How Not to Reform Universities

Ref adnan672, Mullah321, sattar2, krashid69, etc.

Are we discussing reforming Pakistan`s universities or madrassahs?

krashid#: 155

Dear krashid

my comments

``...You are confusing issues. I have asked you, from where in Koran it is suggested to strive for

Islamic Empire or Islamic State.``

The Prophet`s SAW life is the interpretation of Quran and he did establish and expand the Islamic empire ok.

``...Prophet PBUH was cajoled by many bribes in Mecca to stop his....of having the power.``

Indeed it is for the glory of Allah`s religion that the Islamic Empire has to be established. I agree.

``.. To give you an example majority of Danda Bardar and Klashinkov Bardar Mujahideen of Jamiat later joined MQM. And were preaching Mohajir Qaumiat with much more force than Islam``

An example of what???????????????????

``...@nd thing. Everything done in Islamic History may or may not be Islamic. For example:``

The simple answer to your examples is that in all

cases each party thaought that they were simply carrying out the commands of Allah (please see Khilafat o Mulookiyat by Maudoodi to clear confusion on these issues)

``... Muawiya RZAH told his warriors to put Koran on their spears to make determination.``

Just a point in passing it was Hazrat Amr RA who did that ok

``...The movement in current century against imperialism foreign domination etc in last analysis are nationalistic movements.``

Wrong, I disagree, these were spurred by religion, in mosr cases, that they were hijacked by secularists is another story

``With Mujahid like I described before one day fighting for and next day fighting against Islam (meaning Jamiat). What they stand for is unclear.

Bhai krashid, DO NOT BASE YOUR ENTIRE IDEOLOGY ON HATE ok. Else you`ll end up being no better than Lashkar e Jhangvi type people

You come out badly in any discussion, because your hatred for jamiat (for a reason you refuse to disclose) compels you to drag jamiat in a completely ridiculous manner.

`..There is no compulsion in religion simply means you cannot force me to pray or fast.``

This is NOT what the Prophet told us it means.

For sanad see Tafheem ul Quran by Maudoodi

Adnan

sattar2

On your parthenogenesis theory, PLESE do not twist science like this, the learned gentleman who wrote this probably hasnt understood the idea.

Btw have you seen or heard of, in the entire human history of a human birth by parthenogenesis?

Ofcourse NOT, bcos it CANNOT happen in humans

Spare science from this kind of pseudo scientific stuff

Adnan

sattar2#: 159

Dear Mr Sattar

My comments:

``.....rights of women ? etc. etc.). While a lot of these accomplishments are mentioned in Quran ? nowhere is the prophet being the ?last? prophet mentioned ? except in the case of this marriage!

Why so much emphasis is placed on this marriage ? in context of ... ultimate prophet ? and provided simple references from Quran and early Islamic history to make my point.``

A point which you seem to forget (mild amnesia??)from all my posts is this: Tafseer is a process that started with the Prophet SAW as he was a law giver, continued with the Sahaba RA, the Tabaieen RA and so on. It is a chain extending through 1400 years. ok.

Now what each ayah means has been explained by the Prophet SAW, and has come down to us through the Ulema.

Mirza Sahib went against 1400 years of interpretation and in my view came with an idea alien to Islam.

COMMENTS?

Your own argument as to ``ultimate`` fails on several other grounds

1. It is against arabic lexicographical rules (cf. Islam aur khatm e Nabuwwat by Maudoodi)

2. What has ultimate got to do with the Prophet`s SAW marriage?

``...Don?t you remember ??``

No I do not remember ok.

``...Allah being All Powerful ? and All Merciful ? is n.....life ? laws of biology and physics ? constant supply of oxygen, rain, fruit, energy ? shelter against cosmic radiation ? blood flowing in our veins ? a pumping heart ? and much more ? are examples of His Power and His Mercy. There is no inconsistency here ? and if properly understood, it makes complete sense!``

No Mr Sattar it does not make sense! (Although I hate to make the agnostic/atheist case but here goes)

A 6 year old child dies of blood cancer. the last 1 year of his existance is wretched. MERCIFUL GOD INDEED etc etc (may I suggest ``The Miracle of Theism by J.Mackie)

All Life is a coincidence. We evolved acc. to natural selection, there is NO scientific evidence for CREATION.

