Compounded Waste

#64:

am aware of the `other filters`... but there is only one final filter...the word of Allah...

...is an act of the magnitude of suicide bombing mentioned, condoned, discussed in any way in qur`an?... if not then what does the book say about respect for life and liberty of individuals...muslims and non-muslims?...

...use any filter you want:)...then we can review it in the light of the final filter

rgds

t

ntsyed ...

On McVeigh issue, first word of your response … Action … gives the answer. He was executed not for his belief … not for being left-handed … but for this actions. His “apostasy to US government” is not an issue … otherwise thousands more would be executed on daily basis.

Apostasy is purely a matter of faith. But your mullahs insist that an apostate should be killed. On a slightly different note, these mullahs also pressured government of Pakistan to pass laws to imprison Ahmadis for posing like a Muslim … for reciting kalima, for praying in public, for saying as’salam-o-alaikom. Persecution of Ahmadis is a shameless chapter from recent history of ullema’s Islam. Don’t tell me that I am misinformed. These are signs of insecurity and intolerance, which have led ummah to a culture of violence and brutality.

On blasphemy against the Prophet (pbuh), your point as I have understood is that … blasphemy against the prophet threatened the very fabric of society and Islam. My response in #63 addressed this adequately.

Furthermore, Quran addresses issues of adultery, blasphemy, and apostasy in several places. It guides believers on dealing with these issues … without any mention of death for the perpetrators. Following recorded ahadith that violate Quran is foolish in my view. If a recorded hadith violates Quran, it (the hadith) becomes erroneous in my view.

Following are some excerpts from writings of Maudoodi … that highlight ullema’s fanatic and violent positions on various issues. This is one side of the coin that you have ignored all along. Neocons are the other side of the coin, that you remain infatuated with. Look both ways before crossing a street ...

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

APOSTASY

Elaborating on killing of apostates and “no compulsion in religion” commandment of Quran … Maudoodi explains: “This means we do not compel anyone to embrace our religion. This is true. But we must warn anyone who wishes to recant that this door is impassable to free traffic. If you wish to come, do so with the firm decision that your cannot escape.”

He further states:

“There are two methods of dealing with an apostate. Either make him an outlaw by depriving him of his citizenship and allowing him mere existence, or end his life. The first method is definitely more severe than the second, because he exists in a state in which ‘neither lives nor dies’. Killing him is preferable. That way both his agony and the agony of society are ended simultaneously.”

Maudoodi, Murtad Ki Saza Islami Qanoon Mein (“Punishment for Apostates in Islamic Law”), page 51.

MORE ON APOSTASY

“In our domain we neither allow any Muslim to change his religion nor allow any other religion to propagate its faith”

And

“The execution of apostates has already decided the issue. Since we do not allow any Muslim to embrace any other religion, the question of allowing other religions to open their missions and propagate their faiths within our boundaries does not rise.”

Maudoodi, Murtad Ki Saza Islami Qanoon Mein (“Punishment for Apostates in Islamic Law”), Lahore: Islamic Publications Ltd, 1981, 8th edition, page 32.


MORE ON APOSTASY AND ISLAMIC REVOLUTION

“Whenever death penalty for apostasy is enforced in a new Islamic state, then Muslims are kept within Islam’s fold. But there is a danger that large number of hypocrites will live alongside them. They will always pose a danger of treason.

My solution to the problem is this. That whenever an Islamic revolution takes place, all non-practicing Muslims should, within one year, declare their turning away from Islam and get out of Muslim society. After one year all born Muslims will be considered Muslims. All Islamic laws will be enforced upon them. They will be forced to practice all of the obligatory duties (faraid) and optional duties (wajibat) of their religion and if anyone wishes to leave Islam, he will be executed. Every effort will be made to save as many people as possible from falling into lap of disbelief (kufr). But those who cannot be saved will be reluctantly separated from society forever. After this purification Islamic society will start afresh with Muslims who have decided voluntarily to remain Muslims.

Maudoodi, Murtad ki saza Islami qanoon mein (“Punishment for Apostates in Islamic Law”), Lahore: Islamic Publications Ltd, 1950, page 80-81.


