certifired_img

Books and Documents

Islam,Terrorism and Jihad

552 - COMMENTS

  • Sharing this letter to Brother Yusuf Estes having the link of this article in order to educate him out of any support to agents of Saud engaged in killing Muslims pledged to Mowla Ali ,Imam Hussain and all aulias: Brother Yusuf, Save yourself from hellfire since this woman Gulshan Aalani is a criminal slave of those who do not accept the Luminous existence of prophet Muhammad PBUH and HP. She is pledged to terrorist Wahhabis engaged in killing Sufi Muslim Singer of prophet SUH and HP being NOOR e MUJASSAM which means LIGHT of Allah SwT embodied. I am pledged to SUFI chain here in India affirming the Fatimid Leader of aal e Ibraheem in aal e Ali Imraan Abu Talib decreed in verse 3:33,34 for global allegiance being the Hand of Allah, Rope of Allah SwT. ismailignosis.com/2014/10/02/who-succeeded-imam-jafar-al-sadiq-seven-proofs-for-the-imamat-of-imam-ismail-ibn-jafar/ is the proof for the presence of divinely chosen leader. We are confronting usurpers of the idenity of Khalifa of Allah SwT as momineen always following the Sunna of Momineen in this regard. You may find this article instructive

    http://www.newageislam.com/islam,terrorism-and-jihad/muslims-must-confront-islamist-terror-ideologically--an-islamic-reformation-required/d/100918

    since reformation of faith is not possible without pledging allegiance to Imam e Zamana for all not belonging to the community of Momineen pledged to Imam e Zamana. '

    By Mukhtar Alam - 8/17/2016 6:21:30 AM



  • We live in the age of 49th Imam Mahdi ,the MUSTAFA for the age, the Hand of Allah SwT for allegiance. Check this ismailignosis.com/2014/10/02/who-succeeded-imam-jafar-al-sadiq-seven-proofs-for-the-imamat-of-imam-ismail-ibn-jafar/ Your first line is wrong since ,there had been usurpers of the identity of Khalifa of Allah SwT. Islam is peace. Your use of world Islamist for criminal AB Baghdadi and his goons is wrong since ,you do not know the meaning of Islam decreed peace for humanity. I did not know this way as well. If you read verse 3:33,34 then you would know on how there are criminal terrorist usurpers of the identity of Khalifa of Allah SwT in all age contesting the divinely chosen leader. By Mukhtar Alam - 8/17/2016 5:50:41 AM



  • ismailignosis.com/2014/10/02/who-succeeded-imam-jafar-al-sadiq-seven-proofs-for-the-imamat-of-imam-ismail-ibn-jafar/' By Mukhtar Alam - 8/17/2016 5:36:45 AM



  • Yes, he can do that too. It will put Mr Bedi in a questionable position, though, in case the posting was really unintentional.

    In any case he seems to have made his address and our suggestions are now immaterial :)
    By secularlogic - 9/29/2015 12:01:30 AM



  • Why should Shahin Sb try to camouflage his own words? People can detect stealing of ideas. It will look worse. It is better to use his own words and maybe mention that these have subsequently been used by others in their own name without mentioning the source. By Naseer Ahmed - 9/28/2015 10:29:27 PM



  • I am sorry to have bothered you Bediji, but the reason I insisted was that if you write to them, it will be treated as inadvertent mistake, but if I write to them it will be considered a complaint and plagiarism, which might get you banned from these websites.

    As the entire article is word for word the major portion of my comment, minus my address to Observer Saheb, there should be no problem in either deleting it or changing the name of the author.

    I hope they both listen to your request and we close the chapter here. 
    Regards
    By Sultan Shahin - 9/28/2015 5:27:20 AM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin Sahib, I have already requested them to delete the article in question from their sites.  I once again tender my apology.

    With kind regards
    By Satbir Singh Bedi - 9/28/2015 4:42:14 AM



  • Dear Mr Shahin,

    distressing as your situation is, to have to reclaim your own writing, I have a suggesstion. If Mr Bedi is unable to rectify the error, just rewrite the idea in completely new words, and move the order, add new ideas and use the material so that it is unrecognisable from your original writing. Considering that it is your own copyrighted material, there is no unethicality in doing so.
    By secularlogic - 9/28/2015 3:51:01 AM



  • Dear Satbir Singhji Bedi, Please do try to get it deleted from those sites, or tell them to change the name of the author. I am using these paras in my speech at UN. It will be very damaging for me to have it posted in some one else's name in as widely available sites as Yahoo to Merinews. Do please ask them to make amends. I cannot go with your apology to every one who reads this and forms a bad opinion about me. These are very visible items and come up first in any search. Regards and thanks for your kind words. By Sultan Shahin - 9/28/2015 2:46:14 AM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin Sahib, I have great regard for you.  You are  not only a bold person but much more intelligent and learned than me.  I do not know how I came to use your expression in these two articles written by me.  If it is so, then I sincerely express my regrets. I must have used it inadvertently.  A learned man like you can never steal anything from something written by a small fry like me. You can use this apology by me for any use you may like to make of it.
    With kind regards.
    Satbir Singh Bedi
    By Satbir Singh Bedi - 9/27/2015 9:16:16 PM



  • Dear Satbir Singhji Bedi, Somehow one of my comments on this page as an answer to Naseer Saheb Observer's one observation has got published as an article by you and is available on at least two widely available pages, one by Yahoo and another by Merinews.

