Lets Destroy The Bamiyan Buddhas!

More cut-n-paste..

____________________________________________

Taliban say they will spare Hindu statues: KABUL, Mar 14 : Foreign minister of the ruling Taliban movement said today they would not smash idols of the minority Hindu population in their campaign to eliminate statues from Afghanistan. ``There are a limited number of Hindus and Sikhs in Afghanistan with their temples,`` Wakil Ahmad Muttawakil told a news conference. ``Their statues will not be smashed as they are worshipping them as part of their religious rituals. (Reuters)

____________________________________________

I wonder if this adds to the theorizing that the Buddhas were destroyed because of the Taliban being pissed off at noone even acknowledging their eradication of the poppy plantations (amusing that someone should rant about their poppy cultivation..).

To All It May Concern!

I have decided after careful thinking that I will from now on severely limit the amount of interaction I do on Chowk.Though i will probably continue to read the articles I will only reply now if i think it is truly necessary. For life is short and I must worry about myself more and preparing for the Afterlife instead of wasting valuable time here debating with others. All I will say to those who call themselves Muslims on here is as some sincere advice i urge you from my heart to study the aqidah of the Ahle SunnaH w`al Jama`at with an open mind and may Allah give you and me all the tawfeeq to accept it. ameen. To the non-Muslims i will say peace, for you your religion for me mine: I hope you will read the following books: Muhammad (sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam) -His Life Based on the Earliest Sources by Martin Lings and And Muhammad Is His Messenger: Veneration of the Prophet in Islamic Piety by Anne-Marie Schimmel. In addition I urge all Muslims to read Ash-Shifa` by Qadi Ayad al Maliki translated by Aisha AbdurRahman Bewley.

Some websites I recommend also (for all)

www.sunnah.org

www.nfie.com

www.alahazrat.net

www.masud.co.uk

well...that`s it i guess. wa salaamu alaa manitaba al Huda (and peace be upon those who are rightly guided.)

Praise be to Allah Lord of The Worlds and Peace and Blessings Be Upon Our Master Sayyidina Muhammad al Mustafa The Beloved of Allah and His Illustrious Companions, each and every one of them, His Pure Family and Household, His Chaste Wives, His Awliya e Kamileen and all His righteous followers till the Day of Judgement.

abd al Mustafa

Asif

krashid #165, sigalph235 #173

krashid wrote, ``That is why Compaign finance reform is a demand of Democrats mainly. Because once the influence of money is gone, democrats will find it easy to win the election because of their position on social issues, minorities, workers right, enviornment etc which appeals to majority of people``

really? take a look at this:

``Key Democrat to vote against campaign finance bill``

http://www.cnn.com/2001/ALLPOLITICS/03/14/breaux.mccain/index.html

the article writes, ``...Democrats say after reading the language more carefully they believe banning so-called ``soft money`` would put Democrats at a disadvantage.``

...like i said before, for all their rhetoric, democrats will vote against mccain campaign finance reform more vehemently then the republicans. not for the right reason -- that it would violate the 1st ammendment -- but b/c democrats are too addicted to special interest ``soft money`` donations from unions and the like.

krashid, you said the republicans are the party of the rich and democrats are the party of the minorities but you`re just brainwashed by democratic propaganda.

a more accurate generalization would be that the republicans are the party of ideas (individual liberty, small government, markets, etc.) and democrats are the party of identity politics (for democrats, you are not an individual, but a member of a voting block -- asian, african-american, female, etc. -- and the only way to get your vote is to keep you ignorant (that`s why they`re against education reform!) and dependent on gov. through high taxation and welfare programs).

if you don`t agree with this, ask yourself what are democratic ideas? traditonally democrats from franklin roosevelt to lyndon johnson had socialistic ideas of income redistribution (social security) to welfare, but socialism has been a catastrophic failure (look at india) and this has left the democrats with no ideas. clinton knew this and talked like a conservative. al gore isn`t as good a liar and became an embarrassment to his party last year. at present, the best democrats can do is to simply oppose republican ideas. republicans want a tax cut? democrats say we should pay down the debt -- not b/c they believe debt reduction is better then giving people back their money, but simply b/c they have nothing else to say and can`t bring themselves to acknowledge that republicans are right.

unile the the current democrats, whether you agree or disagree, republicans have a view -- that individual liberty, small government, and a free market are the only way to prosperity. the best democrats usually do is to say something like ``we are for X`` where X can be minorities or poor people or whatever -- but it means nothing. the democrats are populists. they just try and say what they think an ignornant population wants to hear.

Bilal#194, sigalph235 #198

Thanks for your thoughtful and meaningful posts.

Sadhana

http://dailynews.yahoo.com/h/ap/20010313/wl/afghanistan_buddhas_5.html

More Buddhist Statues Destroyed

By KATHY GANNON, Associated Press Writer

GHAZNI, Afghanistan (news - web sites) (AP) - At least two weeks before Afghanistan`s supreme ruler ordered all statues in the country destroyed, zealous Taliban soldiers wielding pickaxes hacked an ancient Buddhist complex to rubble, scrawling graffiti on the walls, a Taliban guard said.

``We confront the idols of non-Muslims and destroy them,`` read one message etched in a wall in Pashtu, the language of Afghanistan`s majority Pashtun ethnic group.

Arriving packed aboard four pickup trucks, the soldiers spent several days swarming over the complex, built in tiers up the side of a hill from the second to seventh centuries, said Mullah Saeed Jan, a Taliban guard at the site.

An ancient baked clay statue of Buddha, beheaded decades ago, was hacked into small pieces, among the relics destroyed at the complex at Ghazni, 120 miles southwest of the Afghan capital, Kabul.

``The Buddha was here, but we have smashed it,`` Jan said Tuesday, wrapped in a dirty brown blanket to protect against the cold wind sweeping the arid plains.

Jan said he knew little of the international outrage over the Taliban`s destruction of its pre-Islamic heritage, including two towering statues of Buddha in central Afghanistan.

``I don`t know what the world thinks, but it is in Shariat (Islamic law), so what can we do?`` he said.

