A Case for Banning Polygamy

Re: Dost-mittar #160

And to the credit of the Pakistan Army, it firmly suppressed the rioting. Furthermore, the Martial Law authorities charged both Maududi and Abdus Sattar Niazi with incitement to murder in 1953 and sentenced them to death. The fcuking politicians immediately commuted the death sentences to life imprisonment and then were released in 1955 to placate the fanatics. And its been downhill since then.

Technically speaking, the Ahmadis are of course ``non Muslims`` but lets leave it to Allah to decide on their punishment. IF he wants to, when they die, He can put them in Hell. Of course, that would make Him a rather mean and vindictive God and not one that I would be inclined to put much faith in. I would like to think that each person would be judged on their own merits and not on whether or not they believe in the Aakhiryat of the Prophet. Meanwhile, all the Ahmadis that I have ever known seem to be no better or worse than the non-Ahmadis and much better than True Believers, so lets get a grip on life and tackle some real problems instead of worrying about whether or not some one actually believes that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was God or Allah or Jesus or Ram or the Prophet or Napoleon!

Anew

Sahih Al Bukhari:

Vol 7, Hadiths # 590: To cure fever drink camel urine.

Vol 1, #626: If they do not go to mosque, burn them first and then their house

..
..

Who is Bukhari?

#151 by wajahat on December 9, 2003 7:42am PT
My Question to anew, What is your view about the progression in Islam in respect to women, You do understand that half of Pakistan`s population is made to sit home and thus a large section of our society, its talents, its productivity are left to rot in domesticated environments. When in the times of War the condition was sent that Muslims are to marry upto four wives to provide for the widows of the sahaba who got shadat in the battle. Then should we not take these times to allow that room for our partners, our sisters , our mothers to helps us in these times of need. Pakistan is a ship that needs all hands on deck right now, dont you think its time that the religious scholars accept this change and allow women the room to develop themselves economically, careerwise and as people. Or will their outdated fears disallow this reform?

I don`t think we are really following Islam in the true sense and as you stated ``half of Pakistan`s population is made to sit home and thus a large section of our society, its talents, its productivity are left to rot in domesticated environments.``

Most of them are sitting home for personal reasons or no job opportunity for them. You have an economy which can`t provide decent jobs to your about 70% of males. Then how you can worry about the female population missing their role in `progress of Pakistan`.

The destruction of the family in America, or the West in general, was not planned. It just happened as a logical result of the materialistic, hedonistic, Godless civilizational values that have gripped these societies.

It is unconscionable that we should be answering such chicanery with apologetics of the kind that normally begin with, ``Islam also allows women to,`` as in, ``Islam also allows women to work outside the home.`` Yes, it does in case of necessity, like in in the medical and education fields. The real issue is that Islam frees a wife from the burden to provide for the family. It is solely the husband`s responsibility. In return, wife`s main responsibility is to stay home and take care of the children. The primary field of women`s endeavor is the home, sweet home. And this has to be stated without hesitation or apology. The Qur`an says: ``And stay quietly in your homes.``[Al-Ahzab, 33:33]. And the Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, said: ``The wife is responsible for taking care of the home of her husband, and she will be accountable for those given in her charge.``[Bukhari, Muslim]. This is also the most rewarding job that anyone can think of. The Prophet, Sall-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, assured the woman who stays home to take care of the children, that she would be with him in paradise. According to another hadith, during pregnancy and the entire period of nursing, the believing mother is like the soldier on active duty. If she dies, she gets the reward reserved for a martyr. Yet another hadith says to the women: ``Take care of the home. That is your jihad.`` [Musnad Ahmad].

All of these clearly establish the basic division of labor between men and women according to Islam: men are responsible for the affairs outside the home and the women are responsible for taking care of the home. This division is not a relic of some dark past. It is the only basis on which a healthy society has ever been built and can be built today. The nations that have tried to alter this natural arrangement long enough have nothing but grief and trouble to show for their efforts. And they seem to be groping in the dark, unable to undo the damage and get out of the quagmire. Is there any sane reason that those who have the Light should follow them on the dark highway to disaster?

So to sum up, the women can get all the education and they can be teachers, writers, doctors, nurses but again by observing Shariah laws of Hijab. But, preferrably raise children who will be a complete human being as desired by Quran and then they will protect, respect and take care of their women without throwing burden on them to go out for a job to run the house.

#160 by dost-mittar on December 9, 2003 5:31pm PT
Not totally related to the subject, but I saw this interesting, hitherto not discussed, background to the start of the Ahmediya trouble in Pakistan.

dost-mittar sahib

Ahmediya trouble (fitna) even dates back 1948. The following letter will give you some idea;

Responce of Dr. Sir Muhammad Iqbal to the
Governor of India, Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru
Regarding the Qadiani (Ahmadiyya) Cult
[From the Book: A Bunch of Old Letters, Asia Publishing House, Bombay, Calcutta, New Dehli, Madras]
Lahore
June 21, 1936

Dear Pandit Jawahar Lal,

Thank you so much for your letter which I received yesterday. At the time I wrote in reply to your articles, I believed that you had no idea of the political attitude of the Ahmadis. Indeed the main reason why I wrote a reply was to show, especially to you, how Muslim loyalty had originated and how eventually it had found a basis in Ahmadism. After the publication of my paper, I discovered, to my great surprise, that even the educated Muslims had no idea of the historical causes which had shaped the teachings of Ahmadism moreover. Your Muslims admirers in the Punjab and elsewhere felt perturbed over your articles as they thought you were in sympathy with Ahmadiyya movement. This was mainly due to the fact that the Ahmadis were jubilant over your articles. The Ahmadis Press was mainly responsible for this misunderstanding about you. However, I am glad to know that my impression was erroneous. I myself have little interest in theology, but had to dabble in it a bit in order to meet the Ahmadis on their own grounds. I assure you that my paper was written with the best of intentions for Islam and India. I have no doubt in my mind that the Ahmadis are traitors both to Islam and India.

