The Chicken Hawks Of Pakistan
Feroz R Khan May 7, 2001
#422 Posted by Daska123 on July 10, 2007 7:25:00 pm
Re: # 421
I don`t think that Pakistan should involve itself on any level with Afghanistan apart from maintaining diplomatic relations. The current governemnt is pro Northern Alliance and has been jaundiced against Pakistan from the outset. Any genuine attempt to reconcile or build bridges with the Afghanis is miscontrued by Afghanistan. In short Afghanis find Pakistan a convenient scape goat to blame all of their internal problems on. As the joke goes, if there is an earthquake in Afghanistan it`s becasue of Pakistan`s ISI. I for one am sick of hearing complaints from our thankless neighbours. The sooner we buid a fence across our border with Afghanistan the better. Moroever the US and Europe should pay for it as partial repayment for all the suffereing we have seen due to our thankless guests the last two decades.
I don`t think that Pakistan should involve itself on any level with Afghanistan apart from maintaining diplomatic relations. The current governemnt is pro Northern Alliance and has been jaundiced against Pakistan from the outset. Any genuine attempt to reconcile or build bridges with the Afghanis is miscontrued by Afghanistan. In short Afghanis find Pakistan a convenient scape goat to blame all of their internal problems on. As the joke goes, if there is an earthquake in Afghanistan it`s becasue of Pakistan`s ISI. I for one am sick of hearing complaints from our thankless neighbours. The sooner we buid a fence across our border with Afghanistan the better. Moroever the US and Europe should pay for it as partial repayment for all the suffereing we have seen due to our thankless guests the last two decades.
reply to this interact
write a new interact
add to favorites
flag objectionable content
#421 Posted by sarwar on July 28, 2003 7:39:48 am
=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts
view this users filtered interacts
#420 Posted by sattar2 on June 2, 2001 11:12:51 am
Re Krashid (#423):
I agree that God certainly can, if He chooses to, violate physical laws that He Himself created. But for reasons mentioned in my earlier reply, I don’t think that He does so. As I mentioned, such understanding stems from misinterpretation of Quranic verses and leads to corruption of faith. Ideas like Jesus residing in the sky in flesh-and-blood after 2000 years, Moses parting the Red Sea, Adam and Eve living in Paradise, Prophet Solomon’s “control of jins”, arrival of dajjal and Mahdi, and Jesus shedding the blood of non-believers etc. etc. lead to corruption of faith. They turn religion into a fairy-tale which has less to do with reality and attributes of Allah and more to do with wishful thinking and belief in spirits, jins and more. Eventually this leads a person, or a nation, to creating partners with Allah, using “pirs-and-fakirs” as intermediaries between man and God, superstition, and more. A human mind clouded with these fairy-tale ideas cannot get closer to understanding the attributes of Allah. Rather it remains perplexed with inconsistencies it observes in the natural world and the Word of God.
You seem to have a scientific background. It is therefore easy for you to identify Quranic references to “evolution” of human beings from less-evolved life forms. Such details in Quran, that are proved correct today by advanced knowledge, technology, and science make one wonder … “how beautiful and truthful is the message of Quran that it addressed such deep, hidden secrets in such a beautiful manner, 1400 years ago”. On the other hand, a mullah who insists that Adam and Eve were “first” human beings, created instantaneously, and lived in paradise, will never fully appreciate the amazing truths and facts mentioned in Quran about human evolution. He will forever remain a “jahil” and will never see the true beauties of the Quran.
Believing in such “miracles” leads to corruption of faith. Just imagine, how frustrated and lost would the ummah be, when after waiting for thousands and thousands of years, there would still be no sign of of Jesus coming down from the sky …so sign of the dajjal … and no sign of the long-awaited Mahdi, who was supposed to lead the Muslims to their final victory over all other faiths. What would the ummah do next? Should they continue to wait for another thousand years or give up on divine support and tell themselves that Allah has forgotten all about them and does not care anymore?
Going back to Surah-e-Ahzab, this issue needs some more clarification. You state that I (i.e. Asad) has stated two different things: Allah will raise prophets to guide people as they go stray, and also that Allah will raise prophets from those who follow the message of Allah and His Messenger (Prophet Mohammad, phuh). This apparent contradiction needs a bit more explaining.
Allah raises prophets to guide people as they go astray. These prophets are people of immaculate character and noble deeds. A good example is that of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) who was sent to guide the Israelites who had forgotten the message of God and had succumbed to evil ways. They were a lost people. But still, Bibi Marriam, who was an Israelite, was a righteous lady. Jesus (pbuh), was an Israelite, but was a righteous and a truthful man. The nation had gone astray, but still there were individuals who were honest, sincere, and understood the true message of God. Similarly, at the time of Holy Prophet (pbuh), the Arabs were in ignorance and in moral decay. But Prophet Mohammd (pbuh), his mother, his father, his grand-father etc. were righteous, respectable, and truthful people.
Similarly, as the ummah goes astray and forgets the message of God, Allah will raise prophets to guide them. This prophet will be a righteous person, he will believe in Quran, and he will hold Prophet Mohamamad (pbuh) in utmost regard as the Chief of all Prophets. That is, this prophet will have to be the bearer of the “Seal of Prophethood” in order for him to be a true prophet. Without this “Seal”, one cannot be a true prophet. Just like without an official seal/stamp a document cannot be considered authentic, similarly without the “Seal of Prophethood”, a prophet’s claim cannot be considered true.
We Ahmadi-Muslims indeed believe that the message delivered by the Holy Prophet (pbuh), the message of Quran, is the final message. This message is complete, perfect, and is unchangeable till eternity. The glad tiding given to the Prophet Mohammad in Aurah-e-Ahzab is not that he is the last prophet, but that he is the “King” of all prophets whose “Seal” will authenticate the prophethood of the following prophets. This, as I understand, is the true status of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). Telling Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) that he is the last prophet is no consolation. However telling the Prophet that he is the “Ultimate” prophet and that other prophets can gain prophethood only by following his message is indeed good news for the Prophet (pbuh).
In contrast, as stated in verse 20 of Surah-e-Hadid, followers of other prophets are restricted to the status of Truthfuls and Martyrs only. Prophethood is not mentioned here since followers of other prophets will not have the ``Seal” of prophethood, i.e. they will not believe in the message and truthfulness of Hazrat Mohammad (pbuh). In short, prophethood can only be gained through the message brought by Prophet Mohammad (pbuh).
In my earlier reply I quoted some other verses from Quran to support this view. In the link that I provided (in my earlier reply) to my postings in other threads, I have corroborated this further from ahadith and more.
You are of the view that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) was raised in Israelites since the scripture of Torah had become corrupted. While I agree that the scripture of Torah had indeed become corrupted, I am not aware of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) making any attempts to re-write the then-existing Torah or any sections thereof. If indeed he was sent primarily because the scripture was corrupted, his primary goal would have been to amend the scripture, undo any unauthorized changes, and bring Torah to its original text. He would have them left behind a complete, uncorrupted, fresh copy of the scripture. I am not aware of any such occurrence. Are you?
In other words, are you of the view that all the prophets, all hundred-and-twenty-four thousand of them, were raised either to bring a new law or to modify/amend an existing corrupted scripture? Were there no prophets, not even one, sent only to bring the people to the message of God that they had forgotten? Surely most prophets were non-Law bearing prophets who were sent for the mere reformation of their respective people. This view is supported by the Quranic verse as “And verily We gave Moses the Book and caused Messengers to follow in his footsteps after him …” [2:87].
Same is the case with Islamic prophets, i.e. they’ll follow in the foot steps of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). This is the meaning of Khattam-un-Nabiyeen in Surah-e-Ahzab.
Your primary point is that we are answerable to Allah only. No Jew will be answerable to Jesus, no Christian will be answerable to Mohammad, no non-Ahmadi will be answerable to Mirza Sahib, and no Ahmadi will be answerable to the Pope, Alan Greenspan, or George Bush. Correct, correct, correct, and correct. I fully agree. Now, wouldn’t it be easy if only mullahs understood this and did not persecute Ahmadi-Muslims for reciting kalima, or for saying bismillah at the beginning of their meals, or for saying “asslam-o-alaikom” etc. etc. Mullahs seem to have become “thaekaedar” of Islam and they act as if everyone will be answerable to them on the Day of Judgment.
This, Sir, is the point I was trying to make in my first post.
Good luck and best regards,
Asad
I agree that God certainly can, if He chooses to, violate physical laws that He Himself created. But for reasons mentioned in my earlier reply, I don’t think that He does so. As I mentioned, such understanding stems from misinterpretation of Quranic verses and leads to corruption of faith. Ideas like Jesus residing in the sky in flesh-and-blood after 2000 years, Moses parting the Red Sea, Adam and Eve living in Paradise, Prophet Solomon’s “control of jins”, arrival of dajjal and Mahdi, and Jesus shedding the blood of non-believers etc. etc. lead to corruption of faith. They turn religion into a fairy-tale which has less to do with reality and attributes of Allah and more to do with wishful thinking and belief in spirits, jins and more. Eventually this leads a person, or a nation, to creating partners with Allah, using “pirs-and-fakirs” as intermediaries between man and God, superstition, and more. A human mind clouded with these fairy-tale ideas cannot get closer to understanding the attributes of Allah. Rather it remains perplexed with inconsistencies it observes in the natural world and the Word of God.
You seem to have a scientific background. It is therefore easy for you to identify Quranic references to “evolution” of human beings from less-evolved life forms. Such details in Quran, that are proved correct today by advanced knowledge, technology, and science make one wonder … “how beautiful and truthful is the message of Quran that it addressed such deep, hidden secrets in such a beautiful manner, 1400 years ago”. On the other hand, a mullah who insists that Adam and Eve were “first” human beings, created instantaneously, and lived in paradise, will never fully appreciate the amazing truths and facts mentioned in Quran about human evolution. He will forever remain a “jahil” and will never see the true beauties of the Quran.
Believing in such “miracles” leads to corruption of faith. Just imagine, how frustrated and lost would the ummah be, when after waiting for thousands and thousands of years, there would still be no sign of of Jesus coming down from the sky …so sign of the dajjal … and no sign of the long-awaited Mahdi, who was supposed to lead the Muslims to their final victory over all other faiths. What would the ummah do next? Should they continue to wait for another thousand years or give up on divine support and tell themselves that Allah has forgotten all about them and does not care anymore?