The destruction at the Ghazni complex came at least two weeks before the Taliban`s reclusive leader, Mullah Mohammed Omar, issued his order to destroy all statues, decreeing them idolatrous and offensive to Islam.

Taliban soldiers using explosives last week demolished two towering statues of Buddha hewn from a cliff face in central Bamiyan in the third and fifth centuries. The taller of the two, at 170 feet, was believed to be the world`s tallest standing Buddha, while the other measured 120 feet.

The Taliban have refused to allow anyone to go to Bamiyan.

On Tuesday, Jan displayed bits of clay that used to be part of a Buddha statue kept inside a chamber sealed with wooden slats. In another chamber, all that had remained of one ancient statue, the feet, were pounded into rubble and even the altar was demolished.

``I don`t know. They have gone completely mad, I think,`` said Nancy Dupree, a historian and Afghan expert, who has chronicled the history, culture and traditions of Afghanistan.

A founding member of the Society for the Preservation of Afghanistan`s Cultural Heritage, Dupree said the Ghazni ruins were a rich mix of Buddhist and Hindu traditions.

``This was toward the end of Buddhism in the area and the coming of Hinduism into Afghanistan,`` she explained. Some of the chambers contained Hindu statues, long since lost, destroyed or sold.

Smack in the middle of the ancient trade route between China and central Asia, Afghanistan`s history is a rich blend of cultures and religions.

``There`s an unbroken cultural history of 50,000 years,`` said Carla Grissmann, who spent several years inventorying the thousands of artifacts, most of Buddhist in origin, at the Kabul Museum.

The Taliban`s Foreign Minster Wakil Ahmed Muttawakil said Sunday they had all been destroyed.

For Afghans, Ghazni is considered an Islamic cultural mecca because religious leaders are buried there, Jan said.

Some of those leaders shared the same version of Islam that is followed by today`s Taliban.

Take Afghanistan`s 12th-century ruler, Sultan Mahmood Ghaznavi, who rampaged across most of northern India converting Hindus to Islam and smashing Hindu statues.

He is said to have taken Hindu statues and put them at the entrance to a mosque in Ghazni so the Muslim faithful could use them as stepping stones.

Afghanistan still has a relatively large Hindu and Sikh population, although hundreds fled between 1992 and 1996 when warring Islamic factions, who threw out the communists, destroyed much of Kabul.

The Taliban took control in 1996 and have allowed Hindus and Sikhs to practice their religions. A Sikh temple in Karte Parwan neighborhood is a giant marble hall where the soft melodies of Indian music can be heard.

Despite the Taliban`s ban on music, they have not interfered with music played by other religions.

``At the moment, we have no difficulties. But no one can guarantee the future,`` said a Hindu resident of Kabul, who identified himself only as Makan.

``We don`t want to talk politics,`` said a nervous Andar Singh, a Sikh. ``Everything for the moment is calm and normal.`` An estimated 450 worshippers come daily to a Sikh temple in Kabul, while in Jalalabad, there are 520 Sikh worshippers, Singh said.

Dupree clings to the hope that some of the statues may have been brought to Pakistan to be sold, despite the Taliban`s repeated denials that any artifact was sold.

``It is as wrong to sell as it is to have`` the statues, said Mullah Mohammed Hassan, deputy administrator of Kabul.

rajajanjua, and krashid...read the following any you will have your answers insha Allah. This is my last answer on this topic; (also TAhmed will benefit from this). The views expressed by this great Imam are my views exactly:

quote:

Ten fatwas from the great Islamic scholar of India, Ahmad Rida Khan Barilawi

59 - Of the great `ulama` in India, Ahmad Rida Khan Barilawi, in his fatwa book Fatawal-Haramain, answers twenty-eight questions. All of these fatwas are in conformity with the knowledge of the Ahl as-Sunnat `ulama`. Ten of these fatwas are given below for their auspiciousness:

Question 1: ``The British spies in India, who call themselves `Nayashira`. They believe that Jabrail (`alaihi `s-salam), angels, genies, the Satan, heavens, the mujiza of Miraj, Hell and Paradise exist and that bodies will get alive again as Muslims believe. Yet they give false meanings to the ayats that deal with these subjects, as some of the people called Batiniyya do. They say that these things are not made of matter but they are conceptual and imaginative. They say that nothing can exist outside customs and physical laws. Thus they deny that Allahu ta`ala can create many things outside the laws of nature. They do not believe in mujizat, and they explain them away according to what they see and learn in nature. They say that it is haram and cruelty to use as slaves the captives taken from among non-Muslims in the jihad performed for spreading Allah`s religion and that it is a thing done by the savage. Though it was defined in all heavenly religions, they claim that Allah has not commanded it. They do not believe any of the tafsir and hadith books. They claim that all their contents have been invented by `ulama. They say, `The Qur`an remains the sole truth in our hands. We interpret the Qur`an according to our new information. We do not believe what the early Muslims understood from it or what has reached us from them.` Can those who say so be called `Muslims` or `Ahl al-Qibla` even if they say that they are Muslim, utter kalimat ash-shahada and perform salat towards the qibla? Moreover, these spies claim that they themselves are the real Muslims and that what they tell is the pure Islamic religion. Shall we call them `Muslim` or `non-Muslim`? Shall we consider their words as wrong and falsified?``

Answer 1: They are not sincere at all. I swear by Allah, they have no connection with Islam. They are enemies of Islam fed by the British. They are the worst of non-Muslims and murtads, because they deny the things that are known to be indispensable in religion. Their saying kalimat ash-shahada and professing that the Kaba is the qibla do not show their being believers or Ahl al-qibla. None of the `ulama` and books of itiqad and fiqh has permitted alteration of the indispensable, apparent and open religious teachings.