I was extremely sorry to miss the opportunity of meeting you in Lahore. I was very ill in those days and could not leave my rooms. For the last two years, I have been living a life of practical retirement on account of continued illness. Do let me know when you come to the Punjab next. Did you receive my letter regarding your proposed Union for Civil Liberties? As you did not acknowledge it in your letter, I fear it never reached you.

Sincerely yours,

Mohammad Iqbal

Allama Iqbal on Ahmadism


On the appearance of Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru`s three articles in The Modern Review of Calcutta, I received a number of letters from Muslims of different shades of religious and political opinion. Some writers of these letters want me to further elucidate and justify the attitude of the Indian Muslims towards the Ahmadis. Others ask me what exactly I regard as the issue involved in Ahmadism. In this statement I propose first to meet these demands which I regard as perfectly legitimate, and then to answer the questions raised by Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru. I fear, however, that parts of this statement may not interest the Pandit, and to save his time I suggest that he may skip over such parts.



It is hardly necessary for me to say that I welcome the Pandit`s interest in what I regard as one of the greatest problems of the East and perhaps of the whole world. He is, I believe, the first Nationalist Indian leader who has expressed a desire to understand the present spiritual unrest in the world of Islam. In view of the many aspects and possible reactions of this unrest, it is highly desirable that thoughtful Indian political leaders should open their mind to the real meaning of what is at the present moment agitating the heart of Islam.



I do not wish, however, to conceal the fact, either from the Pandit or from any other reader of this statement, that the Pandit`s articles have for the moment given my mind rather a painful conflict of feelings. Knowing him to be a man of wide cultural sympathies, my mind cannot but incline to the view that his desire to understand the questions he has raised is perfectly genuine; yet the way which he has expressed himself betrays a psychology which I find difficult to attribute to him. I am inclined to think that my statement on Qadianism - no more than a mere exposition of a religious doctrine on modern lines - has embarrassed both the Pandit and the Qadianis, perhaps because both inwardly resent, for different reasons, the prospects of Muslim political and religious solidarity particularly in India. It is obvious that the Indian Nationalist whose political idealism has practically killed his sense for fact is intolerant of the birth of a desire for self-determination in the heart of North-West Indian Islam. He thinks, wrongly in my opinion, that the only way to Indian Nationalism lies in a total suppression of the cultural entities of the country through the interaction of which alone India can evolve a rich and enduring culture. A nationalism achieved by such methods can mean nothing but mutual bitterness and even oppression. It is equally obvious that the Qadianis, too, feel nervous by the political awakening of the Indian Muslims, because they feel that the rise in political prestige of the Indian Muslims is sure to defeat their designs to carve out from the Ummat of the Arabian Prophet a new Ummat for the Indian prophet. It is no small surprise to me that my effort to impress on the Indian Muslims the extreme necessity of internal cohesion in the present critical moment of their history in India, and my warning them against the forces of disintegration, masquerading as Reformist movements, should have given the Pandit an occasion to sympathize with such forces....



Only a true lover of God can appreciate the value of devotion even though it is directed to gods in which he himself does not believe. The folly of our preachers of toleration consists in describing the attitude of the man who is jealous of the boundaries of his own faith as one of intolerance. They wrongly consider this attitude as a sign of moral inferiority. They do not understand that the value of his attitude, is essentially biological. Where the members of a group feel, either instinctively or on the basis of rational argument, that the corporate life of the social organism to which they belong is in danger, their defensive attitude must be appraised in reference mainly to a biological criterion. Every thought or deed in this connection must be judged by the life-value that it may possess. The question in this case is not whether the attitude of an individual or community towards the man who is declared to be a heretic is morally good or bad. The question is whether it is life-giving or life-destroying. Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru seems to think that a society founded on religious principles necessitates the institution of Inquisition. This is indeed true of the history of Christianity; but the history of Islam, contrary to the Pandit`s logic, shows that during the last thirteen hundred years of the life of Islam, the institution of Inquisition has been absolutely unknown in Muslim countries. The Qur`an expressly prohibits such an institution: ``Do not seek out the shortcomings of others and carry not tales against your brethren.`` Indeed the Pandit will find from the history of Islam that the Jews and Christians, fleeing from religious persecution in their own lands, always found shelter in the lands of Islam. The two propositions on which the conceptual structure of Islam is based are so simple that it makes heresy in the sense of turning the heretic outside the fold of Islam almost impossible. It is true that when a person declared to be holding heretical doctrines threatens the existing social order an independent Muslim State will certainly take action; but in such a case the action of the State will be determined more by political considerations than by purely religious ones. I can very well realize that a man like the Pandit, who is born and brought up in a society which has no well-defined boundaries and consequently no internal cohesion, finds it difficult to conceive that a religious society can live and prosper without State-appointed commissions of inquiry in so the beliefs of the people. This is quite clear from the passage which he quotes from Cardinal Newman and wonders how far I would accept the application of the Cardinal`s dictum to Islam. Let me tell him that there is a tremendous difference between the inner structure of Islam and Catholicism wherein the complexity, the ultra-rational character and the number of dogmas has, as the history of Christianity shows, always fostered possibilities of fresh heretical interpretations. The simple faith of Muhammad is based on two propositions-that God is One, and that Muhammad is the last of the line of those holy men who have appeared from time to time in all countries and in all ages to guide mankind to the right ways of living. If, as some Christian writers think, a dogma must be defined as an ultra-rational proposition which, for the purpose of securing religious solidarity, must be assented to without any understanding of its metaphysical import, then these two simple propositions of Islam cannot be described even as dogmas; for both of them are supported by the experience of mankind, and are fairly amenable to rational argument. The question of a heresy, which needs the verdict whether the author of it is within or without the fold, can arise, in the case of a religious society founded on such simple propositions, only when the heretic rejects both or either of these propositions. Such heresy must be and has been rare in the history of Islam which, while jealous of its frontiers, permits freedom of interpretation within these frontiers. And since the phenomenon of the kind of heresy which affects the boundaries of Islam has been rare in the history of Islam, the feeling of the average Muslim is naturally intense when a revolt of this kind arises. That is why the feeling of Muslim Persia was so intense against the Bahais. That is why the feeling of the Indian Muslims is so intense against the Qadianis.



