In Search of the Moderate Muslim

re: Stuka # 497

Stuka, this question must be answered at two levels. One, India should be concerned with the welfare of Bangladeshi minorities, Hindus or Buddhists, only to the extent that they try to enter India as refugees. Otherwise, we really have no business poking our nose in any other country`s internal affairs. Two, India has a vital interest in helping Bangladesh stay on the path of moderation and communal harmony, just as we do. If, God forbid, there is widespread massacres of minorities in Bangladesh (a hypothetical situation, because I don`t at all believe any such tragedy is around the corner), that could put tremendous strain on communal relations in parts of our own country.

You see, I am a selfish man driven not by emotions but what I perceive to be the long-term interests of India. And I believe the best way to secure the interests of India is, to the extent possible, create win-win solutions to our problems with all neighbors.

Regards.

Asif Naqshbandi: #465: ``ulama HAVE traditionally done throughout islamic history is to advise the rulers and ensure that * *they do not make any laws which go against the shar`iat. * *``

I agree with a lot of what you have stated in the reply to my queries. I disagree with two parts, however.

I do think it is the job of the ulema to advise the rulers, but I do not think they have any authority, nor should they have any authority, to, ``ensure,`` anything. This is where all the problems start. This allows the ulema to become part of the judiciary, the legistalature, or ultimately the executive, purely on the basis of their religious knowledge. Their only capacity should be an advisory role in the realm of religion. Because frankly speaking, that is all they know about. If they develop the skills to beocome statesmen, generals, etc., only then should they be allowed to occupy those position.

If the religious education of ulema does not give them enough qualification to fly a simple Cessna aircraft, or drive a truck, how can they claim a more important position, outside religion, on the basis of purely religious education.

The second point is that it is impossible to give a firm decision on who is a great aalim and who is not. It is a subjective decision, and not a scientific one. Maybe someone whom you consider to be a great aalim is considered a hypocrite by another person, and vice-versa. This is why religious leaders are always in a state of conflict with each other. So one cannot state in a blanket fashion that the ideas of such and such aalim should be followed by everyone. One can only apply the ulema`s knowledge on one`s own self.

The position of ulema in an Islamic society, where the shepherds and the salesmen have not bothered to study religion, should be that of a science professor in a univeristy. He/she studies a subject, and presents his ideas. He advises people who seek advice from him. He cannot force or prosecute anyone who disagrees with him, or decides not to follow him. He, does not automatically get any legislative, judicial or executive power, on the basis of his scientific knowledge, alone. He has to do that separately, with a separate set of skills and qualifications.

The above is not a separation of church and state, nor is it a modern Shariah. It is simply keeping people`s authorities within their areas of qualification.

TALIBAN ARE OUR CHILDREN - ISI CHIEF

http://www.dawn.com/2001/11/07/top18.htm

Riyadh recognized Taliban govt on Islamabad`s advice: Prince Turki

By Our Correspondent

RIYADH, Nov 6: Former Saudi intelligence chief Prince Turki Al-Faisal, who remained deeply involved in the Afghanistan issue for almost 25 years, ever since the Soviet invasion, told the local Saudi daily Arab News that Saudi Arabia had recognized the Taliban government in 1997 `` on the advice of our Pakistani brothers.``

In the third part of an exclusive interview jointly conducted by Arab News and the MBC Television, carried on Tuesday, Prince Turki said the former Pakistani interior minister Naseerullah Babar had introduced the Taliban in an interesting way. ``He had said they are my children.``

Recognizing the Taliban regime was a hasty decision, he said. One of the reasons`` why we recognized the Taliban government was the agreement between the Kingdom and Pakistan since the time of President Zia-ul-Haq on consulting and coordinating on all matters concerning Afghanistan. It was a result of this agreement and the advice of our Pakistani brothers that we recognized the Taliban.``

Further, until ``that time the Taliban had not created any controversy. It was controlling 95 per cent of the territory when the Kingdom accorded recognition to the Taliban regime in 1997. It was also providing security and stability in the region. We recognized them several months after they captured Kabul.``

During the interview the prince confirmed that Sudan, at one time, had agreed to hand over Osama Bin Laden to the Kingdom before he returned to Afghanistan in 1996. ``Pesident Bashir (of Sudan) had asked for guarantees that Osama would not be prosecuted.

