Protest in New York!

RE: Zahra

I think Rashid is partly right. Cuz the linguistic grammer tells us that a Q is always followed by two vowels. So either mis-spell it or use K.

KResh0d:

I couldn`t resist questioning:-

Why do you write Quran with a K than a Q ?

Shouldn`t it be Quran ? or Koran ? I think there is a rationale behind it and I have not forgotten that. If you have a reason, please explain that.

Just like if you say in Urdu, Qureshi that will be a Qaa`f with Doa` Nuktaas whereas when you say `Kashish` that will with Kaa`f with the other Kaa`f. Theek ?

I have noticed that people who have not read Arabic or are ignorant in that language they will often use `K` instead of `Q`. Similarly Westerners mostly Non-Muslims will write with a `K`. Now when Muslims write with a `K`, I cannot seem to understand the reason.

?

Omar 1974!

Jizya has validity from Koran and Hadith as far as my rememberance goes.

The Egyptian Jizya thing is different and is a blot in Islamic History where non-Muslim conversion to Islam was prohibited because of Jizya.

I agree with you that seperate elctorate or joint electorate or the system of Governance has nothing to do with Islam.

Yourstruly has still not answered my 2 simple questions. But i guess i didn`t answer his Qs either, but his are Yes/No types, and he knows the answers, while i asked for definitions.

Does anyone have relatively precise historical information on the institution of the practice of `Jaziya`? I believe when the Muslims conquered Egypt, the practice was instituted for revenue collection purposes in lieu of exclusion from military service, but not during the lifetime of the prophet Mohammad (pbuh). That would be 700 something A.D. If its not in the Quran or Hadith, which i believe to be the case, i don`t believe any kind of `Islamic` argument is sustainable for treating religious minorities in a `seperate but equal` manner on any kind of religious basis whatsoever just because of the political/revenue raising expediency of the Jaziya tax. And while Yourstruly may concede that its a political/ constitutional issue, not religious issue, the involvement of `Islamic` religious parties in Pakistan agigating for Seperate religious electorates has considerably blurred the line between religion & Constitutional law/Political issues, especially given the widespread illiteracy in Pakistan.

According to the kind of reasoning favored in Shariat Court however, in all liklihood there would be an examination of the operational theocracy established in Medina to make a determination on the issue of seperate electorates, in view of the fact that there is nothing quite on point (to my knowledge) in the Quran. But frankly, i think in the final analysis, it would be stretching it to argue that the principle on which seperarte electorates are based has some, `Islamic` basis in either Quran or Sunnah.

RE: OMAR 1974

Would you kindly convey my best regards to Sadia Saulat.

Thanks

RE: OMAR1974

Now we are going somewhere, Counselor, aint we? This is the battleground, and these are the rules of engagement, so stop whinning and get in the battle gear. We got some real hard work to do.

Pakistan`s olympic squad has always had women athletes right from the beginning... and none of them are Hijabis ...

Maybe Omar you need to stop making stereotypes about Pakistan!

Yasser

Re: krashid

``Like although I think Hussain RZAH was right, but why the war was fought. Why it was fought in Kufa. Why Meccans and Medina people (except his near relatives) did not join him.``

I thought you were still stuck at Siffin. And I replied-Ammar b. Yasir was fom Mecca. But you are now talking about Hussain.

So, ``you think`` Hussain was right. ``You think!!``. Get a life!

``Sorry for wrong information.``

That`s alright. So far most of your information has been wrong.

``You might be knowing Ushra Mubasharra of Shia are different.``

I am not aware of any such thing.

``The point I was trying to stress was that it was not a war Islam vs non-Islam but had different motive.``

What is Islamic or un-Islamic is Naqshbandi`s obsession. You can refer such questions to him. I have`nt seen a fatwa from that twit in quite sometime. Ask him before he goes into a withdrawl.

``Like although I think Hussain RZAH was right, but why the war was fought. Why it was fought in Kufa. Why Meccans and Medina people (except his near relatives) did not join him.``

Ammar b. Yasir was from Mecca.

``There is two history in Islam, Sunni and Shia. We need to look into it more objectively. Probably Mustashriquin (Western Muslims) can bring some sense to our history.``

There is only one history, my dear fellow. Get over your prejudice for people who belong to other sects. They are Muslims who don`t share your view point. There`s nothing wrong with that.

RaJangua!

Sorry for wrong information.

It is long time I have read. But as far as I remember the Governor of Egypt I think at the time of Uthman was one of Ushra Muabasharra. And some of them were against Ali RZAH.

You might be knowing Ushra Mubasharra of Shia are different.