It is true that mutual accusations of heresy for differences in minor points of law and theology among Muslim religious sects have been rather common. In this indiscriminate use of the word Kufr, both for minor theological points of difference as well as for the extreme cases of heresy which involve the excommunication of the heretic, some present-day educated Muslims, who possess practically no knowledge of the history of Muslim theological disputes, see a sign of social and political disintegration of the Muslim community. This, however, is an entirely wrong notion. The history of Muslim Theology shows that mutual accusation of heresy on minor points of difference has, far from working as a disruptive force, actually given an impetus to synthetic theological thought. ``When we read the history of development of Muhammadan Law,`` says Professor Hurgronje, ``we find that, on the one hand, the doctors of every age, on the slightest stimulus, condemn one another to the point of mutual accusations of heresy; and, on the other hand, the very same people with greater and greater unity of purpose try to reconcile the similar quarrels of their predecessors.`` The student of Muslim Theology knows that among Muslim legists this kind of heresy is technically known as ``heresy below heresy,`` i.e. the kind of heresy which does not involve the excommunication of the culprit. It may be admitted, however, that in the hands of mullas whose intellectual laziness takes all oppositions of theological thought as absolute and is consequently blind to the unity in difference, this minor heresy may become a source of great mischief. This mischief can be remedied only by giving to the students of our theological schools a clearer vision of the synthetic spirit of Islam, and by reinitiating them into the function of logical contradiction as a principle of movement. in theological dialectic. The question of what may be called major heresy arises only when the teaching of a thinker or a reformer affects the frontiers of the faith of Islam. Unfortunately, this question does arise in connection with the teachings of Qadianism. It must be pointed out here that the Ahmadi movement is divided into two camps known as the Qadianis and the Lahoris. The former openly declare the founder to be a full prophet; the latter, either by conviction or policy, have found it advisable to preach an apparently toned down Qadianism. However, the question whether the founder of Ahmadism was a prophet the denial of whose mission entails what I call the ``major heresy`` is a matter of dispute between the two sections. It is unnecessary for my purposes to judge the merits of this domestic controversy of the Ahmadis. I believe, for reasons to be explained presently, that the idea of a full-prophet whose denial entails the denier`s excommunication from Islam is essential to Ahmadism; and that the present head of the Qadianis is far more consistent with the spirit of the movement than the Imam of the Lahoris.



The cultural value of the idea of Finality in Islam I have fully explained elsewhere, Its meaning is simple: No spiritual surrender to any human being after Muhammad who emancipated his followers by giving them a law which is realizable as arising from the very core of human conscience. Theologically, the doctrine is that: the socio-political Organization called ``Islam`` is perfect and eternal. No revelation the denial of which entails heresy is possible after Muhammad. He who claims such a revelation is a traitor to Islam. Since the Qadianis believe the founder of the Ahmadiyyah movement to be the bearer of such a revelation, they declare that the entire world of Islam is infidel. The founder`s own argument, quite worthy of a medieval theologian, is that the spirituality of the Holy Prophet of Islam must be regarded as imperfect if it is not creative of another prophet. He claims his own prophethood to be an evidence of the prophet-rearing power of the spirituality of the Holy Prophet of Islam. But if you further ask him whether the spirituality of Muhammad is capable of rearing more prophets than one, his answer is ``No``. This virtually amounts to saying: ``Muhammad is not the last Prophet: I am the last.`` Far from understanding the cultural value of the Islamic idea of finality in the history of mankind generally and of Asia especially, he thinks that finality in the sense that no follower of Muhammad can ever reach the status of prophethood is a mark of imperfection in Muhammad`s prophethood. As I read the psychology of his mind he, in the interest of his own claim to prophethood, avails himself of what he describes as the creative spirituality of the Holy Prophet of Islam and, at the same time, deprives the Holy Prophet of his ``finality`` by limiting the creative capacity of his spirituality to the rearing of only one prophet, i.e, the founder of the Ahmadiyyah movement. In this way does the new prophet quietly steal away the ``finality`` of one whom he claims to be his spiritual progenitor.