As for rain, food etc etc the reason WE ARE HERE AND OBSERVING THIS is bcos conditions were just right for us to be here and observing all this ok (find some literature on the Anthropic Principle, I can`t recall anything offhand, maybe GOD and the new Physics by P.Davies), no need of the GOD hypothesis in this

RELIGION IS A LEAP OF FAITH. YOU CANNOT CONSTRUCT A LOGICAL RELIGIOUS THEORY

``....Quran leaves no doubt that even Mohammad (pbuh) was merely a human ? and a mortal ? as I pointed out. There is no room for miracles? that you associate with prophets.``

Forget a debate on miracles (we could debate on these), simply tell me Mirza Sahib is a reincarnation of the Prophet SAW (Aik Ghalatee ka Izaalaa) MIRACLE INDEED!!!!!!

``... Even Urstruly stated that ullema have rejected the notions of..........``

I am not a follower of urstruly, he is a good writer and i agree with many of his views, but this is NOT an argument ok.

:...merit ? on grounds of reason and understanding of Quran. Whether I am an Ahmadi or

..... please go ahead and explain your position. Once we are done ? we can review Ahmadi-Muslims beliefs ? deal``

The point here was you were trying to sneak in Ahmadi beliefs in an entirely different discussion, this is what set me off in the first place, I have stated my point of view, your comments??

ADNAN

Sattar 2# 157

Is there a new message brought by Mirza Sahib.

Or is it just the explanation of Koran.

As in Quran and history there is no acceptance of a new prophet.

Is it possible to get the explanation of Koran from Mirza Sahib without believeing him as prophet or Masih Mauood or Mehdi. (in reverse order he proclaimed himself although).

Because if his message is just explanation of Koran in new enviornment (and he did not bring a new Shariah, otherwise it would be a new religion), what is wrong with reading his words without accepting him as prophet.

So apart from denial of miracles, which was done before him by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, what other teachings you want to teach which Ulema failed to understand for 1400 years.

For example although it is historically wrong which you are claiming about jesus. Does it make any difference whether he migrated to Kashmir in search of lost tribe or not.

Or God has to wait 1300 years, before revealing this fact, which he has hidden before to proove on Ummat and Make HIS hujjat on Ummat regarding a new prophet who did nothing to the message of Koran except bringing some ill advised historical facts to proove his worth.

Believe in one GOD. That is all message from all prophets. And that message will remain forever.

Ahad. La Illaha Illallah.

Sattar 2# 157

Is there a new message brought by Mirza Sahib.

Or is it just the explanation of Koran.

As in Quran and history there is no acceptance of a new prophet.

Is it possible to get the explanation of Koran from Mirza Sahib without believeing him as prophet or Masih Mauood or Mehdi. (in reverse order he proclaimed himself although).

Because if his message is just explanation of Koran in new enviornment (and he did not bring a new Shariah, otherwise it would be a new religion), what is wrong with reading his words without accepting him as prophet.

So apart from denial of miracles, which was done before him by Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, what other teachings you want to teach which Ulema failed to understand for 1400 years.

For example although it is historically wrong which you are claiming about jesus. Does it make any difference whether he migrated to Kashmir in search of lost tribe or not.

Or God has to wait 1300 years, before revealing this fact, which he has hidden before to proove on Ummat and Make HIS hujjat on Ummat regarding a new prophet who did nothing to the message of Koran except bringing some ill advised historical facts to proove his worth.

Believe in one GOD. That is all message from all prophets. And that message will remain forever.

Ahad. La Illaha Illallah.

Sattar 2#

You don`t have hell of an idea what is ``Arrhenoblastoma``. It is not arthenoblastoma.

Moreover it does not produce sperm. Do you have heck of an idea, what you are talking about.

There is no known cancer in female which produce sperm.