    I am going to use this comment or part of it, in an edited version, in one of my speeches at the UN Human Rights Council.

    I would not like people to think that I have stolen these paragraphs from your write-up. I would be grateful if you get it removed by these sites or change the writer's name, although I didn't really want it to go as an article by me. At least people will think I have stolen from my own article, I am referring to the following comment I made in this article in response to a comment by Observer.

    I am referring to the following comment I made in this article in response to a comment by Observer:

    “A literal reading of verses like La ikraha fid Deen (There is no compulsion in religion or Lakum Deeanakum waleya Deen (For you your religion, for me mine) is a cornerstone of every moderate's philosophy. These are constitutive verses of the Quran and eternal in significance. They are valid for us for all time.

    The problem arises with contextual and allegorical verses when they are taken literally or even interpreted according to one's own understanding. The problem arises when so-called militant verses are taken literally, considered valid for all time as exhortations of God to all Muslims forever, and followed as they are today. ISIS leaders may have their own designs, but our children and youth, boys and girls who are running away from our well-appointed homes and private schools are doing so out of a literal reading of these so-called militant aggressive verses and considering them universal in nature. Being uncreated, all Qur’anic verses are considered and taught in madrasas as having eternal value as guidance for all time to come.

    One allegorical verse is being interpreted to mean that Malhama (Armageddon) is only two years away. Daesh (Islamic State) is said to be fighting the end-time battle Malhama. This is also one reason why our youth are running away to engage in the battles end-times, the Malhama.

    “I therefore, think, merely literal reading of all Qur’anic verses, without reference to the context of contextual verses, or even personal, contorted interpretations of allegorical verses will be a disaster, is already leading to disaster.

    We must treat Quran as a created work by God which contains constitutive, contextual and allegorical verses which have to be treated by us in different times and different contexts differently. Which means that we should observe Qur’anic advise that we use our rationality and think all the time before accepting anything blindly. A literal reading of all Qur’anic verses cannot be acceptable.

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/10/2015 5:48:17 AM

    http://www.newageislam.com/More-Comments.aspx?ID=100918

     This part of the comment appears as your article at least in the following links:

    merinews.com/clogArticle/a-literal-reading-of-all-quranic-verses-cannot-be-acceptable/15905159#sthash.nqDjB3bX.dpuf

     and

    groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/Janshakti/conversations/topics/34238

    By Sultan Shahin - 9/27/2015 10:39:41 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Slowly but surely, the real character of “Secular Logic,” will be known to all. At one given point in time, the person claimed to be a wife of “Hats Off – S. Jeelani.” Now, the reference is made towards “Gay.”

     

    Let’s look at the two words about Islam, that is, “powerful idea.” In fact, that is how the bigoted person looks at it. Isn’t it amazing for an educated person to come to such a conclusion?

     

    For sure, one can admire Hinduism without believing in God, but at the same time, one can never, I repeat never, have any good things to say about Islam, no matter what moderate reasoning is presented. Yet still, the whole idea behind reading the “Secular Logic,” comments, is that this very person opens the windows of the world for the Muslim readers.  

     

    Have patience, my fellow Muslims. More bigoted views will flow through. I will be keeping an eye on any “Twisted Logic,” that are posted on New Age Islam forum.  Take care.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

        

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/7/2015 9:57:02 AM



  • Sure SL. Many of them  are among some of the best people.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/7/2015 12:37:17 AM



  • Mr Lodhia, I can only gather you seek and gain inspiration from the crazy and disjointed epistles addressed to you, and employ your thus honed skills with unmatched if clumsy enthusiasm upon me.

    BTW to clear a misconception in your mind: I can admire bungee jumping without bungee jumping myself; I can admire Hinduism without believing in God. I can like the ten commandments without getting baptised. I can like Buddhism without being a Buddhist. I can accept that Islam was a powerful idea without endorsing each word that is said in the Quran.

    But it is understandable that people like you don't get it. I can only pity you. 
    By secularlogic - 4/7/2015 12:36:02 AM



  • Mr Ahmed,

    Considering your singular and spectacular talent for interpreting words to mean what you want them to mean, it is entirely possible that I meant to declare myself the Queen of the entire world. :)

    Gay people are sensitive human beings, not inclined to violence even though they have been hounded by society through the ages. It is indeed an honour to be considered one of them.
    By secularlogic - 4/7/2015 12:28:12 AM



  • Secular Logic says:
    "I am the queen of England because I declare myself the queen of England. Therefore, proved." 
    I must infer from the above that you belong to the LGBT community in which case I must accept that you could very well be  "queen of England" and indeed of every country.
    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/7/2015 12:18:09 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Now, kindly share it with “Secular Logic.” Let’s see, if he/she can answer what “Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia” has to go through.