The prince said Bashir was told that no one was above the law and that`` we could not give any such guarantees.`` He also hinted that, at a point in time, Mulla Omar had also given positive signals to the Saudi demand that Osama be handed over to the Saudi government.

In his first of the two meetings with Mulla Omar, Dr Abdullah Al-Turki, the current secretary general of the Muslim World League, had also accompanied the prince. `` Mulla Omar did not object to Sheikh Al-Turki`s arguments on the extradition of the Al-Qaeda chief to the Kingdom and I thought he agreed with Al-Turki`s arguments on the basis of Shariat. At the second meeting,after the US embassy bombings in Africa, however, Mulla Omar was not in a mood to listen to any one,`` the prince said.

He could not recall Mulla Omar`s exact words, except that he had used an abusive language to criticize the Kingdom`s leadership during the meeting.

Prince Turki pointed out that after the Russian withdrawal, the United States` interest in Afghanistan had dwindled. However, he said, the US wanted to see some sort of stability in the region. It kept monitoring the activities of the oil companies which were working for establishing a gas pipeline from Turkmenistan to the Arabian Sea through Afghanistan and Pakistan, he added.

``There were only three choices: the pipeline could either go through Russia, but the Caucasus mountains and the Chechen crisis obstructed the project; or through Iran to Bandar Abbas. But the American firms were banned by the US administration from operating in Iran. So the only viable option left was through the war-torn Afghanistan.``

The prince hinted (that in order to secure support for the pipeline project) some of the oil companies might have even provided funds to the Taliban regime. `` These (oil) companies had contacted the Taliban and I cannot rule out that they had offered their support to the Taliban. In such cases, the assistance could have been in millions or in the form of a promise,`` he added.

Hamzad: ``I just cannot think of a term Atheist would use because if The One is not there then The Other should also not exist.I guess for them there is no such thing as good or evil-----just relativism.``

Me:

There is no Other, there is only the One. and the One is the source of everything: good and evil. There would be no evil in the world if the One did not will it. The One produces good but he also creates evil. The One is weird, because he is beyond our comprehension. The One is the weirdest because there can be no limits when it comes to the One. Am I making sense ? Its like yin and yang, a balance, the karmic cycle, zen & the art of motorcycle maintenance... think about it in private.

Hamzad: ``And that precisely is the idea.To bring up the subject & keep it alive & let one continue to analyse & interpret....in private.

The Question is the Answer!

Thanks Again``

Me:

No, no Hamzad, let me thank you for sharing your daring ideas in public, so that we may ponder over them in private. To keep them alive though you may have to do more than that i.e. interact in public :)

Zafar # 479

And you thaught 1500 years Islam just did Namaz.What more proof you want of INTROCPECTION,didactics,debate,in Islam.You have had only dose of dvaita & Advaitya as only example of intellect.

The Arts of Disputation and Polemics

Case Study We will read selections from two practioners of the kalam: al-Ashari (d. 935), who was originally Mutazilite in his sympathies and



then rejected the Mutazilite position and articulated the Sunni response to the claims of the Mutazilites;

and Saadiah Gaon, (d. 942) Egyptian born head of the Rabbinic academy at Sura who adopted the techniques of kalam to articulate Jewish Rabbinic idenitity.

al-Ashari The two texts we`ll read deal respectively with the problem of the Vision of God, which the Mutazilites rejected, and the problem of anthropomorphism. As you read the two discussions please keep the following questions in mind:

What is at issue on the question of visibility, how is the Quran 6:103 approached by the two sides?

In the second passage, it is the Jahmiyya, who were a movement related to the Mutazilites, are under attack. What is their position? Why is it related to Christianity? ta`til is a technical term for the denial of all attributes.

How does Ashari treat the authority of the Quran and ijma` in determining the interpretation of the questions of God`s hands?

Kalam proceeds through a series of questions and responses and is usually seen as the origin of the Scholastic mode of argumentation that dominates medieval Christianity. How would you characterize the march of the argument about God`s visibility and His hands?