Going back to Surah-e-Ahzab, this issue needs some more clarification. You state that I (i.e. Asad) has stated two different things: Allah will raise prophets to guide people as they go stray, and also that Allah will raise prophets from those who follow the message of Allah and His Messenger (Prophet Mohammad, phuh). This apparent contradiction needs a bit more explaining.
Allah raises prophets to guide people as they go astray. These prophets are people of immaculate character and noble deeds. A good example is that of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) who was sent to guide the Israelites who had forgotten the message of God and had succumbed to evil ways. They were a lost people. But still, Bibi Marriam, who was an Israelite, was a righteous lady. Jesus (pbuh), was an Israelite, but was a righteous and a truthful man. The nation had gone astray, but still there were individuals who were honest, sincere, and understood the true message of God. Similarly, at the time of Holy Prophet (pbuh), the Arabs were in ignorance and in moral decay. But Prophet Mohammd (pbuh), his mother, his father, his grand-father etc. were righteous, respectable, and truthful people.
Similarly, as the ummah goes astray and forgets the message of God, Allah will raise prophets to guide them. This prophet will be a righteous person, he will believe in Quran, and he will hold Prophet Mohamamad (pbuh) in utmost regard as the Chief of all Prophets. That is, this prophet will have to be the bearer of the “Seal of Prophethood” in order for him to be a true prophet. Without this “Seal”, one cannot be a true prophet. Just like without an official seal/stamp a document cannot be considered authentic, similarly without the “Seal of Prophethood”, a prophet’s claim cannot be considered true.
We Ahmadi-Muslims indeed believe that the message delivered by the Holy Prophet (pbuh), the message of Quran, is the final message. This message is complete, perfect, and is unchangeable till eternity. The glad tiding given to the Prophet Mohammad in Aurah-e-Ahzab is not that he is the last prophet, but that he is the “King” of all prophets whose “Seal” will authenticate the prophethood of the following prophets. This, as I understand, is the true status of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). Telling Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) that he is the last prophet is no consolation. However telling the Prophet that he is the “Ultimate” prophet and that other prophets can gain prophethood only by following his message is indeed good news for the Prophet (pbuh).
In contrast, as stated in verse 20 of Surah-e-Hadid, followers of other prophets are restricted to the status of Truthfuls and Martyrs only. Prophethood is not mentioned here since followers of other prophets will not have the ``Seal” of prophethood, i.e. they will not believe in the message and truthfulness of Hazrat Mohammad (pbuh). In short, prophethood can only be gained through the message brought by Prophet Mohammad (pbuh).
In my earlier reply I quoted some other verses from Quran to support this view. In the link that I provided (in my earlier reply) to my postings in other threads, I have corroborated this further from ahadith and more.
You are of the view that Prophet Jesus (pbuh) was raised in Israelites since the scripture of Torah had become corrupted. While I agree that the scripture of Torah had indeed become corrupted, I am not aware of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) making any attempts to re-write the then-existing Torah or any sections thereof. If indeed he was sent primarily because the scripture was corrupted, his primary goal would have been to amend the scripture, undo any unauthorized changes, and bring Torah to its original text. He would have them left behind a complete, uncorrupted, fresh copy of the scripture. I am not aware of any such occurrence. Are you?
In other words, are you of the view that all the prophets, all hundred-and-twenty-four thousand of them, were raised either to bring a new law or to modify/amend an existing corrupted scripture? Were there no prophets, not even one, sent only to bring the people to the message of God that they had forgotten? Surely most prophets were non-Law bearing prophets who were sent for the mere reformation of their respective people. This view is supported by the Quranic verse as “And verily We gave Moses the Book and caused Messengers to follow in his footsteps after him …” [2:87].
Same is the case with Islamic prophets, i.e. they’ll follow in the foot steps of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh). This is the meaning of Khattam-un-Nabiyeen in Surah-e-Ahzab.
Your primary point is that we are answerable to Allah only. No Jew will be answerable to Jesus, no Christian will be answerable to Mohammad, no non-Ahmadi will be answerable to Mirza Sahib, and no Ahmadi will be answerable to the Pope, Alan Greenspan, or George Bush. Correct, correct, correct, and correct. I fully agree. Now, wouldn’t it be easy if only mullahs understood this and did not persecute Ahmadi-Muslims for reciting kalima, or for saying bismillah at the beginning of their meals, or for saying “asslam-o-alaikom” etc. etc. Mullahs seem to have become “thaekaedar” of Islam and they act as if everyone will be answerable to them on the Day of Judgment.
This, Sir, is the point I was trying to make in my first post.
Good luck and best regards,
Asad
#419 Posted by krashid on June 1, 2001 1:46:36 am
Sattar2#
The point of my previous post was, if I can believe God the unseen which as you know atheist deny.
Then I find no problem with miracles. Miracles are mentioned in Quran and if we are not judging God then it is entirely possible that God can perform miracles.(And you will agree with the can part. Whether He does or not is a different matter)
But putting this logic aside, as I said Sir Syed Khan has tried to see miracles in terms of allegory and real reason is natural phenomenon. And that is acceptable interpretation as far as I am concerned.
Also in Ayah of Surah Ahzab. In commentary you wrote that glad tidings to prophet is given that if Muslims follow Allah then they will be given prophets. Now in your previous post, you were of the opposite view. That the need of new prophet was because people were not following God.
But this is not the point.
The point are these:
1- Jesus was sent to Jews because their original scripture was lost and he came to correct them. While original scripture of Muslims is still present. So although I see the need of interpretation. You will be aware of word prophet. That means there is no question of arguing with teachings. What if Mirza Ahmed has interpreted Ayah wrongly.
You will be aware of one thing in Quran. It is clear in its basic beliefs. And those form the core of Islam. While what you are presenting is a far fetched theory, where you are giving the meaning of seal (which makes no sense to you) as prophet.
What would you say if I say that it was a glad tiding for prophet that he is the last of prophet and is choosen to deliever the final message of God for the whole of humanity. I think this is a much more glad tiding.
Anyway each has his own way of thinking.
But the primary point is that whether Mirza Ahmed was prophet or not or as Christians say Mohammed PBUH was prophet or not. But one has not to answer neither Mirza Ahmed nor prophet PBUH, but will be answerable to God for his beliefs and actions.
The point of my previous post was, if I can believe God the unseen which as you know atheist deny.
Then I find no problem with miracles. Miracles are mentioned in Quran and if we are not judging God then it is entirely possible that God can perform miracles.(And you will agree with the can part. Whether He does or not is a different matter)
But putting this logic aside, as I said Sir Syed Khan has tried to see miracles in terms of allegory and real reason is natural phenomenon. And that is acceptable interpretation as far as I am concerned.
Also in Ayah of Surah Ahzab. In commentary you wrote that glad tidings to prophet is given that if Muslims follow Allah then they will be given prophets. Now in your previous post, you were of the opposite view. That the need of new prophet was because people were not following God.
But this is not the point.
The point are these:
1- Jesus was sent to Jews because their original scripture was lost and he came to correct them. While original scripture of Muslims is still present. So although I see the need of interpretation. You will be aware of word prophet. That means there is no question of arguing with teachings. What if Mirza Ahmed has interpreted Ayah wrongly.
You will be aware of one thing in Quran. It is clear in its basic beliefs. And those form the core of Islam. While what you are presenting is a far fetched theory, where you are giving the meaning of seal (which makes no sense to you) as prophet.
What would you say if I say that it was a glad tiding for prophet that he is the last of prophet and is choosen to deliever the final message of God for the whole of humanity. I think this is a much more glad tiding.
Anyway each has his own way of thinking.
But the primary point is that whether Mirza Ahmed was prophet or not or as Christians say Mohammed PBUH was prophet or not. But one has not to answer neither Mirza Ahmed nor prophet PBUH, but will be answerable to God for his beliefs and actions.
#418 Posted by hobbyty on June 1, 2001 1:46:36 am
Sadna #416
These are points about which you mind is made up and discussion does not seem to be required.
I am not using words such as `` West and ``Secularism`` as weapons - I assure you!
I am pointing that the West seems to be very selective in it`s approaches and that this selectivity matches it`s political, economic and and cultural efforts at dominance in the world.
I believe the selectivity is harmful and presents a radical, new definition to values the West has operated on. I also believe that this radicalism is part of partisan political struggle in West. Significant numbers of persons would disagree that religion has no role to play in society. On the other hand if the relkious movement, even if politicized were to engage in illegal activity, certainly, it would not, as in Islamia, be viewed as a public good.
About Hudood - I agree, I don`t for a second hold that these ordinances, as they are presently constructed are Islamic. Do not allow yourself to to be led to believe that Islam is about what is going on in your personal life. These laws, as they are constructed presently in Pakistan, are a manifestation, not of Islam, but of a deep sense of sexual shame. A theme, we, both Pakistani and Indians, discuss entirely to little.
As for the a kind of Muslim better than another - there is nothing Islamic about that. That is a caricature and deserving of condemnation.
Remember, this is not an either or game. Throwing the baby out with the bath water, is not what anybody should want.
These are points about which you mind is made up and discussion does not seem to be required.
I am not using words such as `` West and ``Secularism`` as weapons - I assure you!
I am pointing that the West seems to be very selective in it`s approaches and that this selectivity matches it`s political, economic and and cultural efforts at dominance in the world.
I believe the selectivity is harmful and presents a radical, new definition to values the West has operated on. I also believe that this radicalism is part of partisan political struggle in West. Significant numbers of persons would disagree that religion has no role to play in society. On the other hand if the relkious movement, even if politicized were to engage in illegal activity, certainly, it would not, as in Islamia, be viewed as a public good.
About Hudood - I agree, I don`t for a second hold that these ordinances, as they are presently constructed are Islamic. Do not allow yourself to to be led to believe that Islam is about what is going on in your personal life. These laws, as they are constructed presently in Pakistan, are a manifestation, not of Islam, but of a deep sense of sexual shame. A theme, we, both Pakistani and Indians, discuss entirely to little.
As for the a kind of Muslim better than another - there is nothing Islamic about that. That is a caricature and deserving of condemnation.
Remember, this is not an either or game. Throwing the baby out with the bath water, is not what anybody should want.