     

    “Mohtram Rafiq Bhai,  Salaam

     

    I have already replied all your points in my letter but, perhaps, you never cared  to understand what I have written about Modi and his shortcomings and now blowing up your own trumpet against Muslim while forgetting intentionally all the aggressive designs of Western hippocracy of the west against Muslim Ummah and its Zulm in the Muslim world. You have mentioned only the case of Palestine only and very conveniently ignored the butchering Modi government his Zulm in Kashmir. Where you stand?

     

    Please go through  my letter AFRESH and all your answers are therein. You have "DEVIATED" from the path of understanding it correctly.  

     

    Before ending I must refer to the explanation of Maulana Wahiduddin Saheb of Verse 25 of Surah Al-Hadeed. He is a brother who differs from the very  concept of Iqamatuddeen and is deadly against Maulana Maudoodi Merhoom and he is now serving the cause of Indian Government to limit Islam just  to ritualistic code only. Why  don't you please  study Tafheem. Tadabbur, Ma'reful Qur'an and Fi Zelalur  Qur'an and understand the Verse in the light of the life pattern of Rasulullah (S). You are depending conveniently on a deviated Scholar.

     

    You better get rid of Modi-phobia that is hovering in your mind. You haven't answered any of my point and raised the question that were not the subject matter of  discussion.” 

     

    Secular Logic,” got highly pissed off this morning. Why not? He finally realized that one Muslim can stand up to him. For long, he/she has been insulting “Moderate Muslims,and now, you all read his instant reaction to what he called, “Hate Steroids. He/she forgot that was the norm of every single day which was adopted for so long against the Muslims.

     

    In any case, let “Secular Logic,” read and try to comprehend what Muslims like us has to go through every single day. One should ask a question, “How can an avowed bigot understand anything?

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhiaq - 4/7/2015 12:05:21 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam


    As-Salaam Alay-Kum 


    Lo and behold! All of a sudden it is now Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia, who provides hate steroids every morning. Did I not inform all the readers that “Secular Logic,” will strike back again! He sure did, didn’t he? Who cares about the person’s true identity. A bigot will always remain a bigot.

     

    What’s there to be critical about Islam? One has to be critical about Muslims who lost their way into the wilderness. Bigoted people will always take delight in insulting Islam. There is no better example than “Secular Logic,” who almost always praised “Ex-Tablighi.” What’s common  between these two people? Your guess is as good as mine.

     

    Then again, who is shutting them up? I am merely questioning the bigot, who simply cannot answer tough questions about his own religion. Oops! I forgot, this Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde is deceptive person with “Unclean Heart.One day, he/she is all out praising his belief in his/her religion, and then the next day, there is a constant bragging about not believing in God.

     

    Well then, it is hard to get into the ring when the dual character of the person is fully exposed. Sure, blame it on the “Moderate Muslims. What else is new?

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/6/2015 11:37:42 PM



  • Ahh Mr Lodhia: Glad to provide you your hate steroid this morning. Now we can be treated to your barrage of abuse. The most respected editor, while wringing his hands over how bloggers critical of islam are being minced to death in Bangladesh, will tap you with a toothbrush when you begin whipping up a frenzy against me. Why, he may even reveal my identity to you so you achieve what your heard desires. To shut me up. So much for the Moderate Reformist Movement. MRM. By secularlogic - 4/6/2015 11:20:21 PM



  • I am the most biased and bigoted commentator on New Age Islam forum, who deliberately ignore to comment on anything that pertains to my own culture and religion.

     

    Therefore, proved. My hidden name is “Secular Logic.” Therefore, I can insult, whomever I want to. Henceforth, proven further, without a shadow of doubt.  

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/6/2015 11:10:01 PM



  • I am the queen of England because I declare myself the queen of England.

    Therefore, proved. 
    By secularlogic - 4/6/2015 11:00:38 PM



  • Rational,

    Every mathematical or scientific proposition can be disproved with one counter example.

    The Quran challenges you to find a contradiction or a discrepancy. Take up this challenge to prove that there is a contradiction or a discrepancy.

    As far as the signs that it is a divine book is concerned, there are numerous signs. Read my article on the Prophetic mission of Muhaamad (pbuh) and how seemingly impossible predictions made when the number of Muslims were only 3 come true. 

    The oft repeated description of the Messenger as a warner and a bearer of glad tidings is also proved against all odds. 

    A doubter can keep on doubting because that is how Allah has made human nature. The Meccans kept on doubting until they lost everything. A person who is losing will either course correct early or never. After a point, he has invested too much to care anymore and would rather lose everything than salvage what he can. If you want to read some serious stuff on this aspect of human psychology, I can suggest a book.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/6/2015 1:06:18 PM



  • Lodhia
    Finally it is tablighi who has put the record straight.
    How the Quran can be proof of its own divinity?
    The prophet gave no proof except repeating verses of the Quran.
    The prophet and the Quran mutually authenticating each other. it can't be a proof.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/26/2015 10:49:40 PM



  • Dear Naseer Ahmed Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Thank you for setting the record straight on “The Divinity of the Holy Quran.” It is much appreciated.