Sattar 2

On your matter of Jesus going to Kashmir.

There is a documentary on Jesus, which was played on one of the channels.

Very thoroughly investigated to the point of finding the possibility of Jesus as a fake figure.

It has come up with some points.

Jesus was put on cross. Was buried. And showed to his disciples three days later.

They also entertained the possibility of jesus going to Kashmir, as some people have claimed. And discarded it as utterly rubbish concept.

If jesus can be born without father. He can be raised to heaven.

Do you believe in life after death.

What kind of scientific and rational thoughts you have got. I yet have to determine, before deciding or making any judgement on you.

Sattar 2

Parthenogenesis birth as far as I know there is no example in human.

2nd you said that it is not important to you whether a male child can be born through this process. Biologically, logically, and scientifically it should be very important to you. Because you are denying the existence of miracles. It is very very important, because your denial of miracles cannot stand the ground, if you cannot prove birth of a male child by a female through parthenogenesis.

In the word of Koran it was God`s word ``Kun Fayakoon`` HE said and it happened.

First and foremost do you believe in God. 2nd Can God perform miracles. Or God is so afraid of Mirza Sahib. What is your opinion on Surah Isra. ``Pure is the God, who took his servant in one night night from Masjid-ul Haram to Masjid-e-Aqsa. (meaning only). If you follow up on this all Muslims believed in authenticity of this and all Kafirs were sarcastic. Where do you stand.

In another para you are saying, there is evil in the world. Tell me who created the evil.

Not only Ayah Khatimun-Nabieen put a seal on prophet. But there are many authentic hadith on this.

Anyway, miracle of prophet PBUH is Quran, with all kind of challenges to human being.

Tell me do you believe in angels. Do you believe in Gabriel bringing Wahi to prophet. Do you believe in Jinns.

Pardon me my friend, your facade of rationality and scientificity is as good and as selective as your reading.

Re Adnan (#150):

Yes, I certainly pointed out contradiction in your explanation of “khattam”. You claimed that since the prophet was the “last” prophet, it was important that he struck down the pagan Arab custom by marrying his adopted slave-son’s divorced wife … and therefore “khattam” implies “last”.

I objected that … the prophet accomplished other greater goals … (conveyed the Quran; abolished riba, gambling, drinking; taught salaat; struck alliances with enemies; established remarkable standards of justice and treatment of slaves and POWS; established rights of women … etc. etc.). While a lot of these accomplishments are mentioned in Quran … nowhere is the prophet being the “last” prophet mentioned … except in the case of this marriage!

Why so much emphasis is placed on this marriage … in context of the prophet being the “last” prophet … while other bigger accomplishments are mentioned without reference to the “last” prophet? I then explained why “khattam” means the “ultimate” prophet … and provided simple references from Quran and early Islamic history to make my point.

It was then that you decided to exit the debate … unable to explain the weakness in your argument. Don’t you remember …?

Moving on …

Allah being All Powerful … and All Merciful … is not a contradiction. Rather it makes complete sense! Here’s how. Evil exists in this world … because people, who are given free will … at times choose to rebel against Allah’s commandments. But the game is not over yet. Those who are wronged in this world … will be compensated in the hereafter. Quran repeatedly reminds us of this. Allah is able to compensate those who sacrificed on His behalf … BECAUSE He is All Powerful … and All Merciful! Even in this world, one cannot ignore signs of His Power and Mercy all around … His sustenance of life … laws of biology and physics … constant supply of oxygen, rain, fruit, energy … shelter against cosmic radiation … blood flowing in your veins … a pumping heart … and much more … are examples of His Power and His Mercy. There is no inconsistency here … and if properly understood, it makes complete sense!

Sahib … you are yet to make your case on this account …

Moving on …

Quran leaves no doubt that even Mohammad (pbuh) was merely a human … and a mortal … as I pointed out. There is no room for “miracles” that you associate with prophets.

Even Urstruly stated that ullema have rejected the notions of Jesus’ ascension and descent … which contradicts your statements. I think Urstruly did not want to admit that his Islam does not make sense … to him either. But that was a minor point … that I wanted to bring to your attention. Any comments ...?