Question 2: ``It is understood that they are British spies. What would you say about those who, after understanding their teachings and heresy, call them Muslims, or even regard them as `ulama` of Islam and authorities on religion, or praise them with the terms that have not been used for the superiors of Islam yet, and, by mentioning their names, say, `They are the elect of our time. Their books are invaluable for the youth. Their writings prove their quality of perfection. They are the pillars of our religion and the guards of Islam?` What would you say about those who praise them as such, write, publish and advertise their books as the `books of superiors of religion`?``

Answer 2: One who does not believe in one of the things indispensable in Islam becomes a kafir. One who has suspicion of such a person`s not being a kafir and in that he will not be punished in Hell eternally is a kafir, too. That the latter, too, is a kafir is openly written in the books Bazaziyya, Durr al-mukhtar, Qadi Iyad`s Shifa, Imam an-Nawawi`s Rawda and Ibn Hajar al-Makki`s Al-alam. It has been unanimously declared by the `ulama` of Islam that it also makes one kafir to have doubt that it is infidelity (kufr) if somebody does not regard a Christian, a Jew or a dissenter from Islam as a kafir. This unanimity is written in the above-mentioned books. While one become a kafir out of doubting in the other`s being a kafir, it should be pondered well how the one who regards him as a Muslim or, even, praises him with the terms reserved for the `ulama` of Islam will be. From these words of ours, we should understand well the situation of those who consider such people as `ulama` of Islam and praise and spread their speeches and writings filled with kufr. Praise or effort to disseminate or to advertise shows consent and love. Consent to kufr causes kufr. Consent to kufr does not mean to want the kafir to remain in kufr but to love his kufr.

Question 3: ``What does `ahl al-bidat` mean?``

Answer 3: If the cause of an innovator`s dissent from Ahl as-Sunnat is his belief in the superiority of `Ali over Abu Bakr and `Umar (radi-Allahu `anhum), he is of ahl al-bidat as it is written in Hulasa, Hindiyya and many other invaluable books. The one who does not believe in the khilafat (caliphate) of one or both of the latter two caliphs was said to be a kafir by the `ulama` of fiqh and to be a man of bidat by the `ulama` of kalam. For the sake of precaution, the term `man of bidat` should be used for them. One absolutely becomes a kafir if says that Allahu ta`ala is a creature, or that the present Qur`an al-karim is deficient and contains alterations of as-Sahabat al-kiram and of later times, or that `Ali (radi-Allahu `anh) or one of the Twelve Imams is superior to prophets. It is written in Hindiyya, Zahiriyya, Al-Hadiqat an-nadiyya and in fiqh books that he will be treated as a murtad. There is detailed information on this subject in the book Makalat al-mufassira an ahkami `l-bidati `l-mukaffira. [Ibn Abidin wrote `unlawful betrothal` in Radd al-muhtar: ``If one worships Ali (radi-Allahu anh) or says, `Jabrail was ordered to reveal the Qur`an to Ali, but he mistook and revealed it to Muhammad,` or `Abu Bakr was not a sahabi,` or Hadrat A`isha committed adultery,` he becomes a kafir. If he says that `Ali (radi-Allahu anh) superior to the two caliphs, or curses or slanders at a sahabi, he becomes a man of bid`a.`` In the third volume, he wrote: ``If one curses at or damns the two caliphs, he becomes a kafir. Though those people called Durziz, Mulhids and Isma`ilis carry out the five fundamentals of Islam, they become kafirs because of their belief in transmigration of the soul and by regarding wine and intercourse as halal and giving false meanings to ayats.`` Ibn Abidin, in his book Uqud ad-duriyya, quoted Shaikh al-Islam Abdullah Effendi`s extensive fatwa about the Shi`ites and reveals those who fell in kufr among them.]

Question 4: ``What would say about those who praise the people called `Batiniyya` with the words the `stars of knowledge,` `suns of `ulama`,` `great alim of our time,` or `guide of the century` and about those who believe these words?``

Answer 4: If they know that they praise those declared to be murtads, they also become murtads. Even if those praised are not murtads, it is apparent that it is ugly and bad to praise them. The hadith as-Sharif reported from Anas ibn Malik (radi-Allahu `anh) by Ibn Abi `d-dunya, Abu Yala and al-Baihaki and from Abu Huraira (radi-Allahu `anh) by Ibn `Adi says: ``When a sinner (fasiq) is praised, our Rabb`s indignation arouses.`` Permitting such praises or disseminating or advertising them shows consent to them. Consent to evils is also evil. [It is heard that some people admire the religious and political movement of, and praise the personality of, Humaini of Iran who is understood to be an enemy to as-Sahaba and to the whole of Ahl as-Sunna. They should carefully read this hadith and fatwa, get lesson from them and wake up from unawareness.]

Question 5: ``What would you say about some people`s saying that Allahu ta`ala and His Prophet (`alaihi `s-salam) may lie?``

Answer 5: Lying is a deficiency and ugliness. It has been unanimously declared that there is no ugly thing attributable to Allahu ta`ala or His Rasul (`alaihi `s-salam). This is dealt in detail in my book Subhana `s-subbuh an `aybi kazbin makbuh, wherein I gave documents from the `ulama` of kalam and tafsir. In many books by Arab and Persian `ulama`, it is written that those who say so have dissented from the right path and that they are heretics. The book Ad-durar as-saniyya by Hadrat `Allama Ahmad ibn Zain ibn Dahlan al-Makki, who was one of my masters in hadith, tells in detail about their heresies and gives, from Hadrat Mawlana Abu `s-su`ud, the Mufti of al-Madinat al-munawwara, passages refuting them. They have been caught by the Satan`s current and become soldiers to the Satan. The soldiers of the Satan will certainly be ruined.