     

    May Almighty Allah bless you and your beloved family members.

     

    Very sincerely yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/25/2015 11:45:26 AM



  • Dear Mohammad Ishaque Foujdar Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    I beg your pardon for answering directly to Sultan Shahin Saheb, Editor of New Age Islam.

     

    Truthfully speaking, I have never ever claimed to be an Islamic scholar. I am just an ordinary Muslim, who happens to possess a strong faith in the Holy Quran, which was divinely revealed to our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).

     

    Now you tell me, as a Muslim, “Do you recite Hadith of Sahih Bukhari or Sahih Muslim, in your five time prayers?” Obviously, the answer will be a flat “No, from your side. May I ask, “Why are you then, trying to convince the readers of New Age Islam that ‘only faith in Hadith is an authentic base for a true Muslim.’?”

     

    Ishaque Saheb, it will be wise on your part not to question the “Intelligence, of common Muslims. Respecting Hadiths is one thing, but considering it divine is another. To my simple mind, it is a blatant act of “Shirk.

     

    Surely, you are aware of the Quranic verse, “this is the book; there is no doubt in it. It is a guide for those who are mindful of God, who believe in the unseen.” Make a note of a single word “unseen.” Hence, all the talk about “created” and “uncreated” is absolutely nonsense.


    All in all, try not to create doubt and mislead your fellow Muslims by stating, “your faith is only on speculation, without any authentic proof, very weak faith.” What you are literally trying to do, is to appeal to Muslims, to drift away from the Holy Quran. To me, such a baseless proclamation is nothing but “Blasphemy. Therefore, kindly spare me all of your senseless arguments.

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia    

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/25/2015 11:38:49 AM



  • Dear Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi Saheb, the relevant question is: do we consider these contextual verses applicable to us today or do we not? Unless you come out clearly with your views on this question, there is no point in contextualising verses that you demand, something that has already been done and is largely known, though there is some controversy on some verses. Knowing the context and considering or not considering these verses as applicable to us as divine guidance in this day and age is quite another. I refer to these comments from you:

    "Muslims find it difficult to change their traditional belief regarding the uncreatedness of the holy Qur'an. Perhaps, they see no point at all in relating the universal and out-of-context application of the Qur'anic verses with the Qur'an being created or uncreated."

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/10/2015 10:26:20 AM

    ---------

    "Mr. Sultan Shahin has very rightly pointed out that literalism is the root cause of murder and mayhem in the name of so called militant verses of the Quran.  Until we start contextualising the verses of Quran according to their Shan-e-nuzul or reason for revelation,  we cannot hope any Islamic reformation in today's Muslim societies." By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/9/2015 1:45:11 PM

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/25/2015 7:44:41 AM



  • Quran is not a word of God.  In fact, no book viz., the Bible, Torah or Vedas are the words of God.  If they had been written by God then they would have been written in all the languages of the world because God knows everything.  Moreover, there would not have been mutual contradictions between them. Quran has been written by an intelligent person who knew Arabic only. By Satbir Singh Bedi - 3/25/2015 3:34:33 AM



  • I have no need for any hadith to believe that the Quran is the Word of  God and not of Muhammad (pbuh). The Quran states this in so many words. 

    The proof that the Quran is a book of revelations is in the Quran itself. The Quran provides several tests to prove its authenticity as the Word of God. The mushrikin of Mecca asked the same question and the Quran provides the answer. Imagine responding to them with the word of Ayesha (RA) or even the word of the Prophet (pbuh) himself! Of course the unimpeachable and pure character of the Prophet and his word should have been good enough but the people called him a madman though  not a liar which means that they still held his word in high regard.

    Why do we believe a hadith but not the Word of God in the Quran?
    By Observer - 3/25/2015 2:54:55 AM



  • Mr.Mohammad Rafiq Lodhia 
          I did not ask you, i asked Mr. Sultan Shahin, he knows me. I wrote an article about "Munkar-e-Hadith" in September 2012. I think you regard yourself a big scholar so interested in meddling. If so pl. give me reply of the same question.  
    By Mohammad Ishaque Foujdar - 3/25/2015 1:03:38 AM



  • Respected Sultan Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Lo & Behold! There are countless millions of Muslims like “Foujdars. Their twisted logic is as follows:   

     

    “Nobody got Wahhi that the Quran is a Book of Allah. Only faith in Hadith is an authentic base for a true Muslim regarding this matter.”

     

    There is nothing much, you nor anyone, can do about it. Lack of faith in the Holy Quran is the root cause of all the mayhem and chaos in the Islamic countries.

     

    Almighty Allah says, “What is wrong with them that they do not believe? When the Quran is read to them, why do they not fall to their knees?”