(Urstuly Sahib … please correct me if I am wrong)

The points I have raised … stand on their own merit … on grounds of reason and understanding of Quran. Whether I am an Ahmadi … or an atheist … is largely irrelevant here. I have presented arguments …highlighted your contradictions … and provided sound explanations … all this without references to Ahmadiyyat. Looks like you are unable to respond to the issues I have raised here. If I am wrong … please go ahead and explain your position. Once we are done … we can review Ahmadi-Muslims beliefs … deal?

Re Krashid (#152):

As stated in Quran, I believe that Jesus was born without the agency of a father. This however, does not constitute a “miracle” which defies biological facts. I once posted an explanation of this … and I’ll repost a part of it …

‘ … One of the possible explanations of “virgin birth” is through a rare natural phenomenon of “parthenogenesis”. Here, a kind of tumor known as “arthenoblastoma” found in female pelvis or lower parts of the body, can generate male sperm cells and can potentially result in conception, even in the case of a virgin woman. This type of self-fertilization is an extremely rare phenomenon, but it provides a plausible explanation. The book I have here (Jesus’ Second Coming, by Shah Mustafizur Rahman) refers to Encyclopedia Britanica under topics of “Virgin Birth” and “Anomolies and Curiosities of Medicine”; W.B. Saunders and Co., London, for more discussion on the topic.

I myself have not looked up these references but would like to point out that … as I understand it, medical science supports the idea that such a rare phenomenon (i.e. parthenogenesis) can result in the birth of a female child only, and not a male one. But I am not too concerned about it. In the last 2000-or-so years, science has progressed enough to discover the possibility of a female child being born without a biological father. Given some more time, science may well discover some lesser-known phenomenon (say, a special case of parthenogenesis) that can result in the birth of a male child as well …’

Now … Quran does not ask us to believe blindly. It implores us to ponder over the details of Allah’s creations … and the world around us. Religion, if correctly understood, fully complements rationality … and does not defy reason. Following the beliefs of one’s fore-fathers would have certainly resulted in one rejecting Moses, Abraham, Mohammad … and all other prophets of God. If a set of belief cannot stand the test of reason, it is bound to become corrupted. Quran emphasizes this in several places and does not demand blind faith from the believers … rather it insists that we use our intellect to appreciate message of Allah.

Moving on to the issue of Issa …

Quran calls as doubtful the crucifixion of Jesus. Jesus, as he became unconscious, resembled one who was crucified (killed, as a result of being put on the cross). When he was pierced with a lance on a side, blood and water came forth (Gospel of John) … which indicated a pumping heart. He was dismantled from the cross, presumed dead, while still in the state of unconsciousness. His followers took his body, wrapped him in ointments, and placed him in a tomb. Over the next day or so, Jesus regained consciousness, healed enough to move about, and left the tomb. He later met with his disciples, showed them his wounds, ate with them, traveled in secrecy, and finally left Jerusalem. All this is mentioned in the Bible …which serves as a historical account of the events that transpired.

Jesus then went about searching for people of Israel (descendants of Prophet Jacob, son of Issac, son of Ibrahim) who had migrated eastwards … all the way to Kashmir. He conveyed to them the message of God, and eventually died in Kashmir. Quran in one place mentions that refuge was given to Issa and Mary in a place of green valleys and springs … a description that fits the valley of Kashmir (I can look up the reference later). Historians, including some German and Russian researchers, have traced the path of Issa all the way to Kashmir … and discovered his grave in Sirinagar.

“Ascension” of Issa does not refer to bodily ascension. The jews wanted to crucify Issa on charges of blasphemy … and to show that he is an imposter, and does not enjoy divine support. Torah mentions in one place that he who is crucified … cannot be a true messenger of Allah. The jewish clergy demanded his crucifixion … the roman judge gave the verdict of death … and Issa was put on the cross. His survival against all odds … proved his truthfulness beyond a doubt … and elevated him to the status of prophethood in the eyes of others … and showed support of Allah in his favor. This is the correct interpretation of “aecension” of Issa … as I understand it.