FOREIGN POLICY AND JIHAD

“Human relations are so integrated that no state can have complete freedom of action under its principles unless the same principles are in force in a neighboring country. Therefore, both for its safety and the general reform, a “Muslim party” will not be content with the establishment of Islam in just one area alone. It should try to expand in all directions. On one hand it will spread its ideology, on the other it will invite people of all nations to accept its creed, for salvation lies only therein. If this Islamic state has power and resources it will fight and destroy non-Islamic governments and establish Islamic states in their place.”

[The above statement is an open declaration of war against other nations. It essentially means that a strong Islamic nation is a sign of present and eminent danger for the neighboring non-Islamic states. Maudoodi tries to validate his interpretation by casting Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) as a person who declared war against other nations to subjugate them. Note the emphasis on unprovoked war … associated with the Prophet of Islam … whose sole aim supposedly was to seize power and rule over others. Maudoodi further states …]

“This was the policy which was adopted by the Prophet (pbuh) and his Rightly Guided Caliphs. Arabia, where the Muslims Party was first formed, was the first to be subdued. After this, the Prophet (pbuh) sent invitations to all neighboring countries, but did not wait to see whether these invitations were accepted. As soon as he acquired power, he started the conflict with Roman Empire. Abu Bakr became the leader of the Party after the Prophet (pbuh) and attacked both Roman and Persian Empires and Umar finally won the war”

Haqiqat-e-Jihad (Reality of Jihad); Lahore: Taj Company Ltd., 1964; page 64, 65

... and the rest, as they say, is history. Or is it?

History does repeat itself if we fail to learn from it. Over the course of time, weak becomes strong ... and vice versa. Unless we learn to be patient and to forgive, the cycle of violence will continue forever.

Let`s all of us take steps towards peaceful solutions. This is what the dear Prophet (pbuh) taught us and this is what the Book of Allah teaches us. And if in process one gets shortchanged, remember ... we will all return to the same place ... and each of us will have to account for what we did ... not for what someone else did to us. And He indeed is Just and Merciful ... so stay the course and don`t lose hope.

Re: # 65 by temporal & 66,67 by sattar2

temporal and Sattar,

Sorry for the delayed and joint response to you both, but this is the first opportunity I’ve had to respond to you.

Sattar,

Touche on #67! Muslims are guilty of a lot of crimes, as I`ve maintained previously, but that does not warrant a change in Islam. Unfortunately, neither does it prove your points.

I hope you did not miss my argument deliberately, although it seems so. I’ve been saying exactly the same thing consistently, i.e. if one’s apostasy does not threaten the society at large, then he/she is to be left alone according to Quran. Otherwise in case he/she poses a threat of any kind: social, moral, physical, security, whatever, should be killed.

Same was the case with McVeigh: his “BELIEF” that the US govt. was exploiting its own people LED him to his ACTION. Therefore, as longs such beliefs are not followed by destructive acts, the person is spared.

The rational conclusion then is that “blasphemy” is the most probable outcome of apostasy and disbelief; as we’ve witnessed here on many occasions by different individuals. At the minimum it attempts to lead the believers astray; certainly your own faith, if it is True Islam, seems shaken. Thus, an apostate is to be dealt with swiftly and firmly. No chances should be taken without a promise from the apostate that he/she will not disturb the Muslim society in any manner whatsoever, and the breach of that promise should be punished severely. One is free to leave Islam as it is between him/her and Allah, but he/she is NOT allowed to rock the boat, especially when there’s a great danger of it capsizing.

Quran and Sunnah are not to be blamed if some ignorant mullah/scholars abuse the Shar`iah.

Temporal,

I can’t say if you’re deliberate in your attempt, but you’re mixing the war-time and peace-time paradigms vis-à-vis respect for life and liberty, just like the non-Muslims. Their aim is to gain easier submission of Muslims (or whoever they attack without due reason) disguised as freedom and democracy. I’m not sure what your aim is, and I certainly don’t want to accuse you of anything until your admission.

Unfortunately not being a hafiz I cannot quote a specific verse that justifies acts like suicide bombing, even though I’m sure there is at least one if not more. One only needs to study the history of Islam – including the life of the Prophet (pbuh) – and earlier battles/wars to see that.

Quran vehemently emphasizes on respect for life and liberties of the Muslims and non-Muslims; and great care must be taken to prevent any loss in this respect. However, ALL parties have to respect this convention equally and in deed – one party cannot be responsible for it alone as it is a two-way street.