     

    Regrettably, one is only left wondering, what sort of Muslim mind will comment as follows:

     

    “I think, you believe that the Quran is a revealed Book by Allah, Your this faith is only on speculation, without any authentic proof, very weak faith. May be, you have gotten Wahhi direct from Allah or by Gabriel. Please explain it.”   

     

    So help us Almighty Allah. There is absolutely no need to explain anything. Let these Muslims continue to dwell in the “Science of Hadiths.    

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.facebook.com/readingisliving

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/24/2015 5:49:14 PM



  • Janab Sultan Shahin Sahib   Aadab 
            My question was some extent awkward. I know the Quran is revealed book of Allah on the basis of Hazrat 'Aishah's (R) Hadith reported by Bukhari that  the Quran  descended on  the prophet Muhammad (S). There are so many Ahadith in this respect and i have strong faith in them. Nobody got Wahhi that the Quran is a Book of Allah. Only faith in Hadith is an authentic base for a true Muslim regarding this matter.  
    By Mohammad Ishaque Foujdar - 3/24/2015 1:12:57 PM



  • Mohammad Ishaque Foujdar Saheb, I think this is what every Muslim believes in. "that the Quran is a revealed Book by Allah," is my faith as that of every Muslim, I believe.

    You ask me to explain the following: "Your this faith is only on speculation, without any authentic proof, very weak faith. May be, you have gotten Wahhi direct from Allah or by Gabriel. Please explain it. "

    I must say I don't have any proof that might satisfy you. We, of course, know this from Quran, but apparently this will not satisfy you.

    You will just have to allow me to be a Muslim, believing like all Muslims that Quran is a collection of revelations from God that came to the Prophet, first in Mecca as a foundation for the religion of Islam, and then from time to time to help him respond to developing situations.

    I must say I am a little mystified with your question. Maybe I could not understand it properly or you failed to pose your question properly. If so, please try again. 

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/23/2015 6:31:27 AM



  • Mr.Sultan Shahin Sahib ---Aadaab 
        I think, you believe that the Quran is a revealed Book by Allah, Your this faith is only on speculation, without any authentic proof, very weak faith. May be, you have gotten Wahhi direct from Allah or by Gabriel. Please explain it.  
    By Mohammad Ishaque Foujdar - 3/23/2015 12:09:13 AM



  • Dear Readers of New Age Islaam,

    What is needed is not "reformation" but "restitution" of Islam as lived by the Prophet Muhammad, sallallahu 'aleyhe wa sellem. The terrorists' evil deeds are based on the reformist idea of ignoring all the ahaadith (not only the words but also the practice of) of the Prophet (and the lives of the sahaaba-e kiraam and their followers, the four ahl-e sunnat imaams) and basing their belief on "word by word translation" of the Qur'aan al-kareem or the ahaadith just by picking up one verse. (As might be strikingly  exemplified by the fake interpretation of the aayat meaning "do not aapproach salaat, ..." by some Hayyaamist people.)

    To be the real followers of Muhammad Rasuulullaah, the true Muslims have to learn and understand the Word of Allaah as did the Rasuulullaah sallallaahu 'aleyhe wa sellem and the sahaaba-e kiraam radhiyallaahu 'anhumaa.

    By Abdurrahman Guner - 3/16/2015 4:59:28 AM



  • All in good time Shahin Sb. Have patience.

    By Observer - 3/11/2015 4:16:10 AM



  • But who are these "moderates," Observer Sb? Why are you so reluctant to name them? How can they be moderate if they don't accept the literal meaning of verses like la ikraha and lakum deenakum?  By Sultan Shahin - 3/11/2015 2:30:35 AM



  • Shahin Sb,

    By any definition of "moderate" they will stand foremost among the moderates. They are also highly acclaimed. 

    They only interpret the historical part incorrectly but as for what is applicable today, they do not err. Among the Sunni ulema, including all the Braelvi ulema, there aren't any who come close to them in their very forthright condemnation of all forms of extremism. If you exclude their theory of "the divine plan" which interprets the stories of all the prophets incorrectly  in my view, you cannot fault them on anything else. They also treat the Ahadith with circumspection and not blind belief and neither do they indulge in blind Taqleed. Many of their ideas are modern.

    By Observer - 3/10/2015 8:20:12 PM



  • Anyway, Observer Sb., it's better if you don't call them "acclaimed moderates." People who do not think that "let there be no compulsion in religion" and "to you (those who reject Islam peacefully) be your way and to me mine" are to be taken literally and valid at all times cannot be called moderate. By Sultan Shahin - 3/10/2015 4:10:48 PM



  • Shahin Sb,
    All in good time. Have patience. The acclaimed moderates do not visit this website but you know who they are.
    Yunus Sb,
    I am aware of your beliefs and the fact that these are quite different.
    On the Sunni theology, I have quoted Barbara Zollner from her book. 
    Mr Ziaur Rahman who is on the staff of NAI has similar views:

    This went unchallenged.