Saadiah Gaon Saadiah`s great work on Beliefs and Opinions is a systematic presentation of Jewish theology. The two sections you`ll read deal respectively with the role of doubt and disagreement in the religious community and with the doctrine of God and his attributes. We`ll discuss the following questions:

Why is doubt such a central feature of Saadiah`s age and how is it resolved?

Why do you think Saadiah treats Islam as a version of Christian trinitarianism?

How would compare Saadiah and al-Ashari on the problem of anthropomorphism?

How does Saadiah differ in his treatment of the notions of quantity and quality with respect of God?

References

W. Montogomery Watt, The Formative Period of Islamic Thought, 1973

Harry A. Wolfson, The Philosophy of the Kalam, 1976

re: dost-mittar # 488

Very well said. That is the most important single consideration for anything to be considered good. The rest is all fraud and evil.

Sadna,

Certainly. Denial of a problem doesn`t help. Also, as you correctly point out, we may not have here a strictly religious problem. So, we need to frame it correctly.

Eklavya:

Why should India be concerned for Bangladeshi Hindus? It`s an internal affair of Bangladesh. Are the Hindus of any country our responsibility? If they are, then the Muslims of any country are our responsibility too, right?

Naqshbandi writes: ``It should read:

As for the blessed period of the Beloved Messenger sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam during the Islamic State in Madina it is unique as Allah`s Messenger was at the same time the Beloved (and still IS) of The Divine and also The Lawgiver as well as being the political head of the Muslims all in one.

(The ``was`` in capitals could have been interpreted to mean that i meant that Allah`s Messenger sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam no longer held those unique positions and I ask Allah`s forgiveness for writing something which could have even suggested that. AStaghfirullah!)``

Me:

Sarcasm begins: I think you deserve to die for this blasphemy. What sharia court do you prefer ? or do you prefer that some Muslim cleric declare a fatwa against you and some of the more zealous followers take matters into their own hands ?

audio-video-radio:

you are wrong about farid zakaria: he and his brother, arshad, are sons of Rafiq and Fatma Zakaria. Whether Farid considers himself Muslim or not, he comes from a Muslim background, not a Parsi background.

RE Asif N`s incomprehensible correxion [sic]:

the man above has told me to assure you that he has noted your correction and not to worry, your quota of pleasures awaiting you in the afterlife will not be cut.

Eklavya #484
``Let`s work with decent Bangladeshis to solve a real problem that has arisen recently``

We have to begin by refraining from denials that a problem exists. Next, its not `religious affiliation` that is the driving factor here, its real live immigrants crossing over, reportedly even Awami League`rs.

Zafar Al Talib # 479

Read about the Mutazila many years ago and the

information may be sketchy at best.During the last

days of the Omayyads, religious schism had started

creeping into Islam.At this point of time the

Kharejites had become a political and religious

force(they were the original Shiaan-e-Ali) who

lateron rebelled against Ali and his family.At this time(8th century) we come across the Mutazila who were a rival to the Kharejites.The muslim world was coming in contact with the outside world and by the start of 9th century AD Greek philosophy had found a place under the Abbasids.

Mamun ur Rashid (s/o. Harun Rashid) took over in 819 AD and established his famous ``School of Translation``wherein all kind of scientific, social,religious, and medical works were translated from Latin into Arabic.The interaction with Greek thoughts and philosophy gave rise to logical reasoning of all problems by the scholars of the time and they found the rigid sharia to be incompatible with the Divine Predestination for the human and his actions.

All questions were solved through logic and the rest was discounted. Mamun himself became a convert to Mutazilite School of thought.Mutazila prospered under his rule and continued to receive state patronage till the end of Abbasid period.

However,by the 10th century their power waned against a new challenger Ali Al Ash`ari (873-935),

who founded the Asharite School of thought which

rejected logic from faith and Sharia and followed the four school:Hanafi,Maalki,Shafei and Hambali.

The Asharites went on to become the spokesperson of the Sunni Islam thereafter.The Mutazilite were

persecuted and the school died in a short time.

I hope this little information helps,however,if

there is any error,the fault lies squarely at my

shoulders.