Question 6: ``We nowadays see upstart people who are called `Ghair al-muqallidin,` that is non-or la-madhhabite people. They neither follow any of the four madhhabs nor let anybody follow one of them. They call themselves ahl al-hadith. They say that they follow only the Hadith. We see that some ignorant people, who are deprived of religious education and cannot differentiate the truth from the wrong and the straight from the crooked, pass themselves for authorities on religion after learning some Arabic in Egypt, the Hijaz, Iraq or in Damascus and write books on religion. What would you say about them and their books?``

Answer 6: In the subject on `Zabayih` in the marginalia of Durr al-mukhtar, `Allama Sayyid Ahmad at-Tahtawi, one of the `ulama of the Hanafi madhhab, writes: ``One who departs from the path of the `ulama` of fiqh, from as-siwad al-azam, will have directed himself to Hell. Oh Muslims! Therefore, hold fast to the path of Ahl as-Sunnat wal-Jamaat which is called `al-firqat an-najiyya` (group of Salvation), the unique group reported by our Prophet (`alaihi `s-salam) to be saved from Hell! Because, Allahu ta`ala`s help, protection and taking to bliss are only for those who are on this path. Allahu ta`ala`s Ghadab (Wrath) and adhab (torture) are for those who dissent from this path. Today, this firqat najiyya has gathered in the four madhhabs, namely, Hanafi, Shafi`i, Maliki and Hanbali. One who does not belong to any of these four madhhabs is a man of bidat or a man for Hell [heretic or unbeliever].`` Great Imam Sufyan ath-Thawri (radi Allahu `anh) said, ``If one who is not an alim in fiqh tries to adapt his affairs to hadiths, he leads himself to heresy.`` Great Imam Ibn al-Hajj al-Makki said the same in his work Al-mad`hal. My fatwas about and articles on the la-madhhabi are available in my book Al-barikat ash-sharika `ala marikat al-musharika.

Question 7: ``Some people say, `The la-madhhabi belong to Ahl As-Sunnat and are even licensed authorities on religion. They differ from Ahl as-Sunnat only in insignificant teachings, and this difference is beneficial as that between the Hanafi, Shafi`i and Maliki madhhabs, thus they help the religion of Islam. Should not the la-madhhabi, therefore be considered as those in the Hanafi and Shafi`i madhhabs and should not we know them as Islamic brothers and love heartfully and respect them? Isn`t it the way of those intoxicated with love for Allahu ta`ala to do one`s affairs according to hadiths though one is not a mujtahid? Didn`t Abu Dharr al-Ghaffari (radi-Allahu `anh), a Sahabi, act upon the hadith, ``Do not save your properties to make them kanz, a treasure``?` What would you say about those who say these about the la-madhhabi?``

Answer 7: These words are not correct at all. The person who says these becomes one among them, even one worse than them. How could a man of bidat be respected? The hadith reported from `Abdullah ibn Bashir (radi-Allahu `anh) by at-Tabarani says, ``One who respects the man of bidat will have helped in the annihilation of Islam.`` Another hadith, reported from Muaz (radi-Allahu `anh) in Kabir by at-Tabarani and in Hilya by Abu Nuaym, says, ``One who walks to show respect for the man of bidat has helped in destroying Islam.`` There are many similar hadiths. It is dalala, heresy, for those not promoted to the status of mujtahid not to follow one of the four madhhabs but to do one`s worship and affairs according to what he understands from hadiths. It is dissention from the believers` path. Allahu ta`ala declares in the 43rd ayat of the surat an-Nahl, ``Ask what you do not know from the people of dhikr!`` A hadith reported from Jabir ibn `Abdullah (radi-Allahu `anh) by Abu Dawud says, ``Ask what you do not know. Medicine for ignorance is inquiry.`` These ayat and hadith command those who do not know to learn by asking those who know. As it is concluded from this, those who speak about the la-madhhabi as quoted above or who admit and believe their words, in fact, belong to the la-madhhabi, being partners to them in heresy.

Question 8: ``In the last two years, this kind of people have multiplied in India. An organization named `Nadwat ul-ulama` has been founded in claim of service to Islam and to awaken Muslims. Here, every kind of people and those with heretical beliefs have gathered, and la-madhhabi people, including a few belonging to Ahl as-Sunnat, have taken hold of high chairs. What would you say about this?``

Answer 8: This behavior of them is haram and heretical. It is intended to estrange Muslims with little knowledge from their madhhabs. Such Muslims, upon seeing heretical men of religion in cooperation with Ahl as-Sunnat scholars all sitting at the same line of chairs, think of those heretics also as respectful and beneficial. They begin to show respect for them, which is sinful. Islamic religion commands humiliation and severe treatment of the men of bidat and forbids showing respect to them. In `aqa`id books, for example, in Sharh al-maqasid, the `ulama` of Islam wrote, ``It is necessary to treat severely, to humiliate, to refute and to expel the men of bidat.`` When Muslims see them at high ranks, their hearts incline to listen to them and, with the Satan`s cheating, begin to love them. In actual fact, those who cooperate with the men of bidat cause the dissention of them from the right path. Gathering of people with different beliefs results in the destruction of the religion. Those who say that they will wake up Muslims, in fact, try to poison them and lead them to disaster.

Question 9: ``The aim in the establishment of this organization, Nadwa, has been asserted to be the abolition of the difference between the Sunni and other groups of bidat. `They should not refuse one another`s beliefs, but live brotherly. `Ulama` should not speak or write on the beliefs in disagreement among themselves. Or else, they set a bad example to be copied by all Muslims and their disciples. Difference and argument cause perishing and stem from the desires of nafs and self-esteem,` they say. Are these words right or wrong or excessive?``

Answer 9: When a bidat gets spread, it is fard to refute it and to try to disseminate its harmfulness and wickedness. That this is fard has been unanimously declared by the `ulama` of Islam. Salaf as-Salihin and the `ulama of all times up to now have always opposed bidat in this way. One who does not refuse the men of bidat but let them by themselves will have dissented from Muslims` unanimity, got away from the Islamic jamaat and loved bidats and offenders of bidat. And this means to discredit the Ahl as-Sunnat madhhab and the Muslims of this right path; to forbid the established reason and to command the prohibition; to lead Muslims to Allahu ta`ala`s damnation. Great alim Hadrat Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Makki, the imam of Muslims, said in the preface to his work As-sawa`iq al-muhriqa, ``Though I do not have the profound knowledge to comprehend the reality and essence of the writings in this book, I was inclined to write because of the following hadith ash-Sharif reported in Al-Jami` by Khatib al-Baghdadi: `When seditions and bidats spread and my Sahaba are slandered, those who know the reality shall declare what they know! May those who do not declare what they know be damned by Allahu ta`ala, by angels and by all people! Allahu ta`ala does not accept any of their `ibadat and goodness.` `` The statement, ``Telling what one knows causes disunion, is sinful and is self-destruction,`` is a slander against Allahu ta`ala and Islamic `ulama`, dissention from the Ahl as-Sunnat madhhab and denial or prohibition of an important fard.