#417 Posted by sattar2 on May 31, 2001 9:37:46 am
Re Krashid (#418):
“Miracles” mentioned in Quran cannot be against the laws of nature. Allah has designed this universe, and physical laws, for the benefit of mankind. Violation of these laws by Allah Almighty would not be consistent with His majesty and grandeur. In Quran the reader is commanded to look around, and ponder over the nature of things. He, the reader, is challenged to find any incongruity in the universe. Violations of laws of nature would surely amount to inconsistencies and incongruities in the universe. In Surah-e-Israel, Quran commands Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) that when the non-believers ask you to show your palace of gold or go to heaven and bring them a Book, respond to them by saying that Glory be to my Lord, I am only a human sent as a messenger.
The message here is that resorting to trickery and ``magical`` stunts is not consistent with the majesty and grandeur of Allah Almighty. Even Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) was only a human who lived and functioned like other human beings. Being a prophet of God did not place him above physical or biological laws. When stones were pelted on Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), his shoe got filled with his own blood. In battle of Uhad, Prophet (pbuh) lost few of his teeth and was knocked unconscious due to pain and exhaustion. But Allah Almighty did not violate any physical laws to rescue his beloved Prophet (pbuh), since that would not be consistent with His grand design. Actually, a close examination of Quranic verses combined with teachings of Islam and understanding of science reveals that there indeed were no “miracles” as such. Every event was fully consistent with laws created by Allah and within the scope of physics and biology.
I stated earlier also that if a person does not believe in the Promised Messiah, it does not necessarily mean that he’ll go to hell. This is a matter that only Allah has jurisdiction over. For a person to even speculate if someone will go to hell is likely to earn him displeasure of Allah. A person can be a Christian or a Jew or whatever, and Allah Almighty may very well elevate his status and grant him respite in the Final Judgment.
Coming back to the issue of continuation of prophethood as understood by Ahmadi-Muslims, here are some comments:
Quran tells us that Allah has raised prophets at different times and places. Some of these were law-bearing prophets, and some were non-law-bearing prophets. What is the basis of the claim that there will be no more prophets sent after Prophet Mohammad (pbuh)? If Allah has raised prophets all this time, what is the indication that this trend will come to an end? I would like to put this “burden of proof” on the shoulders of those who believe in end of prophethood.
Most often cited response from non-Ahmadi-Muslims is the reference to Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) as “Khatam-un-Nabiyeen” in Suran-e-Ahzab. I’ll briefly explain the meaning of Khatam-un-Nabiyeen and offer some more references from Quran to support it.
1. The first reference is verse 40 from Surah-e-Ahzab, which refers to Prophet (pbuh) as Khatam-un-Nabiyeen:
“O people! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Apostle of God and Khatam-un-Nabiyeen. And God is Aware of everything”.
Literal meaning of “khatam” is that of a seal. Seal is often taken to mean as “end”, as when something is sealed, nothing can go in or come out. Seal can also be taken to mean “a stamp or an engraved imprint of authority and authenticity”. Further examination of this verse indicates that seal is to be correctly interpreted not as “end”, but as a “stamp or imprint of authority and authenticity”.
It is a well-known fact that Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him) did not have a male surviving child. Kuffar of Mecca used to mock the Prophet that after he (pbuh) passes away, no one will be left to carry his name. As it becomes apparent from the first half of this verse (O people! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily …), it was revealed by Allah to mainly provide consolation to the prophet. This first half of the verse sets up the context for the 2nd half of the verse.
If the 2nd half of the verse is to be interpreted as “ … he is the Apostle of God and last in the line of prophets”, it is quite evident that, for a prophet, being last in the line of prophets is not much of consolation at all. However, if the 2nd half of the verse is interpreted as “…he is the Apostle of God and ‘Chief’ of all Prophets”, then it is quite a consolation! Here I have interpreted “seal” as “Chief” to illustrate the point.
Here it is evident that the first half of the verse provides the context for the 2nd half. To console the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), calling him “last in the line of prophets” does not mean much. However, calling him the “Chief” of all prophets has concrete meaning and consolation.
2. Muslims recite Surah-e-Fathia several times in daily prayers. A few of the verses from this surah state:
“… Guide us along the right path; the path of those on whom Thou has bestowed Thy favors …”
Explaining these “favors”, Quran states in verses 70-71 of Surah-e-Nisa:
“Whoso obeys Allah and the Messenger, shall be among whom Allah has bestowed His favors – the Prophets, the Truthful, the Martyrs, and the Righteous; and excellent companions these are. This is Allah’s grace and Allah is all comprehending”.
We Ahmadis believe that this verse gives the believers glad tidings that if we follow Allah and His Messenger, Allah will continue to bless us with Prophets, among other virtuous people.
Contrast the above mentioned verse from the verse 20 of Surah-e-Hadeed, where reward of followers of other prophets does not mention grant of prophethood, and restricts bounty and blessings to other categories, namely the Truthful, the Martyrs. In other words, whereas followers of other prophets can expect to be blessed with the Truthfuls and the Martyrs, followers of this Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) can expect grant of prophethood as well.
- In Surah-e- A’araf is stated:
“O children of Adam! If Messengers come to you from among yourselves, rehearsing my signs unto you ...”
Here believers are commanded to follow the messengers (rasool) from Allah Almighty.
I hope these help.
Regards,
Asad
“Miracles” mentioned in Quran cannot be against the laws of nature. Allah has designed this universe, and physical laws, for the benefit of mankind. Violation of these laws by Allah Almighty would not be consistent with His majesty and grandeur. In Quran the reader is commanded to look around, and ponder over the nature of things. He, the reader, is challenged to find any incongruity in the universe. Violations of laws of nature would surely amount to inconsistencies and incongruities in the universe. In Surah-e-Israel, Quran commands Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) that when the non-believers ask you to show your palace of gold or go to heaven and bring them a Book, respond to them by saying that Glory be to my Lord, I am only a human sent as a messenger.
The message here is that resorting to trickery and ``magical`` stunts is not consistent with the majesty and grandeur of Allah Almighty. Even Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) was only a human who lived and functioned like other human beings. Being a prophet of God did not place him above physical or biological laws. When stones were pelted on Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), his shoe got filled with his own blood. In battle of Uhad, Prophet (pbuh) lost few of his teeth and was knocked unconscious due to pain and exhaustion. But Allah Almighty did not violate any physical laws to rescue his beloved Prophet (pbuh), since that would not be consistent with His grand design. Actually, a close examination of Quranic verses combined with teachings of Islam and understanding of science reveals that there indeed were no “miracles” as such. Every event was fully consistent with laws created by Allah and within the scope of physics and biology.
I stated earlier also that if a person does not believe in the Promised Messiah, it does not necessarily mean that he’ll go to hell. This is a matter that only Allah has jurisdiction over. For a person to even speculate if someone will go to hell is likely to earn him displeasure of Allah. A person can be a Christian or a Jew or whatever, and Allah Almighty may very well elevate his status and grant him respite in the Final Judgment.
Coming back to the issue of continuation of prophethood as understood by Ahmadi-Muslims, here are some comments:
Quran tells us that Allah has raised prophets at different times and places. Some of these were law-bearing prophets, and some were non-law-bearing prophets. What is the basis of the claim that there will be no more prophets sent after Prophet Mohammad (pbuh)? If Allah has raised prophets all this time, what is the indication that this trend will come to an end? I would like to put this “burden of proof” on the shoulders of those who believe in end of prophethood.
Most often cited response from non-Ahmadi-Muslims is the reference to Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) as “Khatam-un-Nabiyeen” in Suran-e-Ahzab. I’ll briefly explain the meaning of Khatam-un-Nabiyeen and offer some more references from Quran to support it.
1. The first reference is verse 40 from Surah-e-Ahzab, which refers to Prophet (pbuh) as Khatam-un-Nabiyeen:
“O people! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Apostle of God and Khatam-un-Nabiyeen. And God is Aware of everything”.
Literal meaning of “khatam” is that of a seal. Seal is often taken to mean as “end”, as when something is sealed, nothing can go in or come out. Seal can also be taken to mean “a stamp or an engraved imprint of authority and authenticity”. Further examination of this verse indicates that seal is to be correctly interpreted not as “end”, but as a “stamp or imprint of authority and authenticity”.
It is a well-known fact that Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings be upon him) did not have a male surviving child. Kuffar of Mecca used to mock the Prophet that after he (pbuh) passes away, no one will be left to carry his name. As it becomes apparent from the first half of this verse (O people! Muhammad has no sons among ye men, but verily …), it was revealed by Allah to mainly provide consolation to the prophet. This first half of the verse sets up the context for the 2nd half of the verse.
If the 2nd half of the verse is to be interpreted as “ … he is the Apostle of God and last in the line of prophets”, it is quite evident that, for a prophet, being last in the line of prophets is not much of consolation at all. However, if the 2nd half of the verse is interpreted as “…he is the Apostle of God and ‘Chief’ of all Prophets”, then it is quite a consolation! Here I have interpreted “seal” as “Chief” to illustrate the point.
Here it is evident that the first half of the verse provides the context for the 2nd half. To console the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), calling him “last in the line of prophets” does not mean much. However, calling him the “Chief” of all prophets has concrete meaning and consolation.
2. Muslims recite Surah-e-Fathia several times in daily prayers. A few of the verses from this surah state:
“… Guide us along the right path; the path of those on whom Thou has bestowed Thy favors …”
Explaining these “favors”, Quran states in verses 70-71 of Surah-e-Nisa:
“Whoso obeys Allah and the Messenger, shall be among whom Allah has bestowed His favors – the Prophets, the Truthful, the Martyrs, and the Righteous; and excellent companions these are. This is Allah’s grace and Allah is all comprehending”.
We Ahmadis believe that this verse gives the believers glad tidings that if we follow Allah and His Messenger, Allah will continue to bless us with Prophets, among other virtuous people.
Contrast the above mentioned verse from the verse 20 of Surah-e-Hadeed, where reward of followers of other prophets does not mention grant of prophethood, and restricts bounty and blessings to other categories, namely the Truthful, the Martyrs. In other words, whereas followers of other prophets can expect to be blessed with the Truthfuls and the Martyrs, followers of this Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) can expect grant of prophethood as well.
- In Surah-e- A’araf is stated:
“O children of Adam! If Messengers come to you from among yourselves, rehearsing my signs unto you ...”
Here believers are commanded to follow the messengers (rasool) from Allah Almighty.
