Prophecy and the Mullah: Hotel Mohenjodaro

escapist: Simply ridiculing me by calling me a mullah does not mean what I wrote is incorrect. If you have a problem with anything I wrote in that earlier post, I suggest you say it.

Someother ideas of Mullah Tahmed.



#149 by tahmed32 on December 15, 2003 11:03am PT
hamidm #144 And one more thing on the man in the cave. I am not saying the prophet sat around a round table with the angel dictating the message to him. I do believe that the prophet had an experience of some kind in the cave, that he relayed the message as he understood it to those around him, that the message was subsequently penned by various scribes (with the initial copies of the Quran in fact being somewhat different), and that the caliph usman then commissioned a standard version. So clearly there is room, for a ``slip between the cup and the lip`` (or between the experience in the cave and the standard version of the Quran). Nevertheless, it seems safe to say that the basic message of the Quran (which is poles apart from that of the maulvi, and which can be summarizd in one page as a set of values) is based on what the prophet originally related.

My belief above is based on archaeological facts (some time back the NYT reported on different versions of the Quran being studied even today in Europe just as the Dead Sea Scrolls and other aspects of biblical archaeology have been studied - although the muslim world is not ready as yet for this, no doubt it will be ready in a hundred years from now).

It does call for a leap of faith (with respect to the experience in the cave), but as long as one recognizes that and as long as one respects other people`s right to not share this faith, I dont see any problem. And indeed religion can be a positive source of peace and tranquility and moral character, What exactly went on in the cave (or on the mount where the burning bush spoke to moses, or under the banyan tree where buddha sat and meditated) is not so important as the fact that religion can (hard though it may believe for us desis who are used to mobs attacking innocent people in the name of religion) be a source of peace and goodwill. The west has done it. So can we.

Raw Dust #284 Thanks for your appreciative note. As for my ``personal understanding of the Quran``, I thought that is what I had been presenting below. :-)

The answer to your question is #2 without reservation.

To discuss this a bit: As I said earlier, on matters of religion the Quran makes it clear that judgement is reserved by God and will be between the God and the individual. Mankind is entreated not to split apart on religious issues, to treat all religions and even their rituals as given by God.

HOWEVER, the Quran also makes it clear that on the Judgement Day each individual will be held INDIVIDUALLY RESPONSIBLE for his ACTIONS. Thus, you can believe in mirza or maududi or some pir, fakir or aalim. That is not my concern. All I say is that if someone does something that common sense and decency would say is wrong, then clearly that is going to be very relevant on the Judgement Day.

My opposition to the mullahs or the followers of maududi or of mirza or of any other pir, fakir, aalim, ``holy man`` or any other man - is based on the fact that what they all have in common is that they detract from this INDIVIDUAL RESPONSIBILITY, and that has resulted all too often in ACTIONS that are clearly evil - these actions include the irresponsible creation of animosities between communities (as we see all too often on chowk, where hindutvas have been coming in hordes to insult muslims, and a handful of shameless muslim fanatics have done the same), and thus create the atmosphere for so much evil to be carried out in the name of their respective ``religions`` (burning of muslim families in Gujrat, bombing of innocent shiite mosque-goers in Quetta, killing of 3,000 innocent people on 9/11 - these are all actions that I cannot imagine can be inspired by anyone but the devil himself.). Thus, I consider those who cause rifts between communities (even those on chowk who do so while hiding their true identities behind fancy titles) that they know leads to such actions to be as surely dozakhis as any cold blooded killer. Which man misled them does not matter - whether it is modi our maududi.

Sattar Sahib and Tahmed Sahib:
Good exchange!
I was curious to know from both of you, what do you guys think according to your very own personal understanding of Quran, Would a person who interprets Quran diametrically opposite to your interpretation will be shown the gates of hell? Ofcourse to make that judgement whether a person be eternally damned is solely upto God, BUT what is your impression? Has (the way you read Quran) God given any indications of how would he dispose when the time comes:

1) You can say, yes That person will most likely be eternally damned.

2) Cannot and do not make a personal impression about the eventual End of that person (persons siding with Maudodi interpretation for example.), not even remotely.

3) Everyone who considers Quran as the word of God will be saved from Hellfire (does not matter if you think as `yes` he interprets it as `no` in Quran)

Many thanks and peace.

Urstruly: and other muslims.

This is a great site. Everyone should access it and promote it.
Contradictions in the writings of mirza-ghulam-e-farangi

sattar #281 Very good then, as I said earlier - to you be your way, and to me be mine. You have maintained a civility and decorum that is appropriate for any religious discussion, and I hope you have no complaint from my side either.

