elijah, he mentioned that John the Baptist had come in the spirit of Elijah. Some people accepted Issa-ibne-Marriam (peace be upon him) as the Messiah, while others kept waiting for the physical descent of Prophet Elijah from the sky to mark the arrival of the Messiah. To this day, the Jewish clergy awaits the Messiah - the first one. Sad part is that when the Messiah came to them, two thousand years ago, he was rejected and crucified.

As for someone else from outside the Ahmadi faith claiming prophethood and declaring Ahmadiyyat to be false is concerned, I believe that such a person will not be able to live up to his claims. Islam does not profess coercion in religious matters. In its true sense it accepts prophethood of Prophets Ram, Krishna, Buddha, Zaratushtra, Confucius and more (peace be upon them). It is not up to the people to take matters in their own hands and to act like the army of god out to punish the non-believers. Islam teaches patience, mutual respect, and perseverance. If someone attributes lies towards Allah, I firmly believe that he will be frustrated in his plans in ways obvious to others. Time will attest to it.

As for explanation of the terms … “Ahmadi” and “Qadiani” are somewhat interchangeable terms. Ahmadiyyat is the faith that accepts Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, India, as a prophet of God, as the 2nd coming of the Prophet Issa (i.e. the long-awaited Promised Messiah) and as the Imam Mahdi for this age. After the death of the Promised Messiah, “Khilafat” was started, with the chosen Caliph as the supreme head of the Ahmadiyya community. Some of the Ahmadis (mainly from the city of Lahore in Pakistan) were at odds with Khilafat and wanted the governing body of the Ahmadiyya community with its president to be the in charge of running the community. This group is referred to as the Lahori group. As I understand it, the Lahori group has dwindled in size over the years and now consists of less then a few thousand members.

I’ll pause here for now. I am yet to respond to other issues raised in several other posts. And I will, at the earliest opportunity. I now have to wrap up this reply, head home, and pick up some bread and milk on the way. It’s late at night, and I am still sitting in my office. The janitor came by, hoping to find me gone, so that he can vacuum the place and empty the trash bin.

I hope my response helps. I hope my comments about Jewish faith do not offend anyone. I also hope that my belief about finality of prophethood makes sense to others. If not now, then maybe later.

Best regards,

Asad Sattar

Dear readers,

I was filling up Pak Passport Renewal form for someone the other day and I came accross the following declaration:

DECLARATION IN CASE OF MUSLIMS

I, (name) s/o (father`s name) Aged (age) hereby solemnly declare that:

i. I am Muslim and beleive in the absolute and unqualified finality of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) the last of the prophets.

ii. I do not recognise any person who claims to be a prophet in any sense of the word or of any description whatsoever after Muhammad (peace be upon him) or recognise such a claimant as prophet or religious reformer as a Muslim.

iii. I consider Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani to be an imposter nabi and also consider his followers, whether belonging to the Lahori or Qadiani group, to be non-Muslim

Signature
Thumb Impression
Date.

I happen to know at least one case when a Muslim Human Rights Activist (forgot his name and gender) did not complete the Declaration and he was stamped ``Non-Muslim`` in the religion column of the Passport.

So it is safe to assume that filling this coulumn is mandatory; failure to do so will result in the stamping of ``Non-Muslim``. (There are no specifics in the instructions though).

I was once shocked to see its parallel in case of a Russian Passports where Jews and Muslims have to declare their faith and they are marked as Jew or Muslim (I only saw a Jew`s Passport)and not ``non-Christians``.

If by any chance this declaration (on Pak Passports) is made voluntary and religion column is stamped as ``un-declared`` would we be able to draw parallels with ``Dont ask dont tell policy`` of the US. Would it be acceptable to Ahmadis.

I am also under the assumption that this declaration on passports were made mandatory under the pressure of Saudi Government because Ahmadiat is considered to be mainly a Pakistani phenomenon.

Any thougts on the above?

Kant,

The purpose of my post was to introduce you to some of the inner workings of Mussalmans :).
But I must warn you that I am not qualified to do that :) and this is why I encourage mullahs / religionists on chowk.

re sattar2 I concur with your view. His argument is antithetical to his desire.
I also gave him a friendly advice not to engage in this futile debate on beliefs. As you rightly pointed out, how can such arguments be tested rationally? If rest of the Muslim world does not want to agree with Ahmedis, what can Ahmedis do? I think their best bet is to ask Pakistani government to grant them their fundamental human right to practice their religion – no matter what beliefs are. And stop persecuting them because of their religious beliefs.