Question 10: ``They say, `The most important aim of Nadwa is to annihilate the differences among Ahl al-qibla; to unite Muslims of different faith of Ahl as-Sunnat and ahl al-bidat; to do away with disagreements; to bring them all into a state of benefaction and sweet taste like milk and sugar; to render the simultaneous beat of hearts and everybody`s getting share in one`s sorrow and loss; to make known that all who say kalimat ash-shahada are brothers even if their beliefs would be different. This is aimed on account of the command in the hadith, ``Oh Muslims! Be brothers to one another!`` Disagreement on anything or speaking ill of one another is unnecessary. Such unity is a command, a fard, of Allahu ta`ala. The salat, fast and ta`at of only those who unite in this way are acceptable. Those who do not unite in this way will not attain to happiness in this and the next worlds. Moreover, unless Ahl al-qibla do not love one another, they cannot possess iman and enter Paradise. Though men`s every kind of sins may possibly be forgiven, discord and enmity between one another will not be forgiven.` ``

Answer 10: Not all of the above statements are in conformity with Islam. They are harmful to Muslims and lead them to heresy. Many hadiths and the words of Islamic imams support this. Let`s quote some of the hadiths that forbid friendship with men of bidat and command keeping away from them: the hadith reported in the Sahih of Muslim from Abu Huraira (radi-Allahu `anh) says, ``Run away from them! [So] they shall not lead you to heresy, throw you into discord!`` The hadith reported from `Abdullah ibn `Umar (radi-Allahu `anh) by Abu Dawud says, ``Do not visit them when they get sick!`` The hadith reported from Jabir by Ibn Maja (radi-Allahu `anh) states, ``Do not greet them when you encounter them!`` The hadith reported by `Ukaili from Anas ibn Malik (radi-Allahu `anh) says, ``Do not keep company with them! Do not eat or drink with them! Do not intermarry with them!`` [This hadith forbids friendship, eating and marrying with ahl al-bid`a. It is written in Hindiyya and Bahr ar-raiq, ``Zindiqs, Batinis, Ibahis and all the groups with beliefs that causes kufr are mushriks (polytheists) like idolaters and worshippers of stars. Marriage with such mushriks or intercourse with their females as jariyas is haram.`` The above writings conclude that, if the belief of those who do not belong to one of the four madhabs, that is those who are not of Ahl as-Sunna, causes kufr, they become mushriks. Marriage with them and eating the carcass they have slaughtered are haram. Of them, those whose belief does not cause kufr are ahl al-bid`a, and marriage with them is not haram; though the nikah would be sahih, not with them but with ahl as-Sunna should Muslims get married, because living with them and even greeting them are forbidden by hadiths.]

The hadith ash-Sharif reported by Ibn Hibban says, ``Do not perform their funeral prayers! Do not perform salat with them!`` The hadiths reported from Ma`adh (radi-Allahu `anh) by ad-Dailami say, ``I am not of them. And they are not of me. Jihad against them is like jihad against disbelievers.`` The hadith ash-Sharif which was reported through the ancestral succession of Imam `Ali (radi-Allahu `anh), Husain, Zain al-`Abidin `Ali, Muhammad Bakir and Imam Jafar as-Sadiq and which was said to Abu Umama states: ``Do not have relation with those in the groups of Qadari, Murjii and Khariji! They will spoil your religion. They betray as did the Jews and Christians.`` The hadith reported from Anas ibn Malik (radi-Allahu `anh) by Ibn Asakir states, ``When you meet the man of bidat, treat him harshly! Allahu ta`ala is hostile to all men of bidat. None of them will be able to pass the Sirat bridge; they will fall in Hell fire.`` The hadith reported from Hadrat `Umar (radi-Allahu `anh) by Abu Dawud and Hakim says, ``Do not be in company with people of the Qadariyya group! Do not consult them your affairs.`` The hadith reported from `Abdullah ibn Masud (radi-Allahu `anh) by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Abu Dawud, at-Tirmidhi and Ibn Maja and from Abu Musa `l-Ashari (rahmat-Allahu `alaihim) by at-Tabarani says, ``The Sons of Israil committed sin. Their scholars advised them; they did not listen. Their scholars later talked with them. They ate and drank together. Allahu ta`ala introduced enmity among them; He condemned them through the mouths of Dawud (`alaihi `s-salam) and `Isa (`alaihi `s-salam).``

At-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud and Ibn Maja reported from Nafi` that a man conveyed someone`s salam to `Abdullah ibn `Umar (radi-Allahu `anhuma), who said, `I have heard that he has become a man of bidat. If he is so, do not take my salam to him.`` Hasan al-Basri and Muhammad ibn Sirin said, ``Do not come together with men of bidat.`` Ayyub as-Sahtiyani said, ``I and Talaq ibn Habib were sitting together. Said ibn Jubair, passing by, said to me, `Do not sit with him! He is a man of bidat.` `` As Asma ibn Ubaid told, two men of bidat came to `Ali Sirin and said that they wanted to ask him about a hadith; ``No, don`t ask,`` he said. When they said that they will ask him about an ayat, he said, ``No! Get out of here or I will go!`` The two men left. Those who were there said, ``What if you spoke on an ayat from al-Qur`an al-karim?`` He replied, ``I feared that they would read the ayat after altering it and that this alteration might make place in my heart.`` Salam ibn Abi Muti` told that, when a man of bidat said to Ayyub that he would ask him a word, he said, ``I wouldn`t listen even a half word from you.`` Someone asked something to Said ibn Jubair, who gave no answer; when the reason was asked, he said, ``He is a man of bidat, so shouldn`t be talked with.`` Abu Jafar Muhammad Bakir said, ``Do not stay near those who dispute. They give meanings to ayats as they wish.`` In the explanation of Mishkat, Imam Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Makki comments on `Abdullah ibn `Umar`s (radi-Allahu `anhuma) saying, ``Do not say my salam to...`` and adds, ``Because, we are ordered to keep away from men of bidat.`` In the explanation of the hadith, ``Do not be in company with people of the Qadariyya group,`` in the book Mirkat, it is said, ``Because, keeping company of enemies leads one to ruin and disaster.`` It is written in the book Shir`at al-Islam that Salaf as-Salihin did not get close to men of bidat since a hadith said, ``Do not stay with men of bidat! Their vices are as contagious as scabies.`` Another hadith says, ``Do not greet people of the Qadariyya group! Do not visit their sick people! Do not attend their funeral! Do not listen to their words! Give them answer sternly! Humiliate them!`` Another hadith says, ``Allahu ta`ala fills with iman the heart of him who gives stern answer to the man of bidat; He protects him against terrible things. One who disesteems the man of bidat will be saved by Allahu ta`ala against the fears of Resurrection.`` It is written in the book Irshad as-saree sharhu sahih al-Bukhari that, unless it is understood that a man of bidat has vowed for repentance, it is necessary to keep away from him.

