Who is a Muslim?

Rizwan Ahmad

A pertinent question to ask here is after all what is the contribution of Mirza sahib to the benefit of mankind. If he was a reformer than what has he reformed? Mirza Sahib was a prolific writer and undobtedly he has written hundereds if not thousands of books, booklets and essays but every effort seems to be in the direction of defending his own position and none towards reformation. That`s not the way Prophets work. Prophets do not defend themselves, they jump into the fires of Nimrod for their message, they drag their own cross on their shoulders for their message; they lie down on benches smiling to be sawed off for their message; and when they are stonned and chased out of the towns they wish well for their tormentors - none of them wrote one single polemic thesis to defend their positions. Where is the ``Message` in case of Mirza sahib. As a matter of fact Guru Nanak had a message, and he was reformer too even Guru Gobind Singh had a message but Mirza sahib...... I am sorry about this diatrib but someone needs to educate me here.

Hossp:

Yes we should question our religion but we must first appreciate the difference between questioning and speculating. I don`t understand how a speculative argument any better than a beleif based argument. Anyway, in all fairness and justice the burden of proof always lies with the accuser. When you speculate on something, you in fact make an accusation - my point is that you should be the one who should be providing the proof not me making clarifications.

hossp,

`` My faith and belief is not hampered when I question the validity of certain aspect of the religion, my faith becomes stronger when I am able to understand an issue at my level. ``

....... the other day i saw a man trying to walk on lake michigan, but he drowned....... then another man walked out and he too drowned .............. so my faith in christianity became stronger and i concluded that people from chicago were too fat and certainly not prophets ............

.......... and when i saw that a spider had not woven its net across the entrance to saddam`s hole my faith in islam was reaffirmed and i concluded that saddam hussein was a sinner and certainly not a prophet ...............

.............. it is raeally amazing how faith works ........................

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Romair you have asked, as you wrote

``At the same time, while I have not studied the life of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad much, the above is one of the issues I have with his following, as well. He could have just preached a version of religion, and then let the coming generations decide whether he was a Mahdi or a prophet. Rather than inculcating that into a version of the religion. In this sense, he tried to claim ownership of a religion, beyond his own personal sphere (I need to study this a bit more).

Another thing he could have done, was to have completely started a new religion, like Bhudda or Guru Nanak. That would have made life easier for anyone to whom his ideas appealed.``

I will try to explain the perspective, why did not Mirza Ghalam Ahmad do as you have thought.

This is similar to asking Christians why Jesus caused so much controversy, Jesus could have toned down his message and the world would not have seen the later subjugation of Jews and religious wars.

The answer is ``Every prophet of God did, what He was told by God, and they were at highest level of steadfastness and faith``

This points to Agreement of Prophets with God as mentioned in Quran, that they will be truthfull and they would do as asked by God.

All the true Prophets of God are different from ordinary humanfolk in this respect that they have the privilage of communication with God, which essentially give them a level of certainity about God which ordinary humanfolks do not have.

This is the certainity which compelled Muhammad(pbuh) to suffer persecution in Mekkah and face any army of 1000 with 313 in Badar, the consequence could have utter extinction of Islam at that point. But prophets are bestowed with far-out vision and understanding, and Most importantly an unshakeable faith in the One God, the Exalted.

Ispahahani #92 You seem like an intelligent man (from your chowk resume). Why do you write such gibberish? (no offense, I am sure you are a fine individual, but really....)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Urstruly,

Version: form or variant of a type
In software, we use ‘compiled version’ but that is not the only version of the version. So, your logic does not apply -:)

I need to make one more clarification for you in terms of the Quran compiled during Hazrat Osman’s period. That Quran was actually edited and compiled by Zaid ibn Thabit, under the direction of Hazrat Osman and was not written on paper.

There were only four copies of that Quran and it is said that only one is supposedly (that too is questionable.) in existence now. The Topkapi Manuscript in Istanbul, Turkey.