As for the blasphemy laws, I have said enough… they cannot be justified on any ground - including religious grounds.

urstruly,

I will reply to your post depending on my mood, which is currently tied to the performance of our hockey team :) Look, kafirs have always done well in this faani dunya… reward/punishment for the chosen ones who assemble cars while sticking to your emaan will be decided on the day of the judgement :) and according to sattar 14th century should have been the end of your tortures wait :) You better ask mullahs why you are still assembling cars while kafirs are having a swell time :)

fairdinkum #157,

I fully agree with your thread. Let me add that my argument was in no way meant to be a criticism, or a slight towards any faith. It was an obsrvation in absolute and not relative (to mullah, clerics` beliefs). Just want to make a point of futility of sattar2`s plea to debate to convince others to undo their beliefs (while he is sure of his). Thats all!

Kant......

RE: Kant Patel #156

I agree with Fairdinkum #157 with the admission that I have extremely limited knowledge of faith; but as a follower I agree.

Kant Patel #156


``Please allow me, IMOW, to extend your own thread regarding the issues of `finality` of Quran, Prophet, etc.

These cannot be settled by any length of debate or discussions since they are not facts, they are beliefs, faith, and, therefore, cannot withstand

the tests of rationality. Almost every prophet, who claimed to have been revealed to, had no witness. His(why not her!--the apple?:)) word is the proof, a matter of faith, belief! These are not the matters of logic, or rationality, and, hence,are out of bounds of a rational debate. No!”


Kant,

I concur.

However, there is this mechanism amongst Muslims (and urstruly or Asif Naqshbandi can correct me if I am wrong) for ulema (clerics) of different Muslim sects to debate theological matters related to unanimously accepted beliefs/fundamentals of Islam (also referred to as Pillars of Islamic faith). It was this mechanism, which lead to clerics of all Muslim sects unanimously agreeing to exclude Ahmedis from the fold of Islam because in their (cleric’s) view/judgement they (Ahmedis) were/are in breach of a Pillar of Islamic faith namely the finality of Mohammed’s prophethood. Arguments and counter arguments were presented, before this decision was reached.

So, in that sense there is a logical process followed by clerics, which basically operates on the understanding of few fundamental beliefs, which are unanimously accepted by all Muslims throughout the world. These beliefs are the first criteria to test the validity of faith of a person or group persons who claim to be Muslim. Claims of Prophethood or divinity etc are also tested on this criteria. I have read quite a bit on that and find that this mechanism is quite democratic in nature – no single cleric or a group of clerics or a single sect or a group of sects of Muslims has ever been able to exclude another sect out of the fold of Islam. For example, deobandi clerics have issued fatwas to exclude shias from the fold of Islam. However, since not all other sects unanimously agree to it, deobandi fatwas are not enforceable in any Islamic country. This mechanism has been in operation for hundreds of years. However, this process is essentially internal to followers of Islam and by no means open for debate or logical or rational testing by outsiders – which is understandable to certain extent since Islam is a faith and a belief, as you say.

I must say that I am no expert on this matter. I have a very superficial understanding of theological matters related to Islam. It would have been good to hear from Naqshbandi or a real cleric on this matter.

fairdinkum #146,

Please allow me, IMOW, to extend your own thread regarding the issues of `finality` of Quran, Prophet, etc.

These cannot be settled by any length of debate or discussions since they are not facts, they are beliefs, faith, and, therefore, cannot withstand

the tests of rationality. Almost every prophet, who claimed to have been revealed to, had no witness. His(why not her!--the apple?:)) word is the proof, a matter of faith, belief! These are not the matters of logic, or rationality, and, hence,are out of bounds of a rational debate. No!

Kant.....

PS: Before somebody slaps me with `what you know of Islam, you are not a Muslim?`, let me say Yes, I am not. But then I am talking about logic and not faith, YKWIM!

sattar2,

You say, regarding `finality`, that Quran was the last word of Allah(GOD).

What happened to the GOD? Did he die or gone deaf!:). Do you see the contradiction in your thought process? You want yourself(Ahmadi) to be accepted as a practicing Muslim, and righfully so, I may add, however, by arguing and believing about the finality of Quran, Allah, word, etc., you are doing the very thing that you yourself protest at others doing to you. You see, you are denying the other faiths their claim to divinity, their concept of God and their image of the God`s messangers. Yet, you are seeking respect and forebearance from others. If you seek respect, you need to respect others; if you seek love, you need to love others; if you seek tolerance for your beliefs, you need to tolerate others`.

As an aside, I hope you guys will prioritize and stand up for joint-electorates first and religion second. For, the first may grant you the second, but the second will get you nowhere. Good luck my friend!

Kant.........