I hope these help.
Regards,
Asad
#416 Posted by krashid on May 31, 2001 12:07:11 am
Sattar 2#
If I belive in God, the unseen. I found no problem in accepting the miracles mentioned in Koran.
Although I see that it is not unreasonable to interpret the events according to laws of nature, e.g low tide as you mentioned.
I think Sir Syed Ahmed Khan has tried to do the same.
As far as theory of evolution, I agree with you and I have tried to prove in many discussions that theory of evolution is consonant with Quran.
As I said, it only shows that there is a need for new interpretation or Ijtihad. This is being done at individual level and at Government level in many places.
If you believe that Quran is the final message, then although need for interpretation with changing times or Ijtihad I agree, but it does not make a case for new prophet.
You can understand clearly by this statement that any new prophet is a fake prophet as far as I can judge.
Also those interpretations of Quran as I mentioned does not form the basis of Islam, but are interpretation of events in light of new facts. I have asked you if there is a change in belief system, Islamic laws or Incitement or prohibition.
If you agree to my proposition. Any person having faith in one God and do good and is christian according to Koran has reward from his God, I don`t see why any person who believes in One and do good and is a Muslim will not have reward from his God.
It also shatters one important myth. That unless you believe in certain sect, there is no salvation.
Regards.
If I belive in God, the unseen. I found no problem in accepting the miracles mentioned in Koran.
Although I see that it is not unreasonable to interpret the events according to laws of nature, e.g low tide as you mentioned.
I think Sir Syed Ahmed Khan has tried to do the same.
As far as theory of evolution, I agree with you and I have tried to prove in many discussions that theory of evolution is consonant with Quran.
As I said, it only shows that there is a need for new interpretation or Ijtihad. This is being done at individual level and at Government level in many places.
If you believe that Quran is the final message, then although need for interpretation with changing times or Ijtihad I agree, but it does not make a case for new prophet.
You can understand clearly by this statement that any new prophet is a fake prophet as far as I can judge.
Also those interpretations of Quran as I mentioned does not form the basis of Islam, but are interpretation of events in light of new facts. I have asked you if there is a change in belief system, Islamic laws or Incitement or prohibition.
If you agree to my proposition. Any person having faith in one God and do good and is christian according to Koran has reward from his God, I don`t see why any person who believes in One and do good and is a Muslim will not have reward from his God.
It also shatters one important myth. That unless you believe in certain sect, there is no salvation.
Regards.
#415 Posted by hariharan on May 31, 2001 12:07:11 am
Dear Pakistani/Indian brothers/sisters:
There is something going on re kashmir talks.
1. It is possible that US had indirect pressure. It may advised Pakistan`s CE, that when Bush is India, he won`t be visiting Pakistan. That will be bad PR for Pakistan.
2. My earlier assertion still stands. Vajpayee wants something badly after BJP lost many state elections. He wants to win in UP to maintain the coalition.
3. Similarly, Pakistan`s CE wants to position himself as the next ``military/politician/president or even prime minister`` and the only way he can be win credibility in Pakistan and around the world is involving India.
4. OIL and US energy crisis: There is serious energy crisis in US and western nations. Until alternative sources are found, dependence on Middleeast is a must. However, in yesterday`s issue of WSJ indicates that there is a potential of huge gas finds in former soviet/russian republics like turkmenistan/uzbek and I am sure every western country and US are interested in getting a secure supply and they don`t need any problems in that area and they want to contain Afganisthan and they can`t do that without containing Pakistan`s fundamentalists.
5. Economic interests: Forget about friends. All that matters is economic and commercial interests. US MLCs and major corporations have invested billions of dollars in the last couple of years towards long-term investment and to tap into India`s huge middle class of about 200 million people which is close to US population of 248 million. US doesn`t want anything to happen to jeapordize their interests. Besides, if US and other nations are facing recession, they need foreign markets where they can sell and the only thing that come to their mind is India/China.
6. Again Energy: Because, India and China are emerging global economies, they tend to extract more energy needs which impacts demand/supply in US and other developed nations. (this arguement is weak, but nevertheless legit)
7. US needs to place Nato in some form of employment. There is a need to focus on being Asiacentric to contain China to find some useful role. For that they need India/Pakistan to be friends.
8. Now this is completely fuzzy logic. Is it conceivable to say, that some external powers(not from India/Pakistan) want to give Islam such a bad name that they created a monster called ``Taliban`` so that they can demonstrate and give a bad name to ISLAM. Just a thought. Because how can you explain such irrational behaviors coming from Taliban? If Islam is rational then the actions taken by the Taliban is so off the mark they become irrational even if you take `RELIGION` out of the picture. A normal human being wouldn`t do what the taliban is doing.
Thanks,
Hariharan.
There is something going on re kashmir talks.
1. It is possible that US had indirect pressure. It may advised Pakistan`s CE, that when Bush is India, he won`t be visiting Pakistan. That will be bad PR for Pakistan.
2. My earlier assertion still stands. Vajpayee wants something badly after BJP lost many state elections. He wants to win in UP to maintain the coalition.
3. Similarly, Pakistan`s CE wants to position himself as the next ``military/politician/president or even prime minister`` and the only way he can be win credibility in Pakistan and around the world is involving India.
4. OIL and US energy crisis: There is serious energy crisis in US and western nations. Until alternative sources are found, dependence on Middleeast is a must. However, in yesterday`s issue of WSJ indicates that there is a potential of huge gas finds in former soviet/russian republics like turkmenistan/uzbek and I am sure every western country and US are interested in getting a secure supply and they don`t need any problems in that area and they want to contain Afganisthan and they can`t do that without containing Pakistan`s fundamentalists.
5. Economic interests: Forget about friends. All that matters is economic and commercial interests. US MLCs and major corporations have invested billions of dollars in the last couple of years towards long-term investment and to tap into India`s huge middle class of about 200 million people which is close to US population of 248 million. US doesn`t want anything to happen to jeapordize their interests. Besides, if US and other nations are facing recession, they need foreign markets where they can sell and the only thing that come to their mind is India/China.
6. Again Energy: Because, India and China are emerging global economies, they tend to extract more energy needs which impacts demand/supply in US and other developed nations. (this arguement is weak, but nevertheless legit)
7. US needs to place Nato in some form of employment. There is a need to focus on being Asiacentric to contain China to find some useful role. For that they need India/Pakistan to be friends.
8. Now this is completely fuzzy logic. Is it conceivable to say, that some external powers(not from India/Pakistan) want to give Islam such a bad name that they created a monster called ``Taliban`` so that they can demonstrate and give a bad name to ISLAM. Just a thought. Because how can you explain such irrational behaviors coming from Taliban? If Islam is rational then the actions taken by the Taliban is so off the mark they become irrational even if you take `RELIGION` out of the picture. A normal human being wouldn`t do what the taliban is doing.
Thanks,
Hariharan.
#414 Posted by sattar2 on May 30, 2001 4:12:11 pm
Re Krashid (#417):
The issues that I mentioned that have been interpreted incorrectly by Muslim scholars are not limited to natural death of Jesus (pbuh) and continuation of prophethood (the non-Law bearing kind), but these two issues are the major ones. There are more; few are mentioned here:
Ahmadi-Muslims do not believe in “events” that defy the laws of nature. For example, in the “Night of Ascension”, Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) did not physically visit heavens and met with other prophets. This was a spiritual experience and does not violate any physical laws.
Similarly, Prophet Moses (pbuh) did not part the Red Sea. The “parting” of the Red Sea by Prophet Moses (pbuh) was in essence the time of low tide in the ocean. The water withdrew, as it does during receding tides, and Prophet Moses (pbuh) lead his people across the water. A combination of low tide and elevated ground adequately explains this event without any need for a “miracle”. As the pharaoh and his army entered the water, it was now time for high tide, which led to the drowning of the cruel king and his army.
Similarly, there are some miracles associated with Jesus (pbuh) … that he “raised the dead” and “gave life” to people and made the blind “see”. Ahmadi-Muslims interpret “dead” and “blind” as someone who is “spiritually” dead and blind. Conversely, giving life means giving “spiritual” life. This means, teaching the message of God to people who had gone astray and become corrupt. Similarly, ascension of Jesus (pbuh) was a spiritual ascension, and not a physical one. Jews wanted to crucify and kill Jesus (pbuh) to indicate that he was an impostor and did not have any divine support. Jesus getting crucified and yet surviving, thus frustrating the plans of the enemy, was an indication of the divine support he enjoyed. This was one of the many proves that he indeed was a true prophet of Allah.
Similarly Adam and Eve were not first humans, who were created instantaneously, and lived in heaven till their “fall from grace” etc. etc. We Ahmadi-Muslims believe that humans evolved on this planet over billion of years from pre-biotic organisms. In several places Quran supports this idea, which is also strongly supported by science. Adam (pbuh) was the first modern human being who was evolved and intelligent enough to understand divine revelations. He and his tribesmen lived somewhere in the middle-eastern region, around 6,000 years ago. Quranic references to “Iblees” and the “forbidden fruit” are metaphors used to explain some of the actual events that took place involving Prophet Adam (pbuh) and Eve.
Quran (and ahadith also) uses metaphors to indicate phenomenon and future events that were beyond the grasp of the then-existing human intellect. These metaphors have an essence, the true hidden meaning, that becomes evident with time. The fulfillment of these events and phenomenon, as foretold by Quran and ahadith, testifies to the truthfulness of the Quran, and the sayings of the dear Prophet, Hazrat Mohammad (pbuh).
You ask about the role of Mirza Sahib in all this. Here’s a brief answer:
Mirza Sahib is the long awaited Promised Messiah, the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ, as foretold in several ahadith. He is also the Mahdi of the age, and was given the title of a prophet by Allah Almighty.
The “2nd coming of Jesus (pbuh)” as mentioned in ahadith, combined with mis-interpretation of “ascension of Jesus (pbuh)” as mentioned in Quran, led Muslim scholars to believe that Jesus (pbuh) physically ascended to heaven, and will return at a later date, at the time of the Mahdi and the dajjal. Ascension of Jesus (pbuh) as mentioned in Quran is a spiritual one (there are several reasons for this interpretation, but I’ll not discuss that here). Similarly, 2nd coming of Jesus is also a metaphor. It means that God will raise a prophet in the ummah, who will bear parallels and resemblance to Jesus Christ (pbuh). That is, this prophet will come in the spirit of Jesus Christ (pbuh).