While I believe in the finality of the prophethood and you do not, your beliefs are your personal matter and not my business (unless you were to seek to impose it on society, in which case it would be a different matter). I wish you all the best in your personal life, and thank you for having the chance to present my views.

Tahmed,

Your fundamental problem is not with prophethood, but with Quran itself. And no, I am not running out of arguments … but thanks for your make-believe concern anyway. I hope it made you feel better.

You should let Allah know that … since mommies and kindergarten teachers have existed throughout the ages, there was never any need to send prophets to warn people. I am sure Allah will value your input … and amend His grand plan accordingly.

A prophet appearing to remind people of their duty does not conflict with individual responsibility. Quran is full of such examples. It attests to the fact that prophets appeared to remind and warn people as they went astray. If this bothers you, take up your issue with Allah.

And finally …

We are going in circles … while failing to see eye to eye. I am content with my take on Quran … and you should do what makes sense to you. Final point remains that civility and courtesy should be extended to everyone. Whether a person worships a monkey, or follows prophets, or day-trades tech stocks … is his prerogative.

With that comment, I bow out of this discussion.

sattar #279 In justifying the continuing need for prophets, you say ``Prophets primarily serve the function of warning people and reminding them of their duty. ``

Isnt that the reason God made mommies? And kindergarten teachers? I think my friend that you are running out of arguments.

More seriously, your argument does NOT counter the second point it made - it simply re-iterates your original point which I had countered with my argument concerning the central role of the Day of Judgement in the Quran and the emphasis on individual responsibility. You have not addressed this point.

Would you care to address this point directly? Specifically: How can you accept the Quranic emphasis on individual responsibility and at the same time look towards kindergarten teachers (excuse me, I meant follow-up prophets, ulema, holy men, mullahs, and so forth) for guidance? Is it really that hard to tell right from wrong?

Tahmed Sahib …

Contrary to what you state, I did not question the need for Quran. Therefore, your response to the hypothetical question you raised should be directed not to me, but to one who questions the need for Quran. Fair enough?

According to Quran, Torah was revealed for guidance of Israelites. Undoubtedly, Torah put the burden of following God’s commandments on each individual. Quran attests to the fact that … as Israelites went astray, Allah raised prophets for their guidance. Prophets primarily serve the function of warning people and reminding them of their duty. This fits perfectly well with Allah’s attribute of being Merciful. Condition of the world shows that mankind has gone astray once again. The obvious conclusion is inescapable for one who uses Quran as his guide. Remember, it is not about you and me personally … but the condition of the mankind as a whole.

This argument also counters the second point you raised.

malik #276 I suggest you go back and read my article which I wrote before the Iraq war - read it carefully, and you will see that I supported it for the following reasons: (a) regardless of anything else, Iraqis would be rid of an evil dictator; (b) that America has a great record of introducing democracy - I gave the example of Japan and Germany. On these two counts, (a) is already done. Saddam is behind bars.

On (b), let us take the score: over 500,000 children had starved to death while Saddam was building his fine palaces, and Iraq had piled up $300 billion debt to countries like Russia and France. Due to US lobbying on behalf of Iraq (by James Baker and others), much of the debt has been forgiven. There is no chance of Iraq again entering into wars of the kind it engaged in under Saddam - the 10 year war with Iran cost over a million lives, for example. So, when you count the war dead, you should also count lives that have been saved. While Iraq may not emerge as another Japan or Germany, there is no question that over time the insurgency will end and oil-rich Iraq will emerge as the first Arab nation with a proper constitution. It took Japan and Germany several years to get back on their feet - and there is every reason to hope that Iraq will too.

Coming to the innocent lives lost in Iraq - I will admit that the cost has been appalling, and something I had not paid attention to in my article. For that I accept my mistake in supporting the war - and as a result am even more resolute than I was before in saying that the only time violence is permissible is in pure self-defense. While on balance, via cold calculation, one could argue that more lives have been saved in Iraq than have been lost (per the above discussion), there is a question of the ends not justifying the means. And on that basis I accept my error in supporting the war. I allowed the ends to blind me to the horrors of war.

sattar #275 On your first point (why do we need the Quran), I am afraid sir that you have completely missed my point. My point was that the Quran itself provides, simply and clearly, the reason why it was necessary even though (as it itself notes) it says nothing that has not already been revealed in earlier books (e.g. the Torah to use your example). The reason being that it is the Arabic Quran, meant for a people who do not know the languages in which earlier books were revealed. Please provide me an answer to THIS point. Not to something I did not say.