I, the poor servant [that is, Ahmad Rida Khan], am preparing a booklet on this subject now. With documents from al-Qur`an al-karim and hadiths, I explain the necessity of keeping away from the men of bidat and treating them severely. I additionally give the comments of the `ulama`. This work will be the light for the eyes, and the remedy for the hearts.

While the harms of being together with men of bidat are that many, it should be estimated how many more the harms of loving and praising them are. A hadith says, ``One is with those whom he loves.`` Another hadith quoted by Imam `Ali (radi-Allahu `anh) and others, says, ``I swear that Allahu ta`ala will resurrect the man with those whom he loves.`` The hadith reported by at-Tabarani says, ``Allahu ta`ala will resurrect the man among those whom he loves.`` The hadith reported from Abu Huraira (radi-Allahu `anh) by Abu Dawud and at-Tirmidhi says, ``Man`s religion is similar to his friend`s religion. Everybody shall examine whom he has friendship with!`` Extensive explanation about the foregoing hadiths is given in my book Fih an-Nasrin bi jawabi `l-as`ilati `l-ishrin.

The aim of Nadwat al-`ulama` is the same as that of the damned Satan. They endeavor for the dissention of Muslims with little knowledge from the right path. They introduce a new religion with their statement, ``It is fard to unite Muslims.`` Their saying, ``Their `ibadat will not be accepted. They will not attain to blessings and happiness,`` is a slander against Allahu ta`ala. Their words, ``Dispute with and hostility towards men of bidat are sinful. This sin will not be forgiven. Pardon of it is impossible,`` show that they have dissented from the right path of Ahl as-Sunnat wal-Jamaat and that they deny the ayats which say, ``Allahu ta`ala forgives all the sins but shirk of whomever He wishes,`` and ``Allahu ta`ala certainly forgives all sins.`` Their saying, ``Pardon of this sin is impossible,`` results in their denial of these ayats. Also, they ascribe wrong meaning to the hadith, ``Allahu ta`ala`s servants, be brothers [of one another]!`` This hadith`s meaning, as reported in Umdat al-Kari and other books, is, `Do the things that will help you become brothers of one another.` Accordingly, in order for the men of bidat to become brothers to the Muslims of the right path, they should give up their bidats and accept the Sunnat. Their calling Muslims of Ahl as-Sunnat to become brothers for themselves despite their persisting in committing their bidats is an apparent heresy and an ugly deceit. [The Arabic work Fatawa`l-Haramain, from which the foregoing ten fatwas are translated, has been reproduced in offset in Istanbul. The author, Ahmad Rida Khan Barilawi, passed away in India in 1340 A.H. (1921).]

HizmetBooks © 1998

[endquote]

For an article about the Companions

http://www.analyzeislam.com/Companions/statusofthesahabainthequranandsunnah.html

wa salaamu alaa manitaba al Huda

AN INTERESTING LETTER

Dawn, Letter, March 14, 2001
“Destruction of statues

Maulana Fazalur Rahman, the JUI chief and Gen Hameed Gul have criticized the world leaders who have been requesting the Taliban not to destroy the Buddha relics in Afghanistan. They have said that the world community has turned a blind eye towards the famine leading to starvation and deaths in Afghanistan. On the other hand they are making a hue and cry over the destruction of some useless and lifeless statues. In their own wisdom they have given an effective shutup call to the world community (including Muslim countries).

May we ask them the same question? Have the Taliban sorted out all the problems of starvation, cold, health, education, etc? Why are they still utilizing their energy and resources in fighting Masood`s forces, growing poppy, and maintaining camps to train militants? It seems like they have ample time to bang their heads against lifeless statues and are least bothered about their own miserable people.

For each piece of sane advice given to the Taliban they have a standard answer ``This is our internal problem and no one has the right to interfere in our internal matters``. But so is the famine, an internal matter of the Taliban. Why are they accepting food items and other relief goods from the UN and other Kafir Western countries, including USA?

I wish the Maulana would have given a sensible statement at least on this issue for a change and had not made himself the laughing-stock of the world community. Kasbe ma-sh ke hain zaraai hazarha, Lillah aap quom ki khidmat na keejye.

SHER KHAN, Karachi”

Re: Hazrat Naqshbandi (ra)

``u want to know my aqidah``

Hell no! I already know most of what`s in your messed-up head, you dumbass :-). My question was about Shias & Muawiyah.

``And also if we were in an Islamic state then you would be lashed 20 (or 80?) times for slandering Hazrat Amir ul Mumineen Muawiyya radhi Allah anhu.``

When did the Companions of Rasool Allah become above criticism? I thought that previlige was reserved for Rasool Allah only. You call the Prophet, Lord - You talk of Companions, and your ala-Hazrats as if they were Prophets themselves. You give hadees the same status as revelation. Most Sunnis will consider that shirk or at the least biddat.