I’ll toss out another fine point to support this interpretation … The verse in question states that “ … Allah raised Jesus unto Himself …” (4:158). Note the keyword … “unto Himself”. If this was a physical ascension, it would imply that Allah resides somewhere “up there” … in the skies … and He raised Jesus to the skies … to Himself. But clearly Allah is everywhere … and not just in the skies. Which means that physical ascension of Jesus to the skies towards Allah does not make sense. “Ascension” would mean a spiritual ascension … one that elevates the status of Jesus to that of a true prophet … by a show of clear support of Allah.

Also, the Arabic word used here to describe ascension of Jesus (ra’faa) is also used to describe ascension of Prophet Idress in Surah-e-Mariam, somewhere around verse 55-60.

Now, the “miracles” attributed to other prophets … Jesus, Moses, and others … stem from misinterpretation of Quran. I explained in my post to Adnan Sahib that … Quran commands Prophet Mohammad that when people demand miracles from you … Say: Glory to my Lord! Am I anything but a man … a messenger?” (17:93). This response leaves no room for any “miracles” associated with prophets. “Moses parting the waters” can be easily explained in terms of high and low tides. “Miracle” here is the timing of the tides … which allowed Moses and his people to safely cross the water … while the pharaoh and his army got drowned as they were swept by the high tides. Similarly, Jesus raising the dead … is a metaphor … which implies … that Jesus revived people who were spiritually dead.

Quran is truly the Word the Allah. It uses metaphors and descriptive language to make a point. It is important to ponder over the verses … to exercise one’s intellect … and to make an effort to understand it in a sensible, rational manner. This, no doubt, will lead one to correct understanding of the Word of Allah … and better appreciation of His Attributes.

Best ragards.

Re Tahmed (#149):

I understand we have our differences in interpretation of “seal of prophethood”. I interpret it as “the ultimate prophet” for various reasons, as I explained earlier

The context of the verse in question (33:40) makes “ultimate” a better choice … and does not fit with “khattam” as “last”. I explained this in the past … but I do not recall you commenting on the explanation I provided.

Secondly, another verse of Quran (7:35) states … “O’ children of Adam … if messengers come to you from amongst you rehearsing my signs …”. This verse clearly leaves open the possibility of future prophets. If this verse is no longer applicable … the burden to prove this rests on your shoulder … and not mine.

Coming of future prophets does not take away the responsibility of Muslims to use Quran and their common sense. Just as Jesus, Jacob, Yahya and others came as warners … and only emphasized the message of Allah to the people … so will the future prophets. A prophet is responsible only for warning the people as they go astray … and is not answerable on account of others.

I do not think I am twisting the message of Quran here in any sense. Coming of future prophets does not conflict with Ways of Allah and the message of Quran. You have the right to have your opinion on this issue … and we can peacefully agree to disagree … and move on.

As long as we have respect and affection for each other as humans … we should be ok. We both believe in Allah Almighty … and that with time He will separate truth from error. We can only make our best effort to understand, without compromising our dignity and integrity, ask Allah for help … and leave the rest to Him. I know you certainly appreciate this point …

adnan #151 You have been suppressing the words of the Quran and replacing it with your own message. Now, you are suppressing plain facts too - facts about muslim history. No, what I am saying does not go against 1400 years of muslim history, as you say. What I am saying is what the muslims, in their days of greatness, demonstrated through their actions: in Muslim Spain, Jews reached the highest ranks of government and contributed greatly to muslim society and lived in peace. They were not demonized as they are routinely done by your kind on every occassion they can find.

In their days of greatness, muslims invited Hindu scholars to come to Baghdad to share their learning; they read books written in ancient Greece and translated them into Arabic, and thus served as torchbearers of human civilization. Your kind demonize Hindus, demonize the West.

I have wasted enough time with you, and will now tell you (as the Quran instructs we should do with the nonbelievers) ``to you be your way and to me mine``.