For example:
According to Quran, fighting is strictly forbidden in masijd-alharam (the immediate surrounding worshiping area of the Ka’aba), but Muslims also have crystal clear instruction in the same verse to fight back if they’re attacked in the sacred mosque until death, or the enemy desists; or the enemy is annihilated. If the enemy begs forgiveness upon defeat then he can be forgiven conditionally. Surrender to the mightier army is not an option! This may harm some innocent of our own in the process, such is the price of life and liberty.

quid pro quo
Question 1: Why is suicide bombing (one of few weapons of a poorly armed resistence group) more deplorable for you than nuclear bombing, cluster bombing, and use of chemical weapons like depleted uranium that cause many times more “collateral damage” than suicide bombings?

Question 2: Why do you imply submission to the invaders just because they are militarily mightier as opposed to fighting for one’s rights?

Question 3: If you negate my assumption in 2, then how do you suggest Muslims should fight to defend their faith and homes?

Question 4: Do you still believe that the current struggle between Muslims and Non-Muslims is not about destroying Islamic faith, even after the latest news out of Uzbekistan and Newsweek debacle? FYI, incidents of disrespecting Quran have been reported by well-recognized agencies before and you can witness the summary here.

Please do not say that Muslims started this war with 9/11. This crap has been going on for far too long than anti-Muslims and ignorant Muslims care to admit.

Here’s a quote from one of their “civilized” leaders, Sir Winston Churchill: “I’m strongly in favor of using poisonous gas against uncivilised tribes.. It is not necessary only to use the most deadly gases: gases can be used which cause great inconvenience and would spread a lively terror and yet would leave no serious permanent effects of most of those affected.`` (1919). The quote in the preceding link is followed (in the same para) by ``Colonel Gerald Leachman, a leading British officer declares that the only way to deal with the tribes is `wholesale slaughter`. The RAF Middle Eastern Command request chemical weapons to use `against recalcitrant Arabs as (an) experiment```. More than one of top US brass has made similar comments in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq.

What people conveniently render as “blunders” on part of US & UK are in fact premeditated schemes, and the trickling of truth (memos, whistleblowers, et al) in bits and pieces illuminate this fact vividly if one cares to keep up with the news from both sides of the conflict.

Anyhow, being “aware” of the other filters is not enough to be a true Muslim; one MUST believe in them too. Otherwise, his/her understanding of Quran will remain incomplete.

I suppose you’re not about to agree to it until you recognize that Prophet (pbuh) is just as important in Islam as the Quran; and that he`s utterly infallible.

That he (pbuh) NEVER, EVER, contradicted Quran; he simply could not contradict the Quran as he was The Embodiment of Quran; a perfect example of how Quran should be understood and followed. But you can only see this fact IF you study the Quran and the Sunnah both. Otherwise, it’ll not become apparent to you.

Allah raised him (pbuh) as the most truthful and the most trustworthy man to the point that even his archenemies could not deny his (pbuh) character.

Subsequently it was through the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) – the undisputedly truthful and trustworthy personality of the past, present, and future – that Quran was revealed to humanity.

That is THE reason that In the Quran Allah repeatedly tells us – not asks or requests or suggests to us – to obey the Prophet (pbuh) if we seek His Pleasure.

Then to claim that he (pbuh) contradicted Quran is in fact:
- selective belief in the Quran, which in turn leads to
- “selective” faith in Allah, which is
- Unacceptable for Allah and He has grievous chastisement for people guilty of this sin as you must have read in the Quran

Just think about your logic:
1. how can an apostate – ``an UNBELIEVER in Allah`` - ask for His Mercy
2. on one hand you claim to follow only the Quran; but then you violate its instruction to obey and follow Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) with the pretext that he contradicted the Quran; and you don’t even provide a irrefutable proof either.

Until and unless the two of you come to terms with aforementioned simple basics of Islam, your alignment in faith will remain skewed and you will continue to veer left of the True moderate Islamic line. Not to mention your attempts to understand the intricacies of this religion will be futile.

So if you wish for a fruitful discussion, as opposed to current beating of a dead horse, then get yourselves educated in both the Quran and authentic ahadith so all of us could our time more effectively. As it appears now, I quite certain you’ve never studied the Quran on your own since you consistently quote one person or another as per your argumentative needs.