He claims to be a buruz of the Holy Prophet of Islam insinuating thereby that, being a buruz of him, his ``finality`` is virtually the ``finality`` of Muhammad; and that this view of the matter, therefore, does not violate, the ``finality`` of the Holy Prophet. In identifying the two finalities, his own and that of the Holy Prophet, he conveniently loses sight of the temporal meaning of the idea of Finality. It is, however, obvious that the word buruz, in the sense even of complete likeness, cannot help him at all; for the buruz must. always remain the other side of its original. Only in the sense of reincarnation a buruz becomes identical with the original. Thus if we take the word buruz to mean ``like in spiritual qualities`` the argument remains ineffective; if, on the other hand, we take it to mean reincarnation of the original in the Aryan sense of the word, the argument becomes plausible; but its author turns out to be only a Magian in disguise.

It is further claimed on the authority of the great Muslim mystic, Muhyuddin ibn Arabi of Spain, that it is possible for a Muslim saint to attain, in his spiritual evolution, to the kind of experience characteristic of the prophetic consciousness. I personally believe this view of Shaikh Muhyuddin ibn Arabi to be psychologically unsound; but assuming it to be correct the Qadiani argument is based on a complete misunderstanding of his exact position. The Shaikh regards it as a purely private achievement which does not, and in the nature of things cannot, entitle such a saint to declare that all those who do not believe in him are outside the pale of Islam. Indeed, from the Shaikh`s point of view, there may be more than one-saint, living in the same age or country, who may attain to prophetic consciousness. The point to be seized is that, while it is psychologically possible for a saint to attain to prophetic experience, his experience will have no socio-political significance making him the center of a new Organization and entitling him to declare this Organization to be the criterion of the faith or disbelief of the followers of Muhammad.



Leaving his mystical psychology aside I am convinced from a careful study of the relevant passages of the Futuhat that the great Spanish mystic is as firm a believer in the Finality of Muhammad as any orthodox Muslim. And if he had seen in his mystical vision that one day in the East some Indian amateurs in Sufism would seek to destroy the Holy Prophet`s finality under cover of his mystical psychology, he would have certainly anticipated the Indian Ulama in warning the Muslims of the world against such traitors to Islam.



II



Coming now to the essence of Ahmadism. A discussion of its sources and of the way in which pre-Islamic Magian ideas have, through the channels of Islamic mysticism, worked on the mind of its author would be extremely interesting from the standpoint of comparative religion. It is, however, impossible for me to undertake this discussion here. Suffice it to say that the real nature of Ahmadism is hidden behind the mist of medieval mysticism and theology. The Indian Ulama, therefore, took it to be a purely theological movement and came out with theological weapons to deal with it. I believe, however, that this was not the proper method of dealing with the movement; and that the success of the Ulama was, therefore, only partial. A careful psychological analysis of the revelations of the founder would perhaps be an effective method of dissecting the inner life of his personality. In this connection, I may mention Maulvi Manzur Elahi`s collection of the founder`s revelations which offers rich and varied material for psychological research. In my opinion the book provides a key to the character and personality of the founder and I do hope that one day some young student of modern psychology will take it up for serious study. If he takes the Qur`an for his criterion, as he must for reasons which cannot be explained here, and extends his study to a comparative examination of the experiences of the founder of the Ahmadiyyah movement and contemporary non-Muslim mystics, such as Rama Krishna of Bengal, he is sure to meet more than one surprise as to the essential character of the experience on the basis of which prophethood is claimed for the originator of Ahmadism.



Another equally effective and more fruitful method, from the standpoint of the plain man, is to understand the real content of Ahmadism in the light of the history of Muslim theological thought in India at least from the year 1799. The year 1799 is extremely important in the history of the world of Islam. In this year fell Tippu, and his fall meant the extinguishing of the Muslim hopes for political prestige in India. In the same year was fought the battle of Navarneo which saw the destruction of the Turkish fleet. Prophetic were the words of the author of the chronogram of Tippu`s fall which visitors of Serangapatam find engraved on the wall of Tippu`s mausoleum: ``Gone is the glory of India as well of Roum.`` Thus, in the year 1799, the political decay of Islam in Asia reached its climax. But just as out of the humiliation of Germany on the day of Jena arose the modern German nation, it may be said with equal truth that out of the political humiliation of Islam in the year 1799 arose modern Islam and her problems. This point I shall explain in the sequel. For the present I want to draw the reader`s attention to some of the questions which have arisen in Muslim India since the fall of Tippu and the development of European imperialism in Asia.