As far as I am concerned three generations of Banu Ummaya did more damage to Islam than any other calamity that I can think of. And this man, Muawiyah, murderer of Muhammad b. Abi Bakr, Hassan b. Ali, Abdur Rehman b. Khalid b. Walid and thousands of others. Indirectly responsible for the murder of Usman b. Affan (by failing to send troops to Medina after repeated calls of help by Usman b. Affan-and then using the tragic death of Usman as a means to gain personal power and thus dividing the Muslim community)-for the tragedy at Kerbala (by refusing to honor the agreement of convening a shura made with Hasan after the death of Ali and instead appointing that na-mardud (also a Companion) Yazid as the successor), will remain a `kala dhaba` in Islamic history. What happens to him on the Day of Judgement is none of my business. Do I have any respect for him? NO! His being a Companion only further degrades him in my eyes. Here`s a man who had the grand previlige of observing Rasool Allah with his own eyes, of being in his company (who can ask for anything more) and yet his actions tell us that he seems to have learned little from Rasool Allah. He became the instrument of wiping out Prophet`s family from the face of this earth and divided the Muslim community.

Go back to the hole you came from, Naqshbandi-In the immortal words of Jack Nicholson ``You can`t handle the truth`` :-).

``And no, whichever person asked about the little boys dream--it sure wasn`t me;``

My apologies. Must have been some other Asif Naqshbandi. Although I swear his writing style was very similar to yours. I am not being sarcastic here.

Asif Naqsbandi #205

I am in total agreement with the slogan.

Lanat Ala-l-Lahe Kazibeen.

So whoever does not believe in Calipahte of Abu-Bakr or Umar RZAH is a Kafir.

Lanat Ala-l Lahe Kazibeen.

Asif Naqsbandi #205

Are you teaching us a new Islam.

Where in Koran it is written that whoever does not believe in the Caliphate of Abu-Bakr RZAH or Umar RZAH is a Kaafir.

Are you going to state now that whoever does not believe in Mullah Omar is a Kafir. Or whoever does not believe in famous Ghazzali is a Kafir.

I think, in reference to many Hadith regarding doubting Islam of other person, I am doubting that you are even a Muslim. You may be a Kafir masquerading as Muslim. (How about that?)

Also as far as I remember the three things about Amir Muawiya (I respect him not for Islam but pragmatism and a good ruler).

1- He used to read one Rikat in Witr. (How about that?)

2- Fighting with Hazrat Ali RZAH.

3- Starting kingdom in Islam by making Yazid the Caliph after his death.

[...The Taliban have tried to project this as an issue that the `real` Islamists, the madarissa-going ones...]

it would be helpful to know what the correct spelling of this word is, if any:

madarissa
madressah
madarsa
madarsah
mad-arsa
...

any interpretations?

Fro The News International (Jang Group) today:

Striking tolerance

Shazreh Hussain

It is hard to fathom what the Afghan leadership has achieved in smashing the ancient Buddhas in Bamiyan. By electing to shatter, in the name of Islam, the ancient statues, the Taliban have projected an image of the religion which few in the Muslim world can relate to. The majority voices, even those otherwise supportive of the Taliban, have opposed the destruction of the statues. They have strongly disagreed with an act, which distorts the message of Islam, a religion steeped in compassion and tolerance; virtues which the Buddha, whose statues now lie decimated, preached throughout his life.

The Taliban have tried to project this as an issue that the `real` Islamists, the madarissa-going ones as opposed to the college-going would positively relate to. This is a conveniently set divide but not an entirely correct one. Only it is an erroneous one. As a group of men sat in a Bara Koh mosque discussing the Buddha smashing, only one of the seven defended the move. Defiantly he said ``Let their god do something if he can``, referring naturally to the Buddhists who do not worship Buddha but revere him. The rest in the mosque were clear. It was an unnecessary and provocative act. It was to achieve only negative publicity for their religion and for the already besieged Afghans.

Similarly, this purposeless destruction did not find favour even with Muntazir, a driver from Mardan, who rushes to say his prayers in the mosque five times a day. When asked for his opinion, he shook his head with disapproval ``What if those who do not believe in Islam start breaking our mosques?``. He can barely read and write but he recognises the need for tolerance. At a practical level, he understands tolerance as an attitude in his own interest too.

The Taliban`s apparently sudden move has contradicted their own past assertions of protecting the Afghan heritage. In an inexplicable development the statues of the Buddha went from being seen as heritage to being seen as idols to be destroyed. But why? Was there any danger of the Afghans who have lived with these statues for ages beginning to worship them instead of Allah? Had they ever invested these statues with divinity that the powerlessness of these statues needed to be proved?

If Mulla Omar thought he was following the teaching of the Prophet (PBUH), then he has made a sad and dangerous mistake. To compare the statues of the Buddha to the 360 idols residing in the Kaaba is erroneous. Those idols were broken because they were being worshipped as rival gods in the house of Allah. As the idols fell, the Prophet (PBUH) repeated the following Qur`aanic verse ``Verily truth hath come and falsehood hath vanished, it is in the nature of falsehood to vanish``. The Buddha`s statues were no emblem of falsehood.

In fact, the Qur`aanic assertion that a prophet was sent to every people and a knowledge of the Buddha`s life and beliefs would dispose us to think that he would be among those sent by Allah to lead human beings to the straight path.

Mulla Omar should also reflect on what the Prophet did when he came across a statue of Hazrat Isa and Bibi Mariam. He covered it with his mantle and did not allow it to be shattered. Why? Obviously because he saw those statues for what they were, a symbolic remembrance of holy beings whom the Qur`aan teaches us to love and revere.

Islam does not teach us to be threatened by and react angrily to images of people and things revered by people of other faiths. Unfortunately, by destroying the statues, Mulla Omar has struck against tolerance not `shirq`. He has also struck against the centuries old Afghan tradition of peaceful co-existence with its own heritage.

The author is a freelance writer based in Islamabad

Harpreet # 200, Sadhnaji

No let’s leave fawad97 alone.

If you guys can access it, there was an excellent lead story in Wall Street Journal (3/12/01) on Indian generic drug manufacturer CIPLA. Its CEO Yusuf Hamied is making quite a few western drug manufacturers unhappy by offering aids drug at 1/30th of US price to south africans.

This is what we can call true sewa to humanity rather than wasting time in those mandir, masjid or gurdwaras and endless discussion on who has monopoly on heaven and houris. He and his folks are working hard to keep churning out generic drugs for poor people of the world at affordable prices. The guy is Ph D from cambridge and his father was a nationalist muslim who started the company in bombay (1935).