As it turns out, this issue of one prophet coming in the spirit of another prophet is not a new one. Old Testament, the Holy Book of Jews, mentions the ascension of Prophet Elijah (pbuh). Jews had interpreted their scriptures to mean that Elijah (pbuh) will physically descend from the sky to mark the arrival of the Messiah (the first Messiah). When Jesus (pbuh) claimed to be this Messiah, he was asked about the re-advent of Elijah. Jesus mentioned that John the Baptist (i.e. Prophet Yahya, pbuh) who was a companion of Jesus (pbuh), had come in the spirit of Elijah (pbuh). Those who understood this message accepted Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah, as foretold by Biblical scriptures. Those who did not get this hint rejected Jesus and crucified him. Jewish people, to this day, await the coming of the first Messiah. Sad part is that when the Messiah came to them, 2000 years ago, he was rejected and crucified. They will forever wait for physical ascension of Elijah to mark the arrival of Messiah. This will never happen.
Similar is the case with Muslim Ummah. They have mis-interpreted the Quran and ahadith and await the physical descent of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) to mark the coming of the Mahdi and so on and so forth. They will continue to wait forever … and the Messiah and the Mahdi they await will never come. The disappointment and frustration that the Jewish people face, that the Christians face (they also await the return of Jesus), will eventually be shared by the non-believing Muslims who reject the Promised Messiah.
I hope that some of the ideological/theological differences between Ahmadi-Muslims and mainstream Muslims are becoming clear to you. Yes, Quran exists unadulterated to this day, and forever will. This is a divine promise made in Quran, that it will be guarded by Allah Almighty. The problem is not with Quran, but with its misinterpretation, as done by scholars and mullahs. This misinterpretation is done on such a massive scale, and there is such a high degree of corruption in the Muslim world today, that divine intervention is needed to put the ummah on the right path.
On several ocassions I engaged in discussions with people on chowk regarding the coming of more prophets, hinted at in the Quran and ahadith. To avoid re-posting these somewhat lengthy replies, I have provided the links to these posts. I hope these help.
www.chowk.com/bin/showr.cgi?f=omirza_sep1200&n=80#reply197
www.chowk.com/bin/showr.cgi?f=news_jan3101&n=150#reply616
regards,
Asad
The issues that I mentioned that have been interpreted incorrectly by Muslim scholars are not limited to natural death of Jesus (pbuh) and continuation of prophethood (the non-Law bearing kind), but these two issues are the major ones. There are more; few are mentioned here:
Ahmadi-Muslims do not believe in “events” that defy the laws of nature. For example, in the “Night of Ascension”, Prophet Mohammed (pbuh) did not physically visit heavens and met with other prophets. This was a spiritual experience and does not violate any physical laws.
Similarly, Prophet Moses (pbuh) did not part the Red Sea. The “parting” of the Red Sea by Prophet Moses (pbuh) was in essence the time of low tide in the ocean. The water withdrew, as it does during receding tides, and Prophet Moses (pbuh) lead his people across the water. A combination of low tide and elevated ground adequately explains this event without any need for a “miracle”. As the pharaoh and his army entered the water, it was now time for high tide, which led to the drowning of the cruel king and his army.
Similarly, there are some miracles associated with Jesus (pbuh) … that he “raised the dead” and “gave life” to people and made the blind “see”. Ahmadi-Muslims interpret “dead” and “blind” as someone who is “spiritually” dead and blind. Conversely, giving life means giving “spiritual” life. This means, teaching the message of God to people who had gone astray and become corrupt. Similarly, ascension of Jesus (pbuh) was a spiritual ascension, and not a physical one. Jews wanted to crucify and kill Jesus (pbuh) to indicate that he was an impostor and did not have any divine support. Jesus getting crucified and yet surviving, thus frustrating the plans of the enemy, was an indication of the divine support he enjoyed. This was one of the many proves that he indeed was a true prophet of Allah.
Similarly Adam and Eve were not first humans, who were created instantaneously, and lived in heaven till their “fall from grace” etc. etc. We Ahmadi-Muslims believe that humans evolved on this planet over billion of years from pre-biotic organisms. In several places Quran supports this idea, which is also strongly supported by science. Adam (pbuh) was the first modern human being who was evolved and intelligent enough to understand divine revelations. He and his tribesmen lived somewhere in the middle-eastern region, around 6,000 years ago. Quranic references to “Iblees” and the “forbidden fruit” are metaphors used to explain some of the actual events that took place involving Prophet Adam (pbuh) and Eve.
Quran (and ahadith also) uses metaphors to indicate phenomenon and future events that were beyond the grasp of the then-existing human intellect. These metaphors have an essence, the true hidden meaning, that becomes evident with time. The fulfillment of these events and phenomenon, as foretold by Quran and ahadith, testifies to the truthfulness of the Quran, and the sayings of the dear Prophet, Hazrat Mohammad (pbuh).
You ask about the role of Mirza Sahib in all this. Here’s a brief answer:
Mirza Sahib is the long awaited Promised Messiah, the 2nd coming of Jesus Christ, as foretold in several ahadith. He is also the Mahdi of the age, and was given the title of a prophet by Allah Almighty.
The “2nd coming of Jesus (pbuh)” as mentioned in ahadith, combined with mis-interpretation of “ascension of Jesus (pbuh)” as mentioned in Quran, led Muslim scholars to believe that Jesus (pbuh) physically ascended to heaven, and will return at a later date, at the time of the Mahdi and the dajjal. Ascension of Jesus (pbuh) as mentioned in Quran is a spiritual one (there are several reasons for this interpretation, but I’ll not discuss that here). Similarly, 2nd coming of Jesus is also a metaphor. It means that God will raise a prophet in the ummah, who will bear parallels and resemblance to Jesus Christ (pbuh). That is, this prophet will come in the spirit of Jesus Christ (pbuh).
As it turns out, this issue of one prophet coming in the spirit of another prophet is not a new one. Old Testament, the Holy Book of Jews, mentions the ascension of Prophet Elijah (pbuh). Jews had interpreted their scriptures to mean that Elijah (pbuh) will physically descend from the sky to mark the arrival of the Messiah (the first Messiah). When Jesus (pbuh) claimed to be this Messiah, he was asked about the re-advent of Elijah. Jesus mentioned that John the Baptist (i.e. Prophet Yahya, pbuh) who was a companion of Jesus (pbuh), had come in the spirit of Elijah (pbuh). Those who understood this message accepted Jesus as the long-awaited Messiah, as foretold by Biblical scriptures. Those who did not get this hint rejected Jesus and crucified him. Jewish people, to this day, await the coming of the first Messiah. Sad part is that when the Messiah came to them, 2000 years ago, he was rejected and crucified. They will forever wait for physical ascension of Elijah to mark the arrival of Messiah. This will never happen.
Similar is the case with Muslim Ummah. They have mis-interpreted the Quran and ahadith and await the physical descent of Prophet Jesus (pbuh) to mark the coming of the Mahdi and so on and so forth. They will continue to wait forever … and the Messiah and the Mahdi they await will never come. The disappointment and frustration that the Jewish people face, that the Christians face (they also await the return of Jesus), will eventually be shared by the non-believing Muslims who reject the Promised Messiah.
I hope that some of the ideological/theological differences between Ahmadi-Muslims and mainstream Muslims are becoming clear to you. Yes, Quran exists unadulterated to this day, and forever will. This is a divine promise made in Quran, that it will be guarded by Allah Almighty. The problem is not with Quran, but with its misinterpretation, as done by scholars and mullahs. This misinterpretation is done on such a massive scale, and there is such a high degree of corruption in the Muslim world today, that divine intervention is needed to put the ummah on the right path.
On several ocassions I engaged in discussions with people on chowk regarding the coming of more prophets, hinted at in the Quran and ahadith. To avoid re-posting these somewhat lengthy replies, I have provided the links to these posts. I hope these help.
www.chowk.com/bin/showr.cgi?f=omirza_sep1200&n=80#reply197
www.chowk.com/bin/showr.cgi?f=news_jan3101&n=150#reply616
regards,
Asad
#413 Posted by krashid on May 30, 2001 3:27:10 am
Sattar2 #
I asked you which teaching of Quran Qadiani don`t agree which was the wrong interpretation till late 1800`s.
You came up with two.
1- Ascention of jesus.
2- Last prophet.
All I can see with only these two wrong interpretation by earlier Muslim is there is a need for new prophet and that is jesus and mehdi. And who is Mirza Ahmed.
By teachings of Quran I mean the laws of Quran, or what it incites or prohibit.
As I said there is a need for new interpretation according to current circumstances.
Iranians are doing it remarkably as you might be knowing.
Also Pakistani Ulema are doing it and are learning from their experience.
Because according to my belief salvation depends upon ones action.
Belief according to my limited thinking are very much dependent upon circumstances and enviornment.
The need for belief in prophet PBUH is only for the reason of Quran as the unadulterated and final message of God.
If jesus came for correction of Jews, it was for the reason that jews had adulterated the message of God so that original message was lost.
But in Islam the original message is intact in writing and verbally. It does not appeal to me.
What if I believe in Quran where there is no such thing given as coming of another prophet in UNAMBIGUOUS TERM.
You will agree that Quran is clear on its basic teachings or ``Ayah Mohkamat`` and in ``Mutashabihat`` people differ.
So why not I believe in Mohkamat and leave Mutashabihat for scholars to fight with each other.
There is a Hadith of meaning that a person came to prophet and told him that he will pray five times and not more. fast one month and no more. And give Zakat. After he left prophet PBUH told his companions that if he has told correctly, then he will be in paradize.
Regards.
I asked you which teaching of Quran Qadiani don`t agree which was the wrong interpretation till late 1800`s.
You came up with two.
1- Ascention of jesus.
2- Last prophet.
All I can see with only these two wrong interpretation by earlier Muslim is there is a need for new prophet and that is jesus and mehdi. And who is Mirza Ahmed.
By teachings of Quran I mean the laws of Quran, or what it incites or prohibit.
As I said there is a need for new interpretation according to current circumstances.
Iranians are doing it remarkably as you might be knowing.
Also Pakistani Ulema are doing it and are learning from their experience.
Because according to my belief salvation depends upon ones action.