Does the idea of Caliphate in Islam embody a religious institution? How are the Indian Muslims, and for the matter of that all Muslims outside the Turkish Empire, related to the Turkish Caliphate? Is India Dar-ul-Harb or Dar-ul-Islam? What is the real meaning of the doctrine of Jihad in Islam? What is the meaning of the expression ``From amongst you`` in the Qur`anic verse: ``Obey God, obey the Prophet and the masters of the affair, i.e. rulers, from amongst you``? What is the character of the Traditions of the Prophet foretelling the advent of Imam Mahdi? These questions and some others which arose subsequently were, for obvious reasons, questions for Indian Muslims only. European imperialism, however, which was then rapidly penetrating the world of Islam, was also intimately interested in them. The controversies which these questions created form a most interesting chapter in the history of Islam in India. The story is a long one and is still waiting for a powerful pen. Muslim politicians whose eyes were mainly fixed on the realities of the situation succeeded in winning over a section of the Ulama to adopt a line of theological argument which as they thought suited the situation; but it was not easy to conquer by mere logic the beliefs which had ruled for centuries the conscience of the masses of Islam in India . In such a situation, logic can either proceed on the ground of political expediency or on the lines of a fresh orientation of texts and traditions. In either case, the argument will fail to appeal to the masses. To the intensely religious masses of Islam only one thing can make a conclusive appeal, and that is Divine Authority. For an effective eradication of orthodox beliefs it was found necessary to find a revelational basis for a politically suitable orientation of theological doctrines involved in the questions mentioned above. This revelational basis is provided by Ahmadism. And the Ahmadis themselves claim this to be the greatest service rendered by them to British imperialism. The prophetic claim to a revelational basis for theological views of a political significance amounts to declaring that those who do not accept the claimant`s views are infidels of the first water and destined for the flames of Hell. As I understand the significance of the movement, the Ahmadi belief that Christ died the death of an ordinary mortal, and that his second advent means only the advent of a person who is spiritually ``like unto him,`` give the movement some sort of a rational appearance; but they are not really essential to the spirit of the movement. In my opinion, they are only preliminary steps towards the idea of full prophethood which alone can serve the purposes of the movement eventually brought into being by new political forces. In primitive countries it is not logic but authority that appeals. Given a sufficient amount of ignorance, credulity which strangely enough sometimes coexists with good intelligence, and a person sufficiently audacious to declare himself a recipient of Divine revelation whose denial would entail eternal damnation, it is easy, in a subject Muslim country to invent a political theology and to build a community whose creed is political servility. And in the Punjab, even an ill-woven net of vague theological expressions can easily capture the innocent peasant who has been for centuries exposed to all kinds of exploitation. Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru advises the orthodox of all religions to unite and thus to delay the coming of what he conceives to be Indian Nationalism. This ironical advice assumes that Ahmadism is a reform movement: he does not know that as far as Islam in India is concerned, Ahmadism involves both religious and political issues of the highest importance. As I have explained above, the function of Ahmadism in the history of Muslim religious thought is to furnish a revelational basis for India`s present political subjugation. Leaving aside the purely religious issues, on the ground of political issues alone it does not lie in the mouth of a man like Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru to accuse Indian Muslims of reactionary conservatism. I have no doubt that if he had grasped the real nature of Ahmadism he would have very much appreciated the attitude of Indian Muslims towards a religious movement which claims Divine authority for the woes of India.



Thus the reader will see that the pallor of Ahmadism which we find on the cheeks of Indian Islam today is not an abrupt phenomenon in the history of Muslim religious thought in India. The ideas which eventually shaped themselves in the form of this movement became prominent in theological discussions long before the founder of Ahmadism was born. Nor do I mean to insinuate that the founder of Ahmadism and his companions deliberately planned their programme. I dare say the founder of the Ahmadiyyah movement did hear a voice; but whether this voice came from the God of Life and Power or arose out of the spiritual impoverishment of the people must depend upon the nature of the movement which it has created and the kind of thought and emotion which it has given to those who have listened to it. The reader must not think that I am using metaphorical language. The life-history of nations shows that when the tide of life in a people begins to ebb, decadence itself becomes a source of inspiration, inspiring their poets, philosophers, saints, statesmen, and turning them into a class of apostles whose sole ministry is to glorify, by the force of a seductive art or logic, all that is ignoble and ugly in the life of their people. These apostles unconsciously clothe despair in the glittering garment of hope, undermine the traditional values of conduct and thus destroy the spiritual virility of those who happen to be their victims. One can only imagine the rotten state of a people`s will who are, on the basis of Divine authority, made to accept their political environment as final. Thus, all the actors who participated in the drama of Ahmadism were, I think, only innocent instruments in the hands of decadence. A similar drama had already been acted in Persia; but it did not lead, and could not have led, to the religious and political issues which Ahmadism has created for Islam in India. Russia offered tolerance to Babism and allowed the Babis to open their first missionary center in Ishqabad. England showed Ahmadism the same tolerance in allowing them to open their first missionary center in Woking. Whether Russia and England showed this tolerance on the ground of imperial expediency or pure broadmindedness is difficult for us to decide. This much is absolutely clear that this tolerance has created difficult problems for Islam in Asia. In view of the structure of Islam, as I understand it, I have not the least doubt in my mind that Islam will emerge purer out of the difficulties thus created for her. Times are changing. Things in India have already taken a new turn. The new spirit of democracy which is coming to India is sure to disillusion the Ahmadis and to convince them of the absolute futility of their theological inventions.



Nor will Islam tolerate any revival of medieval mysticism which has already robbed its followers of their healthy instincts and given them only obscure thinking in return. It has, during the course of the past centuries, absorbed the best minds of Islam leaving the affairs of the State to mere mediocrity. Modern Islam cannot afford to repeat the experiment. Nor can it tolerate a repetition of the Punjab experiment of keeping Muslims occupied for half a century in theological problems which had absolutely no bearing on life. Islam has already passed into the broad day light of fresh thought and experience, and no saint or prophet can bring it back to the fogs of medieval mysticism...

Re 164 and 163

One has got to see this nonsense to believe it. On the threshhold of th 21st century this dude is talking about permissibility of Olympic wardrobe and inter-gender sports. No wonder that the great Kemal Ataturk had so little patience with such kind of patent anti-freedom, anti-social, abnormally obsessive people. People die of hunger, women are killed in the name of honor, Saddam buries 300,000 in mass graves and all that Islamist apologists can talk about is dress code. No wonder Islam is viewed so negatively in America.

For those who don`t know about Ahmadiyyat and mistakenly think it a sect of islam.

Ahmadiyya Movement in, or against, Islam?


The ``Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam`` (called by Muslims everywhere as ``Qadianism``) was established, in 1889, by Mirza Ghulam Qadiani (1835 - 1908) in a small Punjabi village of India. Mirza Ghulam Qadiani’s family were in the service of the British colonial powers and, to his dying days, Mirza Ghulam openly declared his allegiance to the British imperialism. In fact, the culmination of his service to foreign power was his declaration that resistance to oppressors (Jihad) -- as ordained in the Holy Quran by God -- had become unIslamic!