As for the terrorists you condone, rest assured they have no more chance of success than a gang of bandits.

Adnan #672

#150 and #151

The use of Sattar Bhai and harshnes on TAhmed clearly depicts your Islam.

``Momin are soft among themselves and hard (or harsh) on enemies.

Adnan 672

You are confusing issues.

I have asked you, from where in Koran it is suggested to strive for Islamic Empire or Islamic State.

Prophet PBUH was cajoled by many bribes in Mecca to stop his work. Including making him king. But he refused. For him his main purpose was to spread his message. Since in Medina he did not have to compromise on his principles, he happily saw the advantage of having the power.

To give you an example majority of Danda Bardar and Klashinkov Bardar Mujahideen of Jamiat later joined MQM. And were preaching Mohajir Qaumiat with much more force than Islam.

@nd thing. Everything done in Islamic History may or may not be Islamic. For example:

Fatima RZAH did not talk to ABU-Bakr RZAH for 6 months on the matter of Fidk.

Usman`s RZAH beard was pulled by son of Abu-Bakr Rzah.

Aisha and Zubair fought fought with Ali RZAH.

Ali RZAH fought with Muawiya RZAH.

Muawiya RZAH told his warriors to put Koran on their spears to make determination.

One of the crime of Abu Muslim Khurasani was that he was against ``Jizya`` by the king from ``New Muslims``. He was massacred with the help of Ulema.

The point is people have used Islam for political expediency from the very beginning and throughout history. If you want to turn political expediency into a Islamic and non Islamic thing.

The movement in current century against imperialism foreign domination etc in last analysis are nationalistic movements.

To cut it short. Nationalistic movement of West Pakistan borgouise massacred several hundred thousands to a million Bengali with the backing of Islamic parties. Because nationalism of west Pakistan was synonymous with Islam.

Quran says read in the name of God.-- Who has taught man through pen. taught him what he did not know. Pen for me is written word.

With Mujahid like I described before one day fighting for and next day fighting against Islam (meaning Jamiat). What they stand for is unclear.

If the situation remains tomorrow pub and night club will open in the name of Islam. And interest will be made Halaal by some sophisticated Islamic term.

Right and wrong can be differentiated with an open mind, knowledge and belief.

In early christianity, popes have self inflicted punishment on themselves to please God according to their beliefs. Whether God will will reward them or punish them is not for me to judge.

Koran says its Ayah are clear for those who want to understand with open mind. And if you don`t understand ask the people of understanding. With majority of Ayah demand from a common man is clear.

There is no compulsion in religion simply means you cannot force me to pray or fast.

If you can do that bring me some ``Sanad`` or proof.

sattar2 #147 you write ``the mullahs have interpreted Quran in ways that have raised contradictions within the Book of Allah … and against men’s common sensibilities.``

I of course agree with that, since that is the basic problem I have with adnan`s determination to introduce his own convenient qualifiers to what the simple and clear statement in the Quran that there is no compulsion in religion. These qualifications suppress a fundamental point that is stressed in the Quran, and thus have the far-reaching effect of giving mullahs other scum the political power that is vehemently denied to them in the Quran.

As you may recall from our previous discussion on the subject, I see the Ahmedis playing similar games with the Quran when they interpret the clear and simple message in the Quran regarding the finality of the prophethood. You had provided me the qualifier that there are different grades of prophets, and ``lesser prophets`` are still permitted. The Quran is no less clear on this point than it is on the point you (and I) take adnan to task on. The practical affect of this is not insignificant either: it takes away individual responsibility on the muslim to trust his common sense and his conscience and not look to ``spiritual leaders`` for guidance.

The only difference between adnan`s (i.e. the religious political party`s) convenient twisting of the Quranic message and your`s (i.e. the Ahmedis) is that whereas the former roam in armed gangs around the country trying to intimidate Pakistani people, Ahmedis pose no such security threat to Pakistani society, nor are likely to in the foreseeable future. But the convenient misinterpretation of the Quran is equally egregious in both cases in my considered view.