Belief according to my limited thinking are very much dependent upon circumstances and enviornment.
The need for belief in prophet PBUH is only for the reason of Quran as the unadulterated and final message of God.
If jesus came for correction of Jews, it was for the reason that jews had adulterated the message of God so that original message was lost.
But in Islam the original message is intact in writing and verbally. It does not appeal to me.
What if I believe in Quran where there is no such thing given as coming of another prophet in UNAMBIGUOUS TERM.
You will agree that Quran is clear on its basic teachings or ``Ayah Mohkamat`` and in ``Mutashabihat`` people differ.
So why not I believe in Mohkamat and leave Mutashabihat for scholars to fight with each other.
There is a Hadith of meaning that a person came to prophet and told him that he will pray five times and not more. fast one month and no more. And give Zakat. After he left prophet PBUH told his companions that if he has told correctly, then he will be in paradize.
Regards.
#412 Posted by sadna on May 29, 2001 11:53:20 pm
hobbyt #414
You said Albanians are persecuted I said tell me how are Albanians persecuted. I asked what about Muslims in Afghanistan aren`t they persecuted too. You didnot answer either point and jumped to Hindus in Afghanistan. If I had brought up Hindus in Afghanistan, you would have said, how come secular types care only for their coreligionists?
`` Why do you imagine that Muslims in Pakistan are not aware of what is going happening around the world? Are they not accessing the same sources on the net available to all? or will you decide if they have enough information? Does your point seem rational to you?``
I can access the comments of Islamist party leaders, the OIC, the various mujahid organisations public statements on the net as well as English language opinion writers in Pakistani newspapers. I judge by those statements and not by some inner knowledge of their sources of information and deep rooted faith in their objectivity and real principle(according to my judgement) which I have to yet to see. They are faithful to their ``Muslims are persecuted, people are corrupt because they are not true Muslims or laws are not Islamic or West is satanic`` ideology which invocations are not convincing to me.
You seem to use the terms ``West`` and ``secularism`` as weapons. It doesnot work, I donot care for labels, and am trying to understand what is meant by the Islamic label.
`` I cannot reconcile your statement that Islamic models are static on one hand and the ``meddling`` in constitutional provisions in Pakistan, on the other. They are contradictory.``
Well, since most amendments to the Pakistani Constitution were with the objective of keeping the current ruler`s grip over power(whether Bhutto, Zia or Nawaz Sharif) and not through an considered national debate over pros and cons, I can only use the term meddling. There was nothing of the considered evolution of Islamic point of view in the anti-defection amendment, I feel sure and I have heard the Hudood Amendments called unIslamic.
I have no problem with any concepts of ijtehad, you donot have to keep explaining. I wish the Islamic world all the best for a new dawn and hope Indian Muslims will be also at the forefront. I am however skeptical because you see no connection between the insistence on poorly-defined ``Islamic frame of reference``, its history in Pakistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world and the consequent absence of ijtehad which you seem to exclusively blame on remenants of the West`s depradations.
But I do have a serious problem with institutionalising a world view which looks as Muslims differently from others. As I have said before, once you say Muslims are different from others, and everything is to be evaluated within an Islamic reference point, then in natural progression you get ``some Muslims are different from other Muslims``, then ``some Muslims are better or more Islamic than other Muslims`` and lo and behold, society gets fragmented with some trying to gain ascendency over others on sole basis of professed religious purity which unfortunately has no single defination. Tell me if this is not the case in Pakistan and maybe elsewhere?
I`ve said before on chowk, giving special treatment to a person because he asserts that he is a Muslim is nothing but an open invitation to lie and get away with it. As a core value of society, I believe its dangerous to reward a man for merely what he says and not what he does. In today`s diverse world of which Pakistan is a part, its even more subversive to differentiate between people. And so here I am back to square one.
Look, what am I doing interpreting Pakistani history or the Pakistani Constitution for you? Its for Pakistanis to do it for themselves.
You said Albanians are persecuted I said tell me how are Albanians persecuted. I asked what about Muslims in Afghanistan aren`t they persecuted too. You didnot answer either point and jumped to Hindus in Afghanistan. If I had brought up Hindus in Afghanistan, you would have said, how come secular types care only for their coreligionists?
`` Why do you imagine that Muslims in Pakistan are not aware of what is going happening around the world? Are they not accessing the same sources on the net available to all? or will you decide if they have enough information? Does your point seem rational to you?``
I can access the comments of Islamist party leaders, the OIC, the various mujahid organisations public statements on the net as well as English language opinion writers in Pakistani newspapers. I judge by those statements and not by some inner knowledge of their sources of information and deep rooted faith in their objectivity and real principle(according to my judgement) which I have to yet to see. They are faithful to their ``Muslims are persecuted, people are corrupt because they are not true Muslims or laws are not Islamic or West is satanic`` ideology which invocations are not convincing to me.
You seem to use the terms ``West`` and ``secularism`` as weapons. It doesnot work, I donot care for labels, and am trying to understand what is meant by the Islamic label.
`` I cannot reconcile your statement that Islamic models are static on one hand and the ``meddling`` in constitutional provisions in Pakistan, on the other. They are contradictory.``
Well, since most amendments to the Pakistani Constitution were with the objective of keeping the current ruler`s grip over power(whether Bhutto, Zia or Nawaz Sharif) and not through an considered national debate over pros and cons, I can only use the term meddling. There was nothing of the considered evolution of Islamic point of view in the anti-defection amendment, I feel sure and I have heard the Hudood Amendments called unIslamic.
I have no problem with any concepts of ijtehad, you donot have to keep explaining. I wish the Islamic world all the best for a new dawn and hope Indian Muslims will be also at the forefront. I am however skeptical because you see no connection between the insistence on poorly-defined ``Islamic frame of reference``, its history in Pakistan and elsewhere in the Muslim world and the consequent absence of ijtehad which you seem to exclusively blame on remenants of the West`s depradations.
But I do have a serious problem with institutionalising a world view which looks as Muslims differently from others. As I have said before, once you say Muslims are different from others, and everything is to be evaluated within an Islamic reference point, then in natural progression you get ``some Muslims are different from other Muslims``, then ``some Muslims are better or more Islamic than other Muslims`` and lo and behold, society gets fragmented with some trying to gain ascendency over others on sole basis of professed religious purity which unfortunately has no single defination. Tell me if this is not the case in Pakistan and maybe elsewhere?
I`ve said before on chowk, giving special treatment to a person because he asserts that he is a Muslim is nothing but an open invitation to lie and get away with it. As a core value of society, I believe its dangerous to reward a man for merely what he says and not what he does. In today`s diverse world of which Pakistan is a part, its even more subversive to differentiate between people. And so here I am back to square one.
Look, what am I doing interpreting Pakistani history or the Pakistani Constitution for you? Its for Pakistanis to do it for themselves.
#411 Posted by sattar2 on May 29, 2001 7:36:38 pm
Re Krashid (#411, 412, 413):
I responded to your posts to defend Ahmadi-Muslim teachings when you started to criticized them. I did not take your comments personally, and hope that you’ll also take what I am saying in stride. My intention is not to offend anyone, but to show to others that declaring Ahmadi-Muslims as kafirs and persecuting them in the name of Islam is not a civilized thing to do. Ahmadi-Muslims believe in Allah, teachings of Quran, and hold prophet Mohammad (pbuh) in utmost regard, therefore it is not correct to declare them as non-Muslims. You have raised some interesting points on your posts. I will attempt to respond to them as best as I can.
Jesus (pbuh) did not bring any new teachings or book, nor was he a law-bearing prophet. His mission was to bring the Israelites back to the original teachings of Law of Torah. Jesus (pbuh) received revelations from Allah Almighty, like prophets do, and he attempted to fulfill his mission, i.e. to being Israelites back to the original teachings of Torah. The Gospel, first four Books of the New Testament, was compiled by disciples of Jesus (pbuh) some 90+ years after his crucifixion. These Books and other Books of the New Testament consist of some of the prophecies made by Jesus (pbuh) and the events surrounding his crucifixion. Later on, approximately 300 years after the crucifixion of Jesus, he was declared the Son of God and given the status of deity. People who subscribed to this doctrine (Doctrine of Trinity) were termed Christians. It is interesting to note that the true followers of Jesus Christ (pbuh), who took him to be a prophet of God and not the Son of God, were severely persecuted by the Roman emperors. In short, Jesus (pbuh) was a non-Law bearing prophet, who was sent neither to start a new religion, nor to add to the existing religion, but only to remind people that they had gone stray. Similar was the case of several other prophets, other than Jesus (pbuh), who were sent for the reformation of Israelites. They did not introduce any new religion, but brought people back to the original teachings of Torah.
Similar is the case of Mirza Sahib. He did not bring a new religion, but his mission was only to bring people to the original teachings of Quran. Mirza Sahib received revelations from Allah Almighty informing him of his status as the Promised Messiah and the Mahdi of his age. Mirza Sahib was also given the status of prophet (a non-Law-bearing prophet, since the Law has been completed and perfected in the form of Quran) by Allah Almighty.
Now whether the people who reject the Promised Messiah, will go to hell or not …I do not have an answer. This is between the individual and Allah, and only Allah has the authority to decide on this issue. No human has the power to pass judgment here.
Some of the critical teachings of Islam that became crooked with time and needed new interpretation are:
1. Physical return of Jesus Christ (pbuh): This is an important one. Believing that Jesus Christ (pbuh) physically ascended to heaven and will physically descend to the earth after 2000+ years of this birth has no basis at all. It is based upon mis-interpretation of Quran and hadith. People are expecting the dajjal, a one-eyed monster with his head in clouds, to descend to the earth. The donkey of dajjal will eat fire and will travel at very fast speeds. This will be followed by arrival of Mahdi, and physical descent of Jesus (pbuh) from the sky. Jesus and Mahdi will “kill the dajjal, break the cross, kill the swine” and convert the rest of the world to Islam. Blood of a lot of non-believers will be shed. There is more, but I’ll stop here for now.
This sir is a fairy-tale which will never come true … not the way it is currently understood by the mainstream Muslims.
These thoughts and teachings run counter to the message of true Islam. They pose serious contradictions between the physical world (governed by principles of science and logic) and Laws of Allah. Quran challenges the readers that they will never find any incongruity in the creations of Allah. On the other hand, such stories are completely at odds with nature, reason and logic, and turn religion into a fairy-tale.