Long live secularism!

janjua,

u want to know my aqidah--well i believe if a shia believes ONLY that Hazrat Ali was superior in rank to the other three khulafa i rashida and doesn`t disparage any of the others and accepts their caliphate as righteous he is a muslim although from ahle biddah; if however he/she denies the caliphate of Hazrat Abu Bakr and Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Uthman, or curses them, or says that the Qur`an is not complete, or that their is another Qur`an, or that the Imams of the Ahle Bayt are superior to the other Prophets, or that Hazrat Ayesha commited adultery (naudhubillah), or that Gabriel made a mistake etc. then s/he is definitely a kaafir and destined for Hell insha Allah.

That is the aqidah of the Sunnis.

And also if we were in an Islamic state then you would be lashed 20 (or 80?) times for slandering Hazrat Amir ul Mumineen Muawiyya radhi Allah anhu. And Hazrat Ali sher-e-Khuda karam Allah wajhu said he had nothing to do with those who considered him higher than the two Shaykhan.

You have no adab for the elders of islam but you know this is going to be a noose round your neck when you face your Creator unless you repent.

AS for visiting ASFA (sunnah.org) --you should--you might learn the correct aqidah. And no, whichever person asked about the little boys dream--it sure wasn`t me; it says a lot about you though that u have to resort to slander and lies.

Please carry on -- i dont expect much better from you pseudo-liberals anyway.

La`nat Allah alaa kadhibeen.

An article that really puts things in perspective.

From Moses to the Taliban

By Crispin Sartwell

Saturday, March 10, 2001; Page A21

The Washington Post

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A49468-2001Mar9.html

He took the calf that they had made, burned it with fire, ground it to

powder, scattered it on the water, and made the Israelites drink it.

Moses

said to Aaron, ``What did this people do to you that you have brought so

great a sin upon them?``

Exodus 32: 20-21

What the Taliban is doing to statues in Afghanistan appears to be

mindless

destruction. But it is deeply rooted in a tradition we share with them.

The word ``iconoclast`` today indicates a person who attacks widely

accepted

beliefs. But it originally meant one who literally breaks idols. And

the

first iconoclast on record was Moses, who, coming down from the

mountain

with the Ten Commandments to find the Israelites worshiping a statue,

broke

the tablets and then the idol itself.

Ever since, we have oscillated between idolatry and iconoclasm, two

impulses

that share a belief that images have power: power to bring you to the

divine, or to mislead you into worshiping false gods.

Plato wanted to ban figurative art because he believed it was

deceptive. The

early Christians destroyed images of the Roman and Greek gods

throughout the

Roman Empire, and Christian missionaries have done the same with images

all

over the world. The Protestant Reformation of Luther and Calvin was in

part

a reaction against the Catholic cult of Mary and the saints, and the

Protestants destroyed innumerable Catholic icons.

The Mosaic religions -- Judaism, Christianity and Islam -- all of which

recognize the authority of the Old Testament and its prohibition of

idol

worship, have each given birth to extreme moments of iconoclasm. Sects

of

Judaism and Islam in particular have sometimes gone as far as Plato and

prohibited all representational arts.

Iconoclasm is inseparable from monotheism. God for the Mosaic religions

is

conceived as pure spirit, and hence often as an entity of which there

can be

no images. That is part of what distinguishes the Mosaic religions from

what

monotheists call paganism and idolatry.

That is not to say that what the Taliban is doing is rational or

justified.

Afghanistan, in losing its images of the Buddha and other statues, is

losing

something that connects them and us to their history, and is losing the

work

of centuries of creative genius. But we must also acknowledge that the

Taliban`s interpretation of Islam is directly connected to the

mainstream of

the tradition of Moses.

But the idolaters that the Taliban are attacking are not the worshipers

of

the Golden Calf or even of the Buddha. Buddhism has been dead in

Afghanistan

for a thousand years.

The idols they`re obliterating are ours.

We of the secular West have to some degree replaced religion with art.

Art

for us is something holy that must be preserved: housed in

fortress-like

buildings to which we make pilgrimages, preserved or restored in

perpetuity.

Art has not always been thought of that way by other cultures. Navajo

sand

paintings, as beautiful and difficult to make as they are, are

traditionally

destroyed after the ceremonies for which they are made.

Art for us is spiritual, eternal, transcendent. We have made of art a

cult,

and the work of art is our idol. So the iconoclasts of the modern era

horrify us as much as the iconoclasts of the ancient world horrified

the

pagans. It has seemed at times in the past few days that we are moved

more

by the plight of the sculptures of Afghanistan than the plight of the

Afghan

people, who are suffering from a drought and from the oppression of the

Taliban rulers themselves.

But the Taliban know very well how to horrify us: They know our

religion,

and they know their own. They`re both enacting a central feature of

theirs,

and achieving maximum provocation by assaulting ours.

This leads to the sad destruction of beautiful things. But it also

testifies

to the continuing power of images and the continuing power of the great

religious traditions.

And give the Taliban this: Unlike Moses with the Israelites, they`re

not, as

far as we know, grinding the statues to powder, scattering them on the

water

and making people drink them.

Crispin Sartwell is the author of ``The Art of Living: Aesthetics of the

Ordinary in World Spiritual Traditions.``

Harish3

Relpy#191

`rather then constantly blaming the west for their problems`

I didn`t blame the West specifically. In my post I have blamed the World. I have mentioned in one place that the Buddhas were not meant to be housed in American Museums, only because an offer did come from one/both of them. Perhaps this made you think that the post was directed against the West.



`i think its also noteworthy to point out that the person with the least amount of outrage at this destruction would be the buddha himself for one of the central tenents of his teaching was the

impermanence and illusory nature of life. (remember at the end of the film ``little buddha`` when a monk, in order to demonstrate this

impermanence of life, came and swept his hand over a painstakingly designed mandala design, intricatley laid out in colored sand?)`

If you re-read my post, you will see that we are in agreement here. And thanks for reminding me of that very beautiful gesture in the `little buddha`.

With the kind of human destruction that is going on every day in Afghanistan (Thank you Sadma for your post on the URLs), only the Stone-hearted will think about saving the Statues instead of talking about Saving the PEOPLE.