Mirza Ghulam Qadiani’s life was laden with contradictory and anti-Islamic claims. In 1880, he declared himself to be only a Muslim writer; in 1885, he announced he was a revivalist (Mujaddid); in 1891, he claimed to be the Promised Mehdi and the Promised Messiah; and in 1901, he pronounced himself a prophet of God! Facing an open and strong opposition by Muslim Scholars and religious leaders for this blasphemous declaration and other teachings which belittled Jesus Christ(pbuh) and contradicted the Quranic revelations, he also announced that he was the second and improved coming of the Prophet Muhammad(SAW) with authority to reinterpret the Holy Quran at his pleasure! Not happy with mere prophethood, in 1904, he declared himself the Krishna (the Hindu Lord). Obviously, like an unethical modern-day politician, he was trying to appeal to all uneducated segments of the public in India!

Fortunately, the Almighty Allah(SWT), time and time again, exposed Mirza Ghulam Qadiani`s falsehood through his own statements and so-called prophecies. Even many of his own family members were aware of his treachery and openly opposed his anti-Islamic teachings. Mirza Ghulam Qadiani finally died by intervention of the Almighty Allah and as the result of religious prayer challenges (Mubahala), in 1908.

Since the death of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani, his heirs -- the leaders of the Qadiani organization (``Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam``) -- have been extremely busy trying to clean up his image. Backed by seemingly unlimited support they receive from their anti-Muslim allies, they have been promoting falsehood and deception through the media. They have even resorted to removing some of most controversial writings of Qadiani leadership -- which had become a source of embarrassment to them -- from circulation. Their partial English translation of their original text has been heavily edited to exclude all controversial and anti-Islamic sayings of their cult leaders. Obviously, they themselves realize the true nature of their ``Ahmadiyya Mission``.

The goal of the ``Ahmadiyya Mission`` is, and has always been, to confuse uninformed Muslims, divide the Ummah, prevent resistance to oppressors (Jihad), and provide an alternative to non-Muslims who find the message of Islam appealing. Quite cunningly, they do so by using Islamic terminology and teachings, and hiding the controversial writings of their founders. Today, only the most learned Muslims are able to attend one of their functions and realize that their brand of Islam is a form of Kufr (disbelief). Even when their leaders mention the Kalima (I bear witness there is only one God and Muhammad is his messenger), they are referring to their founder who proclaimed himself to be (God forbid) the second improved coming of the prophet Muhammad(SAW) and not to the true Prophet(SAW) of Allah(SWT).

Muslim brethren everywhere should not be confused by Qadiani leadership`s superficial use of Islamic concepts to promote their cult. Our beloved Prophet Muhammad(SAW) and the four Khalifah also faced such false prophets. Of particular interest is the claim by an Arab, named Musailama, to prophethood, during the latter part of the life of the Prophet(SAW). Although he simply claimed co-prophethood with the Prophet Muhammad(SAW) of Arabia and did not belie any other teaching of the Holy Quran, he and all of his mislead followers were declared out of the fold of Islam, by righteous believers. Under the leadership of Hadrat Abu Bakr Siddique(RA) and with the unanimous consensus of all the companions of the Prophet Muhammad(SAW), a victorious war was waged against Musailama for using Islamic concepts and claiming prophethood. This should indeed be sufficient evidence to declare the Qadianis as non-Muslims.

In 1974, after an exhaustive examination of all the evidence presented for and against the Qadianis, the Muslim World League (Rabita Alame Islami) -- which represents all religious scholars from every Muslim country of the world - passed a unanimous resolution declaring the Qadiani Movement and its leadership out of the fold of Islam. Indeed, ``Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam`` is a man-made organization with no divine authority or guidance.


Say: ``O ye men! Now Truth hath reached you from your Lord! those who receive guidance, do so for the good of their own souls; those who stray, do so to their own loss: and I am not (set) over you to arrange your affairs.``
(The Holy Quran, Yunus, 10:108)


May Allah(SWT) expose the falsehood of the Qadiani leadership and show its unfortunate followers the path to the perfected and completed religion of Allah: Al-Islam.

ZahraJ # 157

My post was just a ``Joker`` thrown in this debate between the believers & non-believers.

Personally, I get completely put off by the Niqab or Burqa-clad women; and avoid, or never get into a conversation with them. I feel unable to trust any one whom I can not see or with whom I can not communicate at equal footing.

Have a inside knowledge about the reality of ismaili madhib;


FROM AN ex-ISMAILI TO A MUSLIM

Dear Brothers-Sisters

As-Salaamu Alaikum Warahmatullahi Wabarakatuhu

May I for the sake of Allah (swt), His Deen and the Muslim Ummaah, request you to please consider the following facts very carefully and decide on your responsibility before Allah (swt) in this matter.

I am a revert to Islam. I was an Ismaili before - a follower of the Aga Khan. And I perceive an important Da`wah responsibility which the majority of Muslims are for some reason or other are ignoring. I am not getting you into petty sectarian issues, but a very important matter - please judge for yourself:

1. The Ismailis (followers of the Aga Khan) all professedly believe that the Qur`an was time bound and was not meant to be a Universal message for all times. They believe that their spiritual leader, Karim Aga Khan, is the ``walking - talking Qur`an`` and his ``religious pronouncements``, whatever they may be, are the ``guidance`` for the present times. The fundamental article of faith that there will not be any NEW revelations or ``wahy`` after the Qur`an, is being completely violated by the Ismailis.