2. Continuation of prophethood: Law of Allah has been completed and perfected in Quran by the perfect human being Peophet Mohammad (pbuh). No changes to this law can occur. But Allah Almighty will send prophets to guide the ummah as they go astray. Nowhere in Quran is stated that there will be no more prophets of any kind. This concept is based upon incorrect meaning and interpretation of “khattam-ul-Anbiyya” verse in Surah-e-Ahzab. Actually, there are several places in Quran where coming of other prophets in hinted at. Similarly, ahadith indicating the end of prophethood are also misquoted and mis-interpretted. There are several other hadiths that hint that the door to prophethood remains open. Mullahs very conveniently ignore these ahadith or label them as “not authentic”.
3. General condition of the Muslim world of this day is very discouraging. There are conflicts within the ummah, exploitation by the mullahs, sectarian violence within the Muslims and more. Corruption, from a material standpoint and also from a spiritual standpoint is rampant. Conditions of Muslims of this day is similar to the conditions of Jews in the days of Jesus Christ (pbuh). Then Allah raised Jesus (pbuh) to guide people back to true teachings of Torah. In this day and age, Allah has raised Mirza Sahib (pbuh) to guide the people back to true teachings of Quran.
You seem to agree that new interpretation of Islamic teachings is needed. My question is that with the dissent among the Muslim community, corruption of the mullahs, and sectarian violence and more, how in the world can anyone unite them, get them to agree upon important issues, and apply Islamic principles to these issues. There is no power in this world that can unite the Muslims to this day. A task of this magnitude requires agency of a prophet, one with signs of truth and divine support from Allah Almighty. This is why we Ahmadi-Muslims believe in continuation of (non-Law bearing) prophethood.
I’ll pause here for now. I hope that you realize that Ahmadi-Muslim point of view is not without merit. I hope this helps.
Regards,
Asad
I responded to your posts to defend Ahmadi-Muslim teachings when you started to criticized them. I did not take your comments personally, and hope that you’ll also take what I am saying in stride. My intention is not to offend anyone, but to show to others that declaring Ahmadi-Muslims as kafirs and persecuting them in the name of Islam is not a civilized thing to do. Ahmadi-Muslims believe in Allah, teachings of Quran, and hold prophet Mohammad (pbuh) in utmost regard, therefore it is not correct to declare them as non-Muslims. You have raised some interesting points on your posts. I will attempt to respond to them as best as I can.
Jesus (pbuh) did not bring any new teachings or book, nor was he a law-bearing prophet. His mission was to bring the Israelites back to the original teachings of Law of Torah. Jesus (pbuh) received revelations from Allah Almighty, like prophets do, and he attempted to fulfill his mission, i.e. to being Israelites back to the original teachings of Torah. The Gospel, first four Books of the New Testament, was compiled by disciples of Jesus (pbuh) some 90+ years after his crucifixion. These Books and other Books of the New Testament consist of some of the prophecies made by Jesus (pbuh) and the events surrounding his crucifixion. Later on, approximately 300 years after the crucifixion of Jesus, he was declared the Son of God and given the status of deity. People who subscribed to this doctrine (Doctrine of Trinity) were termed Christians. It is interesting to note that the true followers of Jesus Christ (pbuh), who took him to be a prophet of God and not the Son of God, were severely persecuted by the Roman emperors. In short, Jesus (pbuh) was a non-Law bearing prophet, who was sent neither to start a new religion, nor to add to the existing religion, but only to remind people that they had gone stray. Similar was the case of several other prophets, other than Jesus (pbuh), who were sent for the reformation of Israelites. They did not introduce any new religion, but brought people back to the original teachings of Torah.
Similar is the case of Mirza Sahib. He did not bring a new religion, but his mission was only to bring people to the original teachings of Quran. Mirza Sahib received revelations from Allah Almighty informing him of his status as the Promised Messiah and the Mahdi of his age. Mirza Sahib was also given the status of prophet (a non-Law-bearing prophet, since the Law has been completed and perfected in the form of Quran) by Allah Almighty.
Now whether the people who reject the Promised Messiah, will go to hell or not …I do not have an answer. This is between the individual and Allah, and only Allah has the authority to decide on this issue. No human has the power to pass judgment here.
Some of the critical teachings of Islam that became crooked with time and needed new interpretation are:
1. Physical return of Jesus Christ (pbuh): This is an important one. Believing that Jesus Christ (pbuh) physically ascended to heaven and will physically descend to the earth after 2000+ years of this birth has no basis at all. It is based upon mis-interpretation of Quran and hadith. People are expecting the dajjal, a one-eyed monster with his head in clouds, to descend to the earth. The donkey of dajjal will eat fire and will travel at very fast speeds. This will be followed by arrival of Mahdi, and physical descent of Jesus (pbuh) from the sky. Jesus and Mahdi will “kill the dajjal, break the cross, kill the swine” and convert the rest of the world to Islam. Blood of a lot of non-believers will be shed. There is more, but I’ll stop here for now.
This sir is a fairy-tale which will never come true … not the way it is currently understood by the mainstream Muslims.
These thoughts and teachings run counter to the message of true Islam. They pose serious contradictions between the physical world (governed by principles of science and logic) and Laws of Allah. Quran challenges the readers that they will never find any incongruity in the creations of Allah. On the other hand, such stories are completely at odds with nature, reason and logic, and turn religion into a fairy-tale.
2. Continuation of prophethood: Law of Allah has been completed and perfected in Quran by the perfect human being Peophet Mohammad (pbuh). No changes to this law can occur. But Allah Almighty will send prophets to guide the ummah as they go astray. Nowhere in Quran is stated that there will be no more prophets of any kind. This concept is based upon incorrect meaning and interpretation of “khattam-ul-Anbiyya” verse in Surah-e-Ahzab. Actually, there are several places in Quran where coming of other prophets in hinted at. Similarly, ahadith indicating the end of prophethood are also misquoted and mis-interpretted. There are several other hadiths that hint that the door to prophethood remains open. Mullahs very conveniently ignore these ahadith or label them as “not authentic”.
3. General condition of the Muslim world of this day is very discouraging. There are conflicts within the ummah, exploitation by the mullahs, sectarian violence within the Muslims and more. Corruption, from a material standpoint and also from a spiritual standpoint is rampant. Conditions of Muslims of this day is similar to the conditions of Jews in the days of Jesus Christ (pbuh). Then Allah raised Jesus (pbuh) to guide people back to true teachings of Torah. In this day and age, Allah has raised Mirza Sahib (pbuh) to guide the people back to true teachings of Quran.
You seem to agree that new interpretation of Islamic teachings is needed. My question is that with the dissent among the Muslim community, corruption of the mullahs, and sectarian violence and more, how in the world can anyone unite them, get them to agree upon important issues, and apply Islamic principles to these issues. There is no power in this world that can unite the Muslims to this day. A task of this magnitude requires agency of a prophet, one with signs of truth and divine support from Allah Almighty. This is why we Ahmadi-Muslims believe in continuation of (non-Law bearing) prophethood.
I’ll pause here for now. I hope that you realize that Ahmadi-Muslim point of view is not without merit. I hope this helps.
Regards,
Asad
#410 Posted by hobbyty on May 29, 2001 7:36:38 pm
Sadna # 410
``...I certainly think Muslims in Pakistan think that they (Pakistanis) are being persecuted in Palestine, Bosnia...and that too with out being properly informed about what is really going happening.``
If your line of reasoning is valid that it should hold that Hindus in India should not feel the kind of concern they feel when Taliban direct Hindus in Afghanistan to wear yellow badges. If your argument is that the plight of coreligionist is not our concern, does the same not hold true for the Hindus? Or are values for the concern of human being exclusively to secular liberalism?
Or if Indians are not taking the fight to the Afghans, it may suggest a more civil approach. or a difference in the display of the courage of conviction.
Why do you imagine that Muslims in Pakistan are not aware of what is going happening around the world? Are they not accessing the same sources on the net available to all? or will you decide if they have enough information? Does your point seem rational to you?
You are exactly right that Pakistanis are witness to the worst kind of religious and ethnic discrimination, and in the name of religion, both in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. And that it is cause for shame for the pakistani nation. And I and an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis do feel it.
And you are exactly right that the notion of Ummah and it`s own view of itself in the world, is romantic and therefore emotional.
``...Under Western systems and all issues being discussed in public and improvement sought and implemented.`` I remind you that through out this conversation both Eklavya and with you I have maintained that Ijtehad needs to be applied more frequently. The scholarship and debate will open more doors, in a more meaningful way, within Islamia to new ideas. I will explain again why this opens doors and eventually will discredit the conservatives who make a mockery of Islam and it`s institutions. But after this, I will not give the benefit of the doubt, as I will have explained it for the third time.
That seats of higher learning and opinion and decision makers with Islamia are conversatives and reactionary, there is no dispute. These persons and their influence can and be diminished only by organized , civil, private and public debates and increased literacy in the general population. Scholarship and Debate, by their very nature are liberating.
If an option, which so many careless recommend, to surpress violently, conservatives and their reactionary movement is ever exercised, it would be disasterous to the goals we pursue, namely a society, literate, confident in it`s knowledge of the sources of it`s civilization, tolerant and inclusive. Supression will be disasterous to us because it will deny us the discrediting of the reactionaries in public, by the public. They will inturn go underground. You should be aware that Deobandi organization and teaching were a direct result of the failure of the Sepahy (Sepoy)mutiny. And did not the USSR think Islam was a dead religion? Were not Masajid converted to museums of a ``dead religion``? Did not Stalin try to break the Chechans peoples and their culture by Banishing them to Central Asia? Can we say the English succeeded in Supressing Islam in India? Did the Russian succeed in supressing Islam in USSR?
I understand that the course I am advocating is a long, slow course. And that it is natural to seek a quick solution, but the problem arose slowly and it will fade slowly.
I cannot reconcile your statement that Islamic models are static on one hand and the ``meddling`` in constitutional provisions in Pakistan, on the other. They are contradictory.
Allow me to summarize the positions I have taken:
1.A secular view that seeks to reject a role for religion in the affairs of organized society, is a very narrowly conceived view of who may participate in the affairs of organized society and which values shall be meaningful.
That this in fact a cultural war, taking place through out the globe.