Two issues here:
1. It is true that Arabs of Mecca or Medina were not exposed to paper but they had conquered Syria and the current Iraq before or during Hazrat Osman’s period and paper was being used in Syria and in the current Iraq then, why did Muslims not preserve this copy of the Quran on paper?

2. The Islamic history does not list the names of the people who had memorized the Quran the first time. You see this is a big anomaly. Obviously the Prophet (PBUH) did not memorize the Quran- then who did? In Islamic history couple of names have appeared but none with any surety. (If you have something on this I will appreciate that.)

Now the point is with the first compilation and the last Na’azool of the Quran, there is a gap of almost 20 to 25 years. How much can be relied on the memory alone? Lastly, With Arab traditions of story telling and exaggerations, some elements of doubt about the authenticity of the people who memorized the Quran, does creep in.

You Said: “Keeping these points in mind lets get back to your contention that there existed ``various versions of Qura`n`` prior to Osman. Then the question is what has prevented various versions to emerge after Osman in the past 1500 years.”

Muslim tradition informs us that after the above compilation, all other competing codices and manuscripts were destroyed after 646-650 A.D. Even ``Hafsah`s copy`` (the other written version) from which the final recension was taken was burned.

That was the Islamic explanation to your question above; now my question.
Why were they not preserved, like so many other older documents that are still in existence today?

We really can’t continue this discussion if you have to rely on your beliefs to support your contentions, as I don’t think that there is anybody who can squabble with beliefs.

The truth is that this is not a matter of belief and faith alone.

The source book of Islam has to be able to stand the truth of the time or all edifices of Islam will come down with it. The Jurisprudence, the economics guidelines, the Sharia and even your most sacred belief of Last Prophet of God.

Nobody can continue to look at things without questioning them. My faith and belief is not hampered when I question the validity of certain aspect of the religion, my faith becomes stronger when I am able to understand an issue at my level.

Eventually, Muslims have to accept that they have to question many things themselves or they will allow others to question them. Like it is being done now and most of the Muslims voices are just reduced to shrills and common sense is in not so common in the Muslim world. Unfortunately, mullah would not allow that, as that would be the end of their control on the Muslim minds.

tahmad-
I think you captured it all. Christians and Jews have questioned their books and faith repeatedly and with a sense of humor too. They have proven that their books are not the work of a person or are divine. They have accepted that their books have emerged over a period and represent a period in the history rather then the God’s word alone.

Now I sound like a Mullah!!!!!!

… so Urstruly’s hurt by Ahmadis calling themselves Muslims … and he is tired of making sacrifices for them …

Urstruly … I am sorry for being an insensitive jerk all these years … if I had known it was you who was making sacrifices for Ahamdis all along … I would have sent you a bouquet and some miswak to show my appreciation … I am truly sorry man …

So, Urstruly and his mullahs declare Ahmadis non-Muslims, confiscate their books, forbid them from giving aazan, and lock them in prisons for saying as’salamo alaikom. And this is only the first page of his social contract with Ahmadis.

This is a bit like jews … who were unhappy with the occupying Romans … and decided to nail Jesus to the cross. After all he did hurt their sentiments by claiming to be the messiah …

Urstruly’s situation is like that of an impotent man … who beats up his young bride for his own insecurities. Of course, it hurts to have a burgeoning bride when I cannot perform … so she must bear this pain for me … is his lethargic defense. So he goes on to beat her, while struggling with memories of youthful days … reassuring himself that the whore is getting what she deserves. After all … why should I be the one making all the sacrifices …