2. The Aga Khan has officially Declared himself, before his followers, as the ``Mazhar of Allah on earth``. The word ``mazhar`` means ``copy`` or ``manifest``. Consequently, these Ismailis who call themselves Muslims do ``sujood`` before him. So even the primary axiomatic principle of Tawheed is being fundamentally and formally violated by them.

3. The Ismailis are not instructed to offer the Islamic Salaah, observe Saum or perform Hajj. They have replaced Salaah with certain shirk-infested Dua`as (thrice a day). They are told that their Hajj is a personal ``Glimpse`` (Deedaar) of Karim Aga Khan.

4. The Aga Khan and his appointees `forgive the sins` of the followers on regular basis. Ismailis are misled into believing that they will not be questioned on the Day of Judgment for the sins that are already forgiven in their Jamatkhanas (community centers). Forgiving of sins is the exclusive prerogative and privilege of Allah (swt) alone. Qur`an 3:135.

5. Against this backdrop, most of the poor (spiritually poor) Ismailis who are not introduced to al-Furqan are confused and misguided. Hence, Ismailis are very easy prey to missionary efforts by various Christian groups and Baha`is. I have known a couple of young ex-Ismailis who are today preaching ``Pauline Christianity`` to Ismailis as evangelical missionaries.

6. Karim Aga Khan`s own daughter Zahra having married a practising Christian has opened the gates for young Ismailis girls to follow the footsteps of a family member of their beloved Imam-e-Zaman. The parents of the Ismaili girls who wish to marry outside of Islam have no recourse but to let them go.

7. The Aga Khan has made Halaal for the Ismailis that which Allah has made Haraam for the humans. Taking of interest (usury) is not forbidden by the religious instruction classes run by the ``Tariqaah`` board of the Ismailis. As a matter of fact, the much publicized ``Venture Capital`` program (details on the website of FORBES Magazine - search under ``Aga Khan``), of loaning funds on interest by the AKFED (Aga Khan Fund & Economic Development), has been a great success. Similar entrepreneurial projects are now being actively promoted and introduced to poor Muslims of Tajikistan and neighboring areas.

8. The Muslim Ummaah and the various Muslim leaders are not fully aware of these Un-Islamic acts and beliefs of this community of less than two million members, who claim to be the Ismaili Muslims. Surprisingly, their leader Aga Khan claims himself to be a spiritual leader of 15 million Muslims and a Direct Descendant of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam).

9. Earlier, one did not have authentic books on Ismailism, but it is not so anymore. There are two authentic books as well as one comprehensive web site exposing the inner practices of the Ismailis and the Proclamations (Farmans) of the Aga Khans. Hence, now you have no ``hujjah`` argument or excuse left before Allah (swt) for not taking up the task of inviting the misguided ``Ismaili Muslims`` towards the Deen of Allah (swt) and not safeguarding them from committing unpardonable sin of Shirk.

10. The Aga Khan in collaboration with so many Western powers and aid, has set up the world-wide Aga Khan Development Network (AKDN) which runs several institutions and service companies both in the profit and not for profit sectors. This network is very actively operating in Pakistan, India, Tanzania, Uganda, Kenya and Bangladesh, and has now started concentrating its efforts in Tajikistan and the neighbouring areas where there is a concentration of Muslims who have not known or openly practised Islam for the decades. By taking up economical, social, educational and rural development efforts through NGOs (Non-Govt. Organizations) within the AKDN, the Ismailis and the Aga Khan have gained wide acceptance amongst these countries and masses. Hence this urgent appeal.

11. Now all these beneficiaries are ``obliged and grateful`` to the Aga Khan and his followers and his organizations for the much-needed schools, medical centers, hospitals, various projects and programmes. In this manner they are penetrating and infiltrating the support system - and one fine day, the Muslim Ummaah will wake up to the unexpected realization that they have a community of so called Muslims, practicing the Un-Islamic Tariqaah, in charge of all core and support activities. Each of these much-needed projects will have the photos of Aga Khan decorating the walls.

In the name of Allah (swt) and Islam, kindly urge our Brothers and Sisters to do Da`wah to the Ismailis, who otherwise will, on the day of judgement, hold us responsible for not conveying the Revealed Truth to them. Dear Brother/Sister, you know much more on the subject than what little I have learnt since reverting to the Deen of Allah (swt). It hurts to see the misguided simple minded people die on SHIRK because we did not amply warn them before their deaths.

I am aware of your stature as a religious leader of repute, respectability and acceptance among Muslim Masses, and hence have sought to put this appeal to you. I request you to seriously consider this request and initiate all steps that you consider Wajib and appropriate. To spread the ``Truth`` and eradicate ``Tagoot`` is a significant, major Sunnah of the prophet (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam).

May I also request you to please forward this e-mail to at least five (if not all) of your Muslim friends and activists so that greater awareness of this issue is created, and this request reaches a wider audience. Please do so. JazakAllah.``

In case you wish to seek any further clarification please feel free to e-mail a message. I will Insh`allah respond. I apologize in advance, if this happens to be a repeat message.

May Allah (swt) shower His Choicest Blessings on the entire Muslim Ummah. May Almighty Allah bless you and keep you in the service of Islam and Muslims. Aameen.