2. Within Islamia, afflicted as it is, there is a tremendous need for solutions that bear Islamic sanction. The need for the greater employment of Ijtehad, is urgent. You will note that Taliban and equally reactionary movements in Pakistan are called OBSCURANTISM. It is defined as opposition to the spread of, or the withholding of knowledge from the general public.
3. That increased scholarship and debate by their nature will lead to the examining of new ideas and the reexamination of old ideas.
4. That these debates can be greatly influenced by public opinion and understanding of the issues and the impact on their living faith.
5.That it will take time to resolve these issues and that these problems are not amenable to a quick solution.
I request you not obfuscate these issues. I admit that I find you more interested in promoting the relative value of you point of view, as opposed to opening up to the possiblity of the validity, in it`s own context, it own frame work of reference, an alternate outlook.
It makes the conversation one endless argument and not an exploration. We need not agree on points of opinion, but I don`t detect in your post, a spirit that seeks to listen and hear, but instead a defense of preconceived notions, with the zeal of a new convert.
I, on the other hand have tried to convey an ideas that seeks to include all in search for solutions within a Islamic framework, as it is my contention that this frame work is most acceptable to Muslims.
But then, I may be wrong!
``...I certainly think Muslims in Pakistan think that they (Pakistanis) are being persecuted in Palestine, Bosnia...and that too with out being properly informed about what is really going happening.``
If your line of reasoning is valid that it should hold that Hindus in India should not feel the kind of concern they feel when Taliban direct Hindus in Afghanistan to wear yellow badges. If your argument is that the plight of coreligionist is not our concern, does the same not hold true for the Hindus? Or are values for the concern of human being exclusively to secular liberalism?
Or if Indians are not taking the fight to the Afghans, it may suggest a more civil approach. or a difference in the display of the courage of conviction.
Why do you imagine that Muslims in Pakistan are not aware of what is going happening around the world? Are they not accessing the same sources on the net available to all? or will you decide if they have enough information? Does your point seem rational to you?
You are exactly right that Pakistanis are witness to the worst kind of religious and ethnic discrimination, and in the name of religion, both in Pakistan and in Afghanistan. And that it is cause for shame for the pakistani nation. And I and an overwhelming majority of Pakistanis do feel it.
And you are exactly right that the notion of Ummah and it`s own view of itself in the world, is romantic and therefore emotional.
``...Under Western systems and all issues being discussed in public and improvement sought and implemented.`` I remind you that through out this conversation both Eklavya and with you I have maintained that Ijtehad needs to be applied more frequently. The scholarship and debate will open more doors, in a more meaningful way, within Islamia to new ideas. I will explain again why this opens doors and eventually will discredit the conservatives who make a mockery of Islam and it`s institutions. But after this, I will not give the benefit of the doubt, as I will have explained it for the third time.
That seats of higher learning and opinion and decision makers with Islamia are conversatives and reactionary, there is no dispute. These persons and their influence can and be diminished only by organized , civil, private and public debates and increased literacy in the general population. Scholarship and Debate, by their very nature are liberating.
If an option, which so many careless recommend, to surpress violently, conservatives and their reactionary movement is ever exercised, it would be disasterous to the goals we pursue, namely a society, literate, confident in it`s knowledge of the sources of it`s civilization, tolerant and inclusive. Supression will be disasterous to us because it will deny us the discrediting of the reactionaries in public, by the public. They will inturn go underground. You should be aware that Deobandi organization and teaching were a direct result of the failure of the Sepahy (Sepoy)mutiny. And did not the USSR think Islam was a dead religion? Were not Masajid converted to museums of a ``dead religion``? Did not Stalin try to break the Chechans peoples and their culture by Banishing them to Central Asia? Can we say the English succeeded in Supressing Islam in India? Did the Russian succeed in supressing Islam in USSR?
I understand that the course I am advocating is a long, slow course. And that it is natural to seek a quick solution, but the problem arose slowly and it will fade slowly.
I cannot reconcile your statement that Islamic models are static on one hand and the ``meddling`` in constitutional provisions in Pakistan, on the other. They are contradictory.
Allow me to summarize the positions I have taken:
1.A secular view that seeks to reject a role for religion in the affairs of organized society, is a very narrowly conceived view of who may participate in the affairs of organized society and which values shall be meaningful.
That this in fact a cultural war, taking place through out the globe.
2. Within Islamia, afflicted as it is, there is a tremendous need for solutions that bear Islamic sanction. The need for the greater employment of Ijtehad, is urgent. You will note that Taliban and equally reactionary movements in Pakistan are called OBSCURANTISM. It is defined as opposition to the spread of, or the withholding of knowledge from the general public.
3. That increased scholarship and debate by their nature will lead to the examining of new ideas and the reexamination of old ideas.
4. That these debates can be greatly influenced by public opinion and understanding of the issues and the impact on their living faith.
5.That it will take time to resolve these issues and that these problems are not amenable to a quick solution.
I request you not obfuscate these issues. I admit that I find you more interested in promoting the relative value of you point of view, as opposed to opening up to the possiblity of the validity, in it`s own context, it own frame work of reference, an alternate outlook.
It makes the conversation one endless argument and not an exploration. We need not agree on points of opinion, but I don`t detect in your post, a spirit that seeks to listen and hear, but instead a defense of preconceived notions, with the zeal of a new convert.
I, on the other hand have tried to convey an ideas that seeks to include all in search for solutions within a Islamic framework, as it is my contention that this frame work is most acceptable to Muslims.
But then, I may be wrong!
#409 Posted by krashid on May 29, 2001 1:55:22 pm
Sattar 2
In last part you said that there is a need for prophet when people go astray.
So do you think another prophet will come.
Because of my experience with Qadiani some good and some not good at all.
In last part you said that there is a need for prophet when people go astray.
So do you think another prophet will come.
Because of my experience with Qadiani some good and some not good at all.
#408 Posted by krashid on May 29, 2001 1:55:22 pm
Sattar 2#
Addition to my previous.
Ascention of prophet Jesus is in Koran. (Whether bodily or not I have no idea)
Regarding Jesus, according to my limited knowledge, Romans hanged another person in doubt and Jesus was ascended according to Koran.
Other attributes given to Jesus in Koran. He was a miraculous birth without father to chaste Mary. But was a God`s creation and not son of God.
Also contrary to other religions like judaism and christianity which believe in coming of another prophet. (which according to Muslims is Mohammed PBUH).
Hadith and Quran are pretty much clear and there is consensus among Muslims that no new prophet will come. There is no consensus on Mehdi or second coming of Jesus in Islam, majority believing and minority not.
Addition to my previous.
Ascention of prophet Jesus is in Koran. (Whether bodily or not I have no idea)
Regarding Jesus, according to my limited knowledge, Romans hanged another person in doubt and Jesus was ascended according to Koran.
Other attributes given to Jesus in Koran. He was a miraculous birth without father to chaste Mary. But was a God`s creation and not son of God.
Also contrary to other religions like judaism and christianity which believe in coming of another prophet. (which according to Muslims is Mohammed PBUH).
Hadith and Quran are pretty much clear and there is consensus among Muslims that no new prophet will come. There is no consensus on Mehdi or second coming of Jesus in Islam, majority believing and minority not.
#407 Posted by krashid on May 29, 2001 1:55:22 pm
Sattar2#
Why bothering me.
I don`t see any difference between 72 and 73 sects as long as they are claiming to be the sole interpreter of Islam and only correct version.
For me bigotry in one name is the same as other.
Your logic don`t stand.
If Jesus came with new teachings, to correct the jews, it converted into christianity.
The same you can apply to Qadiani religion.
You are trying to say that other people have interpreted Quran wrongly and Mirza Ahmed is interpreting correctly. But the difference is that other scholars even great Imams are fallible. But Mirza Ahmed by being a prophet is infallible.(So his interpretations and inspirations and Wahi cannot be questioned)
Instead of going into these squabbles I will state an Ayah.
Whether it is a christian, or jewish or Sabian or Believer, whoever believes in God (one) and do good will have his reward from God`` (only meaning)
So instead of becoming part of another sect the validity of which is questionable to most scholars why not keep faith strong in God and do good.
Or there is no salvation, if I have not followed a certain version.
Or all Muslims are going to hell after late 1800`s because they failed to recognize the Muslim jesus.
Would you care to point out what teachings of Islam are crooked which were corrected after late 1800`s, which not only needed a new interpretation, but a new prophet with all its implications. (This is a serious question).
You will recognize from my writing that I believe in new interpretations of Islam for current times as a must without the need of a new prophet.
Why bothering me.
I don`t see any difference between 72 and 73 sects as long as they are claiming to be the sole interpreter of Islam and only correct version.
For me bigotry in one name is the same as other.
Your logic don`t stand.
If Jesus came with new teachings, to correct the jews, it converted into christianity.
The same you can apply to Qadiani religion.
You are trying to say that other people have interpreted Quran wrongly and Mirza Ahmed is interpreting correctly. But the difference is that other scholars even great Imams are fallible. But Mirza Ahmed by being a prophet is infallible.(So his interpretations and inspirations and Wahi cannot be questioned)
Instead of going into these squabbles I will state an Ayah.
Whether it is a christian, or jewish or Sabian or Believer, whoever believes in God (one) and do good will have his reward from God`` (only meaning)
So instead of becoming part of another sect the validity of which is questionable to most scholars why not keep faith strong in God and do good.
Or there is no salvation, if I have not followed a certain version.
Or all Muslims are going to hell after late 1800`s because they failed to recognize the Muslim jesus.
Would you care to point out what teachings of Islam are crooked which were corrected after late 1800`s, which not only needed a new interpretation, but a new prophet with all its implications. (This is a serious question).
You will recognize from my writing that I believe in new interpretations of Islam for current times as a must without the need of a new prophet.
Interact Index
Latest Interacts
- Goldfinger: Re: # 15 nkg,... The Palestinian Puzzle
- nb: Mr Gill, a couple... The Palestinian Puzzle
- tahmed32: sattar2: there is a... Terrorism Unveiled
- Romair: anil #: "You are... Terrorism Unveiled
- nkg: Re: # 12 Kedar... "If someone... The Palestinian Puzzle
- Romair: anil #: "They can... Terrorism Unveiled
- nkg: Bhairav... closer at home Ramalinga... The Palestinian Puzzle
- Romair: anil #:......once again, i... Terrorism Unveiled