The point I was trying to stress was that it was not a war Islam vs non-Islam but had different motive.

Like although I think Hussain RZAH was right, but why the war was fought. Why it was fought in Kufa. Why Meccans and Medina people (except his near relatives) did not join him.

There is two history in Islam, Sunni and Shia. We need to look into it more objectively. Probably Mustashriquin (Western Muslims) can bring some sense to our history.

Re: The Summation.

Q.1 Define `Muslim`.

Q.2 Define `Islamic State`.

Incidently, based solely upon my own knowledge, although i am not an Islamic scholar by any means, i feel reasonably secure in Saying that the origins of the Zia ul Haq Blasphemy law are not `Islamic` whatsoever the definition you come up with of that term. #1 Its not in the Quran, and to the best of my knowledge the Prophet (pbuh) Mohammad (not to be confused with M.G.A) never punished anyone who insulted him, to the point whereby according to the hadiths available, when the people of Taif threw stones at him and his shoe was filled with blood, he simply forgave them their sins when he could have had the city leveled. This narrated incident shows the glory of the prophet Mohammad (pbuh) and his compassion. Therefore i conclude that the while the Blasphemy law is not enjoined by any Islamic injunction, in fact, its promulgation as law, and application in fact, is against the available hadiths of the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). If anything it not only has nothing to do with Islam, but it is an example of the cynical manipulation of religion for Political ends by General Zia, who went so far as to commission a referendum in which he had the sheer audacity to equate himself and his continued dictatorship with Islam.

The law is UnIslamic. Furthermore a Constitutional disprate impact analysis would i believe demonstrate conclusively that it is disproporionaly used as a political weapon against minorities by the religious majority

in Pakistan. Therefore its application is in violation of the legal principle of equal protection of the law, no doubt lodged somewhere in the 100 page Constitution of Pakistan, which somehow when compared with the mere 10 page U.S Constitution, manages to confer far fewer unqualified enforceable rights to the people of Pakistan.

As for the distinction YOURSTRULY attempts to make between a political/Constitutional issue & a `religious issue`, i`m afraid, the fine point eludes me, for i know quite well this land of Pakistan, where once the mullah gets involved, all rational discussion comes to an end.

Re: `Are they against our constitution?` Classic, `US` Vs. `THEM` view of citizenship. You presume you have more right by virtue of being a Sunni Muslim to the land than the `Ahmadis`. This is conceited to say the least. Get this straight, citizenship is not based on religion, only on birth/naturalization.



Omar Mirza

more later.

``Uthman RZAH is blamed for nepotism. i.e putting his relatives at high posts. Some of them like Amr-bin Aas were ``Ushra Mubasshira``.``

The ten men who were promised Paradise by the Prophet during their lifetimes are:

Abu Bakr Siddique

Umar ibn al-Khitab

Usman ibn `Affan

Ali b. Abi Talib

al-Zubayr b. al-Awwam

Abu Ubayda ibn al-Jarrah

Abd al-Rahman ibn Awf

Talhah ibn Ubaydullah

Sa`ad b. Abi Waqqas

Sa`ad ibn Zayd

Usman ibn `Affan, al-Zubayr b. al-Awwam, Talhah ibn Ubaydullah and Ali b. Abi Talib were killed by their own muslim ``brothers``.

RE: Sattar

May be we were ``ambiguous`` about our limitations. Were we?

ylh #229 I guess you are right. Incidentally, I understand that in addition to the Jewish victims (and no disrespect to their memory intended), a few other folks also lost their lives in that great conflict of the 1940`s.

RaJanjua!

As I said in my first post, that I did not want to start a discussion.

1-Because I am not a scholar of Islamic History.

2- And I don`t have references available what I have read long time back.(Of recent Martin Ling book I have read after a decade)

The affiliation of Muawiya was not because of Syria. Syria was captured, I think at the time of Hazrat Umar and Arab Governors were ruling it.

Uthman RZAH is blamed for nepotism. i.e putting his relatives at high posts. Some of them like Amr-bin Aas were ``Ushra Mubasshira``.

How the alliances played into at that time you can judge when whole of Banu Hashim was boycotted because they would not stop protecting Prophet PBUH.

Although, you might join Ali RZAH, but at that time you would go with your tribe or people.

It was not Islamic or non-Islamic war.

ON MY MIND

As I sit here watching the Olympics on NBC, the womyn`s diving competition is on now, i suddenly wondered ... has Pakistan EVER been represented by a woman at the olympics? If not, why not? Something to think about surely. HamidM (a/k/a Salman Rushdie) is sure to oblige with an answer ... :)