shobuz #83 I am not sure why you are so upset at hossp - the best I can tell is because he attached a write-up on the Yemeni Qurans. You seem to think that Jews and Christians have not performed similar archaeological studies of their holy books, when in fact the opposite is true. Ever hear of the Dead Sea Scrolls (written around the time of Jesus)? The Bible itself is divided into four Gospels, each Gospel being known by the name of the author (although the names of the scribes themselves are lost to history), namely Mark, Matthew, Luke and John. The background in which they were written has been studied to death, as well as the commonalities and differences between them. As for the jews, archaeology is a national obsession in Israel - Moshe Dayan, one of their greatest generals, was also an expert archaeologist. Ancient ruins like the city of Jericho have been studied and their contrast with the Bible noted - e.g. the Genesis claim that Joshua brought down the walls of the city of Jericho through the sound of trumpets is considered to be a bit of an exaggeration - studies of the ancient ruins show those walls to be several feet thick.

All this does not mean that jews or christians are lacking in faith, or that their faith is shaken because they accept the fact that their books were written by ordinary men. It is only the hypocrites and the ignorant maulvis who are afraid to face the fact that the Quran was written by ordinary men. The important thing is not the Quran, but the MESSAGE OF ISLAM that in the Quran that is important. I find it ridiculous that while Quranic teachings are violated at every step of the way, or carefully covered up by a layer of sharia, the Quran itself is treated as if it is some kind of a magical book. Too many muslims think that Islam is some kind of magic where you repeat some manter so many times and you get some benefit in return from God.

No wonder the muslim world is the most backward part of the world today, and the muslim chauvinists are among the most hypocritical people on earth. Because they have chosen to ignore the Quran and treat its teachings as some kind of manter, and to make up their own Islam via the Sharia.

… more on mullah Urstruly’s democratic Islam … (whatever the hell that means …)

While Quran asks readers to ignore blasphemers … mullahs have agreed that blasphemers should be killed. To display their commitment to democratic principles, they also voted to condemn to death polytheists, adulterers, and anyone who decides to leave Islam …

Of course, this improves the dynamic social contract with non-Muslims … is the self-aggrandized explanation from mullah Urstruly. Ahmadis are not singled out … same treatment will be dished out to anyone who fails the criteria of a momin ... or any unmarried woman who fails the random, shariah-ordained virginity test …

Back to you Urstruly ... you are truly inspiring. I am sure hamidm has no reason left to remain a stranger to the ummah … and ZahraJ is now ready to dump her white, live-in boyfriend in favor of nikah to the fat, smelly imam of the grand mosque in detroit …

Some things may just not be defined.
Who is a `good` person? Who is a `bad` person?

Can these questions be answered comprehensively?

The best thing to do would be to give up trying to correct others and defining them for them - and rather focus on self-analysis. ARE WE MUSLIMS? ARE WE GOOD MUSLIMS? AND GOOD HUMANS?

Those must be the questions. And for answering those, including the first two, we must consult our conscience and good old common sense given to all humans. Others must be left alone.

Ispahani:

Heaven is real, temporal, ruling gods are shamefully worthless!

if i understand this correctly then am in agreement...


a better insaan learns to be be a responsible person here

for hereafter...well...sequentially...it is here preceding after so to (needlessly) repeat the point...let`s endeavour to be better insaans here and that will take care of all that after might offer

(sorry for the obtuseness...try hard as i can i can not match your simplicity)

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

#71: Hossp:

Romair’s writing cannot be understood with your present memory configuration. By default these sort of writing will be obnoxious for you. Please avoid yourself to be more frustrated and refrain using vulgar word.

How much research has you done on Bible or Vagabat Gita or other. Do you come from a background where you have particular interest on Islam? Do you have certain sickening pleasure on bashing Islam? Do you have Islam O Phobia? Please visit you nearest newfound God (discard previous God Russia) and obtain a brochure on the potent to enhance your pleasure and gratification of your twisted sickening mind.

1400 years has gone down the drain - the bedouins are still not sure who they are. They are tearing apart each other in their vain quest for a illusive one-dimensional definition.

Better question: Are Muslims modern-day neanderthals? Stuck in a groove and unable to get on with life?