    My article who is a Kafir went unsupported by and large.

    So I assume that the beliefs of most Sunnis are in accordance with what I have said in my article about Sunni theology.

    Has Sunni theology changed for the better since the medieval times? I doubt it.

    By Observer - 3/10/2015 2:26:53 PM



  • Also, Observer Sb., who do you have in mind when you use expressions like "acclaimed moderates?" Who are these "acclaimed moderates" in your mind? By Sultan Shahin - 3/10/2015 11:17:48 AM



  • By what criteria, Observer Sb, do you call such people moderate? 
    "acclaimed moderates who do not think that "let there be no compulsion in religion" and "to you (those who reject Islam peacefully) be your way and to me mine" are to be taken literally and valid at all times." "
    People who practice Taqaiyya are not moderates, they are hypocrites. Moderates actually believe that Islam is a religion of peace.  They do that by reading Quranic verses in context, considering Quran word og God rather than God. 
    Of course, Jihadis do train their people to practice Taqaiyya. Quroting verses like La ikraha fid Deed and lakum deenakum waleya Deen wheen dealing with non-Muslims and believing and wanting their own folk to believe  that these verses have actually been abrogated by later militant verses.  In the age of internet, there is no room for Taqaiyya really. But Jihadi institutions do teach that. This is on the evidence of ex-Jihadis who all became died as suicide bombers.
    By Sultan Shahin - 3/10/2015 11:15:41 AM



  • No insightful, thinking and brainstorming Muslim would disagree with Mr. Sultan Shahin when he says: "merely literal reading of all Qur’anic verses, without reference to the context of contextual verses, or even personal, contorted interpretations of allegorical verses will be a disaster, is already leading to disaster".

    However, Muslims find it difficult to change their traditional belief regarding the uncreatedness of the holy Qur'an. Perhaps, they see no point at all in relating the universal and out-of-context application of the Qur'anic verses with the Qur'an being created or uncreated.
    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/10/2015 10:26:20 AM



  • Dear Observor,

    I agree with you 100% that in the context of the revelation, "Kufr or Kafir does not apply to the unaware, anyone to whom the Message has not been conveyed or reached."

    But today, I am a Hindu and having read the Qur'an, I do not believe in its divinity, a Muslim who calls me a kafir himself commits kufr as he denies the Qur'an's message on religious freedom, and diversity of Sharia (5:48). In fact I have done an article on the theme that you had endorsed.

    By muhammad yunus - 3/10/2015 9:22:15 AM



  • Dear Observor,
    Please do not quote the Medieval interpretation of Islam that holds that "Sunni theology of 'all non-followers of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) are kafir',"
    I am very much Sunni, but my (jt) interpretation of the Qur'anic message, developed in consultation with a number of renowned Sunni scholars of this era and approved by the apex Sunni religious institution, al-Azhar al-Sharif does not condemn all "non-Muslims" as kafirs.  The following extract from its Chapter 9 reads as follows:
    "Pieced together, the foregoing verses and those in the last two chapters bring across the Qur’anic vision of a universal brotherhood of humanity that will allow people of diverse faith, culture, color and language to live together, to know and respect each other and assist each other, to make life easy and peaceful for all human beings.

    "Some Muslim scholars, however, advocate that the non-Muslims (in its present day sense), who do not believe in the Prophet Muhammad, will not qualify for God’s mercy. They interpret the generic word islam (submitting/ orienting oneself to God, Ch. 7) in the verse 3:85 (underlined below), in its popular restrictive sense as the religion of the followers of the Prophet Muhammad. This is misleading as the preceding verses (3:83-84), demonstrate the generic character of the word islam appearing in 3:85. 

    “Do they seek any (religion) other than the din (religion) of God, to whom all in the heavens and on earth have submitted, willingly or unwillingly, and to whom they will all be returned (3:83)? Say: ‘We believe in God, and in what has been revealed to us, and in what has been revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and the tribes, and to Jesus and Moses and (other) prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them; and surely to Him do we all submit (muslimun)’ (84). If anyone seeks other than islam as a din (religion), it will not be accepted of him, and in the hereafter he will be among the losers”(3:85).

    "The foregoing argument also holds for the identically worded verses 9:33 and 61:9 (Note 226/Ch. 3), some scholars quote to claim exclusivity of Islamic faith:

    "To leave no doubts about the universality of its message, the Qur’an warns those who take a restrictive view of their faith that their desires will not prevail and that whoever does evil will be requited accordingly.

    “Neither your desires, nor the desires of the People of the Book (can prevail): whoever does evil will be requited accordingly, and he will not find any protector or helper besides God” (4:123).