Regards.

correxion: in my post 465 I wrote:

[As for the blessed period of the Beloved Messenger sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam during the Islamic State in Madina it is unique as Allah`s Messenger WAS the Beloved of The Divine and also The Lawgiver as well as being the political head of the Muslims all in one.]

It should read:

As for the blessed period of the Beloved Messenger sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam during the Islamic State in Madina it is unique as Allah`s Messenger was at the same time the Beloved (and still IS) of The Divine and also The Lawgiver as well as being the political head of the Muslims all in one.

(The ``was`` in capitals could have been interpreted to mean that i meant that Allah`s Messenger sal Allahu alayhi wa sallam no longer held those unique positions and I ask Allah`s forgiveness for writing something which could have even suggested that. AStaghfirullah!)

Re: rushdie

``I think there is no more sad case than Rushdie.He could have been all that & more without going through the ardous route making unnecessary enemies.``

dude, give it a rest...he doesn`t like many aspects of Islam and that`s his right...it probably puts a thorn in your side because you know he`s right

Sigalph235 #477:

Just to add - the presence of Communist parties in power in West Bengal and Kerala does not make these states/India Communist either.

One correction to your post: RSS is not a political party. It has zero parliamentary seats. Probably you were referring to the BJP...

Zafar,

The following is from Beliefnet. I am actually amazed at the history of these folks....

Mutazila (moo-uh-ta`zi-luh; Arab)

A rational school of theology in Islam. It was first connected with the names of Wasil ibn Ata (d. 748) and Amr ibn Ubayd (d. 761), who taught in the city of Basra, Iraq. A second group of Mutazilites flourished in Baghdad. Each group had its successive disciples and distinctive, subtle differences on points of doctrine. The controversial issue that led them to isolate themselves (Arab. itazala; hence the name Mutazila) from other theologians was whether the grave sinner was to be considered a believer or an unbeliever? Wasil`s answer was that the grave sinner was neither a believer nor an unbeliever but was in an intermediate position: a reprobate. By ca. 900, the Mutazila--who referred to themselves as ``The People of Justice and Unicity``--had come to express their doctrine in five fundamental principles, affirming (1) the unicity of God, (2) God`s justice, (3) God`s commitment to carrying out His threats of punishment to the wicked and promises of reward to the faithful, (4) that the grave sinner is neither a believer nor an unbeliever, but in ``an intermediate position,`` and (5) commanding the good and forbidding the evil.

Discussion of the first principle logically led the Mutazilites to deny that God has essential attributes and affirm that God is living, all-knowing, all-powerful, willing, speaking, etc., in virtue of his essence. Consequently, the Qur`an is not uncreated, as mainline theologians held, but created. The principle of God`s justice led them to reject the doctrine of predestination and affirm human free will and an individual`s power over one`s actions. Furthermore, the adherence of the Mutazila to human free will and personal responsibility and accountability, and to the fifth principle (above) led them to espouse the political view that a sinful caliph should be deposed, and if he resists then rebellion against him is lawful and so is killing him.

The Mutazilite doctrine of the created Qur`an was upheld by three Abbasid caliphs: al-Mamun, al-Mutasim, and al-Wathiq (who ruled in succession from 813 to 847). They attempted to enforce Mutazilite doctrine on society by compelling the leading religious thinkers to subscribe to it. Resistance led to an inquisition, which caused many uncompromising scholars suffering and imprisonment. The most famous example is Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 855). This episode ended when al-Mutawakkil succeeded to the caliphate in 847; persecution then was reversed and traditionalism restored. The Mutazila were weakened but continued to produce great scholars such as Abd al-Jabbar (d. 1025) and al-Zamakhshari (d. 1144). Although Mutazilism seemed to collapse by the time the Mongols sacked Baghdad in 1258, Mutazilite doctrines (with the exception of their doctrine regarding the caliphate/imamate) were adopted by the Zaydiyya branch of the Shia, which flourished in Yemen, where it still survives. Although the Mutazilites are often characterized as heterodox thinkers, their attempt to place Islamic religious belief on a rational basis in conjunction with revelation has found some support among twentieth-century Muslim intellectuals.