#68

I’m not sure what your aim is, and I certainly don’t want to accuse you of anything until your admission.

aim? accuse? admission? ... if you read this and other articles by me your questions would be answered:)

Unfortunately not being a hafiz I cannot quote a specific verse that justifies acts like suicide bombing, even though I’m sure there is at least one if not more.

...just fyi...am not a hafiz either...but since you are sure then please quote it here...that is what i have been asking all along...(#65: one final filter)

quid pro quo

this is a good one...you have not answered my one question...yet indulge in this? interesting:)

ok i will answer one question...theek hay?

Question 1: Why is suicide bombing (one of few weapons of a poorly armed resistence group) more deplorable for you than nuclear bombing, cluster bombing, and use of chemical weapons like depleted uranium that cause many times more “collateral damage” than suicide bombings?

more deplorable? or even less? for me?... where do you come with these ideas and the attribute them to me? kamal hay yaar! (shaking me head)...

...frankly i don`t know if you do this deliberately and maliciously or innocently... you assume my position and try to set up straw arguments against that assumption...

..so back to the original question...re: justificationof suicide bombing in qur`an:)

rgds

t

Re: # 69

...just fyi...am not a hafiz either...but since you are sure then please quote it here...that is what i have been asking all along...(#65: one final filter)
As I’ve said before, yours is an inherently FLAWED question to begin with since it excludes the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) and ahadith Qudsi, without which Islam could not be comprehended in its entirety.

It is designed to discredit defenders of Islam and turn the chickened Muslims against the fighters to keep the latter from deploying their most effective weapon which has historically been used only in defense.

Not being hafiz is even more a reason for both of us NOT to throw in specific verses of Quran merely to win arguments, lest we err in narrating Allah; if you can fathom the consequences of that.

According to the Prophet (pbuh), anyone who misinterprets Quran, or offers an explanation of verses without appropriate knowledge, will land in the hellfire. He (pbuh) himself never offered the explanation for “alif-laam-meem” and other such verses because Allah had not given him this knowledge or did not allow him (pbuh) to tell the people...Allah knows best.

The example: the first verse Dr. M. Khan has quoted in reference to suicide is not exactly per context if you care to read the tafseer. Suicide IS haram except under two circumstance (mind you this may or may not be amongst the reasons for suicide bombings; several factors have to be taken into account for that):

(1) a woman is permitted to commit suicide to prevent rape, as post rape trauma is quite often devastating for her even with family support etc.

(2) a Muslim soldier when captured by enemy can commit suicide if his captivity endangers the Muslims. The simple reason for the two exceptions are the extreme circumstances.

this is a good one...you have not answered my one question...yet indulge in this? interesting:)
The question is answered, again, above viz FLAW.

Secondly, kindly review the text in my post (#68) beginning with According to Quran, fighting is strictly forbidden in masijd-alharam… I could give you the specific verse number too to win this argument, but I’d rather you find it yourself as winning an argument is not my objective. I will tell you this much that this verse is in Sura Baqra.

I repeat: deploy your research skills and read the Books, instead of asking others to provide with specific verses to prove/disprove arguments.

more deplorable? or even less? for me?... where do you come with these ideas and the attribute them to me? kamal hay yaar! (shaking me head)...

...frankly i don`t know if you do this deliberately and maliciously or innocently... you assume my position and try to set up straw arguments against that assumption...
Meray chandaa…don’t shake your head, lest you get a chouk. This is nothing more than a futile defense; not an answer to the simple question?

But then again, you never laid out “moderate Islam” definition in one of my previous posts either.

Again, we’ll continue to run in circles around this issue and others as long as we’re not on the same wavelength when discussing the prescribed and proscribed in Islam.

For that to happen, either you convince me that Prophet (pbuh) ever contradicted the Quran, or accept that he (pbuh) never did and then read his biography, ahadith etc. The reason is simple: just as we look towards scientists – authority on a specific science – to understand the subject, we need to look at the ultimate authority on Quran to understand it in its entirety. Without a doubt, that authority is the Prophet (pbuh), and without his (pbuh) teachings no one could understand Quran comprehensively. If one could, then Allah wouldn`t need to reveal it to Mohammad (pbuh) only. Instead, He could have just shipped us out with complete text and interpretations embedded in our brains.

regards

# 70:

back to simplicity a la amrita:)

question: is there any justification in the qur`an for suicide bombing?

answer that then we can possibly talk more

rgds

t