Jazak`Allah and Was salaam,

Yours in the Service of Islam,

Akbarally Meherally

For nazarhayatkhan

In Islamic discourse a great deal of emphasis is placed on the issue of hijab for women with much debate about the extent and nature of that covering. This is obviously an important issue for Muslim women, but an equally significant topic is that of Modesty. The Prophet, passed by an Ansari man who was counseling his brother on modesty (He was advising him not to be too much shy or modest). The Prophet said: ``Leave him (and do not advise him like this); for modesty is part of faith.`` [Sahih Al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim]. The Prophet, , also said, ``Modesty results in good alone and nothing else.`` [Sahih Al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim]

Modesty is a term that is used often but one that is not clearly understood. One way to conceptualize it would be to think in terms of moving from an outer layer to the inner workings of a system. The covering, or hijab is the surface layer of modesty that everyone sees and that is very obvious to all. However, a woman could wear hijab and modesty may not go any deeper than that; it could be an artificial form of modesty or one done to satisfy another person.

Going deeper, the next layer may consist of what is commonly known as self-consciousness or shyness. At this level the woman not only wears hijab, but also acts in a way that is reserved and respectful. An important behavior in this category is lowering of the gaze. ``And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty.`` [Quran Surah #24 Verse # 3 1] Emphasis is often placed on men lowering their eyes, but this is also a requirement for women. Eyes should be turned away from everything that is forbidden. This includes not looking at any non-mahram man, at the awrah of another woman, or with bad intentions at another person. In one hadith qudsi, the Prophet, reported that Allah, subhanahu wa ta`ala, says, ``Looking at a non-mahram is one of the poisoned arrows of Satan. Whoever will stop it because of fearing me, I will bless him with such Imaan, the sweetness of which he will feel in his heart`` [Tabarani]

Another characteristic at this level is humility in speech. As with everything in Islam, a woman`s speech should be in moderation. It should be neither too loud nor too soft (so as to be alluring). Idle, senseless, excessive conversation should be avoided since it has no benefit and distracts from more important responsibilities. When a woman engages in conversation she should keep it decent and respectable and void of such harmful vices as backbiting, mockery, suspicion, and gossip. She should be humble and not boast about her abilities and achievements. ``Successful indeed are the believers who are humble in their salah, and who shun vain conversation, and who are payers of zakat`` [Quran Surah #23 Verses #1-4]. Being placed between two pillars of Islam demonstrates the very significance of this pronouncement.

A woman should also attempt to avoid contact and conversation with non-mahram men. When this is necessary, such as for educational purposes or in the work environment, the discussion should be limited to pertinent matters and the woman should speak in a straight-forward and virtuous manner.

As with the hijab, these rules of etiquette may be observed for various reasons. The woman may act modestly because of cultural norms, her own innate disposition, or to impress or satisfy other people. This may have no connection whatsoever to the innermost level of modesty as any non-believer may follow the same code of conduct.. The center of this innermost level is the heart, alongside Imaan. A true believing woman does not engage-in these behaviors for other people; rather, she does it for the sake of Allah. She does not do so out of shyness from other people; she does it out of shyness from Allah. She is humble in the presence of Allah because she knows that everything she has, her wealth, her status, her abilities, are only from Him. This understanding highlights the interconnection between modesty and Imaan. The Prophet said, ``Indeed, modesty and Imaam are companions. When one of them is lifted, the other leaves as well.`` [Baihaqi] And when this happens, the moral fiber of society is jeopardized

Hey maulana t ahmed -- are you trying to reconvert our hamidm to your Islam?

#163 anew
Qadianis (who declare Mirza Ghulam Ahmed of Qadian to be a prophet), and munkareen-e-hadith (deniers of Hadiths) have been busy attracting our new generations to their falsehoods.
##

What is the criteria to determine an apostate? Who makes that decision for your ``billion-strong`` ummah?

#152 by hamidm2 on December 9, 2003 7:42am PT
anew,

.........this is a serious question:............ what is your opinion on sports because some of them require men and women to dress ``indecently``?....... you are not suggesting that you can run a marathon, swim, play hockey or get up parallel bars wearing an abaya or shalwar kameez ? .......are you?....... i am sure you can, but i doubt if you can really compete............. are you suggesting that muslims should stop participating in the olympics and hold their own ``islamic`` games?........

hamidm2

Your mention of Olympics would have been appropriate if we were winning there medals worth mentioning. Your feeling of Islam as hindrance in participating sports events is not valid. BTW, abaya and shalwar kameez are not a mandatory Islamic dress. Only covering satar is mandatory. It could be in track suit or a long nicker upto knees or above knees if knees are covered lby many sportsmen for protection.

Sports tournaments involve 2 parties: a) participants, and b) spectators

As far as the participants are concerned, Islam encourages physical fitness and health consciousness. Keeping these objectives in mind participation in modern day sport will be permissible with the following conditions:

a) His attire conforms with Shariah regulations.

b) His involvement in such sport does not make him negligent of his religious obligations.

c) No form of gambling is involved in such activity.

d) He does not become the cause of others neglecting their religious duties.

e) Intermingling of sexes does not take place.


As far as the spectators are concerned the primary benefit of watching sport is relaxation but modern sport on an organized level has gone far beyond the boundaries of exercise and relaxation.

Yes, if we have to violate Islamic rules to participate in Olympics than an Islamic Olympics would be advisable where there will be sports but following the shariah. Now seeing the state of present day Muslims violating all Shariah laws to win this world but still lying at the bottom. No gain in this world and Aákhira also lost. This is curse of ALLAH for disobeying HIM.

The good Muslims strive to win ALLAH`s blessings, pleasure and favors than winning a piece of metal and HIS displeasure.

yek too naa milaa, saaree duniyaan mile bhee to kyaa hain
meraa dil naa khilaa, saaree bagiyaan khile bhee to kyaa hain