    --------
    The point to bear in mind is in this era, when people have access to translation of the Qur'an, we must not commit kufr by quoting past scholars who only upheld the opinions of their mentors. It is not for me to judge their faith but I have no doubt that this day, any Muslim who has read the Qur'an and quotes the divisive and restrictive interpretations of past scholars only creates confusion and misunderstanding, as such interpretations stand in stark denial of the Qur'anic message and give a wrong signal to the others.  By muhammad yunus - 3/10/2015 9:06:54 AM



  • Shahin Sb,

    If the moderates subscribe to the Sunni theology of 'all non-followers of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) are kafir', then all bets are off since the Quran prohibits friendship with the Kafirin. I will also show you books by acclaimed moderates who do not think that "let there be no compulsion in religion" and "to you (those who reject Islam peacefully) be your way and to me mine" are to be taken literally and valid at all times." The Islamophobes are not wrong while accusing the Muslims of practicing "Taqiya" and saying that these are relevant and quoted when the Muslims are in a weak position and are superseded by other verses when the Muslims gain strength. The proof of it is in the books of the moderates who say that the command in the Quran after the conquest of Mecca, was to slaughter all the Mushrikin irrespective of whether they were peaceful rejecters, or simply those who did not accept Islam, even if these people  had never practiced any aggression against the Muslims. They quote all kinds of sources to "establish" this utter rubbish falsifying the Quran. They are moderates without a doubt because they say that this suspension of the application of the cited verses was by God and will never apply again. All this is to support an elaborate theory of the "Divine Plan of God" that is full of holes and historical inaccuracies.  The meaning of the Quran is twisted to suit the theory! 

    I will also show how they depart from literalism to make their points.

    People mix up the ahadith and the Old/New Testaments to make their points and "interpret". No matter what they do, I hope to establish, in the next 10 days or so, that a literalist and a fundamentalist understanding of the Quran sans context imported from other sources,  leads to discovering the true meaning, after which there is no need to interpret. That is a tall claim but I hope to at least show the way in a significant manner.

    Such an understanding will show that the Quran is literally and fundamentally a religion of peace and moderation. Does not the Quran literally say so?

    For the time being (next 10 days or less) you will have to be patient. 
    By Observer - 3/10/2015 7:17:49 AM



  • But this is not correct Observer Sb as far as moderates are concerned. You say: "Unsurprisingly, the interpretationists are neither able to accept what I say, nor able to refute it because both groups do not hold "let there be no compulsion in religion" and "to you (those who reject Islam) be your way and to me mine" are to be taken literally and valid at all times."

    A literal reading of verses like La ikraha fid Deen (There is no compulsion in religion or Lakum Deeanakum waleya Deen (For you your religion, for me mine) is a cornerstone of every moderate's philosophy. These are constitutive verses of the Quran and eternal in significance. They are valid for us for all time.

    The problem arises with contextual and allegorical verses when they are taken literally or even interpreted according to one's own understanding. The problem arises when so-called militant verses are taken literally, considered valid for all time as exhortations of God to all Muslims forever, and followed as they are today. ISIS leaders may have their own designs, but our children and youth, boys and girls who are running away from our well-appointed homes and private schools are doing so out of a literal reading of these so-called militant aggressive verses and considering them universal in nature. Being uncreated, all Qur’anic verses are considered and taught in madrasas as having eternal value as guidance for all time to come.

    One allegorical verse is being interpreted to mean (you can check on You Tube, I don't have the url now with key words Islamic eschatology, Islamic scholarship that studies the signs of end-times, Yawm al-Qiyāmah) that Malhama (Armageddon) is only two years away. Daesh (Islamic State) is said to be fighting the end-time battle Malhama. This is also one reason why our youth are running away to engage in the battles end-times, the Malhama.

    I therefore, think, merely literal reading of all Qur’anic verses, without reference to the context of contextual verses, or even personal, contorted interpretations of allegorical verses will be a disaster, is already leading to disaster.

    We must treat Quran as a created work by God which contains constitutive, contextual and allegorical verses which have to be treated by us in different times and different contexts differently. Which means that we should observe Qur’anic advise that we use our rationality and think all the time before accepting anything blindly. A literal reading of all Qur’anic verses cannot be acceptable.

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/10/2015 5:48:17 AM



  • Kufr = Denial or rejection of the Truth = Concealing the Truth = Ingratitude = Choosing to live in the darkness of ignorance = Hiding or covering something = Closing eyes to the light of Truth = Stubborn denial of the Truth = Concealing the Truth = Knowingly oppose the Truth = Uncritical adherence to ancestral views = Trying to be with the majority without discernment.

    Kafir = One given to Kufr = One who adamantly denies the truth = Commonly translated as ‘infidel’ = Derivatively and positively, a farmer who hides the seed under the soil (57:20). Therefore, Kufr or Kafir does not apply to the unaware, anyone to whom the Message has not been conveyed or reached.

    By Naseem Ahmed - 3/10/2015 5:19:11 AM



  • Shahin Sb,

     Let me state my position once again.

    Islam is fundamentally and literally a religion of peace and moderation as per the Quran

    Anybody can take me up on this and refute it. Since I have written several articles based on the Quran, they can choose any article for their refutation.