On our second point (your contention that there is a continuing need for prophets, rather than the finality of the prophethood with Prophet Muhammed), I am afraid your argument is quite faulty. And this is where the fault lies: the argument you have presented goes contrary to the clear implications of the Quranic emphasis on the Judgement Day. That is, by emphasizing the Judgement Day, AND by emphasizing individual responsibility on the Judgement Day (and explicitly rejecting ``advocates`` and intercessors between the individual and God on that day), the Quran places accountability squarely with the individual. What you are saying (namely, this need for a continuing stream of warners and messengers following the Prophet Muhammed) clearly dilutes this responsibility. Please reflect upon this carefully, since this is a fundamental flaw in your entire philosophy. (Not, btw, I may add is this flaw insignificant - since, by emphasizing individual accountability Islam automatically rejects the need for a priesthood or a follow-up prophet or a theocracy. And by emphasizing individual accountability that Islam re-inforces human dignity.)

tahmed32 - you write ``My basic point is very simple: those who actively promote violence and discord between communities of people are to be condemned.``

Thank you. In this spirit I condemn you for supporting and promoting the invasion of Iraq. In fact, you went beyond other war promoters on chowk - you wrote an article promoting the war. I condemn you for joining the thousands of propagandists of this genocide. I condemn you for being a follower of Iblis. I condemn you for having the blood of innocent iraqi children on hand. How do you sit at home with your kids and have dinner when the TV in front of you shows another bloody massacre of Iraqi children as result of a war you so promoted?

Tahmed32 - your rhetoric cannot hide the blood on your hand.

Tahmed Sahib …

Individual responsibility that Quran emphasizes … was emphasized in Torah as well. But prophets were raised as people went astray. Nothing changed in the time interval between Torah and Quran … as far as human behavior and psychology is concerned.

You ask me … why do I need prophets to understand the message of Quran? It’s not about you and me … but the condition of the world at large suggests that mankind indeed has gone astray (re-read this sentence). You may argue that the world should not need more prophets. You may also argue that Israelites should not have needed more prophets. But the fact remains that Israelites did need more prophets. Similarly, the humanity still needs prophets today … as human corruption and suffering across the world at large continues to rise. Note that one of the main functions of prophets is to warn and to remind.

Let’s call it quits … but you should review your habit of unnecessarily bashing Ahamdi-Muslims. Re-read my first post on this board (#237)… and you should realize that your response was inappropriate and below the mark of civility.

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

Urstruly,

… I am only giving you the cyber-equivalent of a kick in the groin … that you continue to ask for by posting incorrect, hateful information about Ahamdis. If I hold a mirror to you, and you see a limping eunuch, is it my fault?

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

Atif Sahib,

When you imprison Ahmadis for saying prayers or giving aazan … it is not tolerance. It is gundaa-gardi. A person who claims to follow Quran should know better. Obviously you don`t. And that`s the travesty of the ummah nowadays.

malik: you forgot to mention the 3000 people of other nationalities who were killed on 9/11 whom I did not mention either. Should I therefore claim that you consider their lives to be less valuable than of the 60 pakistanis who were killed? No. Should I ask about the large number of bengalis that were killed by our own army and by the jamaatia and bihari paramilitaries in 1971 and ask why you forgot to mention them? I wont. Because all it means is that one can only give so many examples.

My basic point is very simple: those who actively promote violence and discord between communities of people are to be condemned. And those who do so by using religion as an excuse do so in violation of the Quranic injunctions are twice condemned - for promoting violence that leads to death and injury to countless innocent people in the first instance, and for replacing the peaceful message of Islam with their own satanic ideology of hate and violence and hypocrisy.

tahmed32 - you write ``Who cries for the 60 young pakistanis who were killed at the WTC by another branch of these followers of iblis? ``

it is strange how selective you are you in your mourning. While you have repeatedly brought up the death of 60 Pakistanis in WTC, since it fits in well with the agenda of your masters, i remember fully well that you openly promoted the invasion of Iraq that killed 100,000 innocent men/women/children of iraq. I also remember your joy upon the killings of hundreds of innocent pakistanis in Wana. Do you realize that by being an aide to the agent of death, you personally have the blood of these innocent people on your hand?

Or is it just that the death of these thousands of innocents was NOT the work of Iblis?!!!!

At some point hypocrisy ceases to be repulsive - it just makes one sad.

sattar - just like I am pretty tolerant towards whatever christians and jews do to their religions, I am pretty tolerant towards what you do to your qadiyani religion. The problem I have is when Qadiyanis show THEIR intolerance my messing with my religion and my Prophet (saw) and my Quran.

as for the stick you are planning to throw at me, use it to on your fellow Qadiyanis to bring some tolerance in them and to tell them to show sensitivities towards the majority Muslim population of Pakistan.