    The most recent ones are:

    Who Is A Kafir In The Quran? (Part 1): 'Kafir,' 'Mushrik' and 'Idolater' are not synonyms

    URL of Part 1: http://www.newageislam.com/islam-and-pluralism/by-observer-in-new-age-islam/who-is-a-kafir-in-the-quran?-(part-1)---kafir,---mushrik--and--idolater--are-not-synonyms/d/101509

    Who Is A Kafir In The Quran? (Part 2): Muslim– Non-Muslim Relationship

    URL of Part 2:  http://www.newageislam.com/islam-and-pluralism/observer-in-new-age-islam/who-is-a-kafir-in-the-quran?-(part-2)--muslim–-non-muslim-relationship/d/101525

    Who Is A Kafir In The Quran? (Part 3): Why Kufr Is A Relative Concept While Shirk, Idol Worship Etc. Have Fixed Meanings

    URL of Part 3: http://newageislam.com/islam-and-pluralism/observer-for-new-age-islam/who-is-a-kafir-in-the-quran?-(part-3)--why-kufr-is-a-relative-concept-while-shirk,-idol-worship-etc-have-fixed-meanings/d/101618

    Who is a Kafir in the Quran? (Part 4) Defining Kufr

    URL of Part 4: http://newageislam.com/islam-and-pluralism/observer-for-new-age-islam/who-is-a-kafir-in-the-quran?-(part-4)-defining-kufr/d/101695

    Who is a Muslim in the Quran?

    http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/observer-for-new-age-islam/who-is-a-muslim-in-the-quran?/d/101862

    Now if you are saying that this is not true, and being a moderate requires not being a fundamentalist and a literalist, then the argument of the extremist and the Islamophobe stands proven. Isn't their argument that the moderates are not true Muslims and the extremists are the true representative of Islam because the moderates are not fundamentalists and literalists and the extremist are?

    The problem actually is that neither the "moderates" nor the extremists are fundamentalists and literalists. They both are interpretationists

    Unsurprisingly, the interpretationists are neither able to accept what I say, nor able to refute it because both groups do not hold "let there be no compulsion in religion" and "to you (those who reject Islam) be your way and to me mine" are to be taken literally and valid at all times. They also hold that a person who has not accepted Islam is a Kafir which I have shown is literally untrue. By Observer - 3/9/2015 10:00:54 PM



  • Mr. Sultan Shahin has very rightly pointed out that literalism is the rootcause of murder and mayhem in the name of so called militant verses of the Quran.  Until we start contextualising the verses of Quran according to their Shane nuzul or reason for revelation,  we cannot hope any Islamic reformation in today's Muslim socities. By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/9/2015 1:45:11 PM



  • But Observer Saheb, God also asks us to use our rationality. Literalism may be good when our rationality tells us this is an essential, constitutive, and non- allegorical verse. What about the contextual verses, however, which ask us to kill the kafir, whoever you think the kafir is. You had to write a long four-part article to find and explain why the word kafir means what you say it does.
     So far your elucidation, though seemingly logical and accepted as such by a few, has not had wide acceptance. Indeed, the classical scholars on this forum too have not been motivated enough to find time to study your presentation. So you can see what literalism will continue to do. It's literalism that is behind most of the strife today. Islamist terrorists use literal meanings of Quranic verses and ahadees to justify their brutality.
     And what brutality! One finds it difficult to believe that any human being and on top of that a Muslim like us, belonging to our peaceful faith can be as inhuman as this. 
    All this is the result of literalism. At least our children and youth, boys and girls, who are joining this brutality are doing so out of their literal reading of Quran and Hadees. 
    By Sultan Shahin - 3/9/2015 7:56:39 AM



  • Fundamentalist is a good word. Even literalist. 

    Fundamentalists are those who go by the Quran and not the works of human scholarship.

    Literalists are those that go by the literal word of God. For example: "Let there be no compulsion in Religion"

    It is those who are non literalists and non fundamentalists who "interpret" to suit their ends or ignore/treat as abrogated what is not convenient. A fundamentalist is one who insists on deriving the meaning after taking into account all that is relevant on the subject before arriving at the correct meaning and avoids interpreting. Interpreting  means putting his own spin on the subject.

    If Islam is truly a religion of peace and moderation, then only by being a fundamentalist and literalist will one achieve both peace and moderation.

    By Observer - 3/9/2015 5:55:43 AM



  • Dear Shanavas, 

    The Masses and a large body of so-called Ulama, radical intellectuals, rationalists conflate fiqh, that is human interpretation of the divine Sharia with the divine Sharia itself. In the like manner, they conflate the Hadith with the Qur'an in that they feel the knowledge of the Qur'an can only be acquired by way of hadith. Technically, these claims stand in stark contradiction to the truth: neither the so-called Islamic Sharia Law (which is nothing but cumulative fiqhi rulings) and the ahadith (which are largely apocryphal dubbed 'Sahih' meaning the people in narration chain were reputed for their piety, but they couldn't be interviewed for the veracity of reports attributed to them, let alone the Prophet) are infallible nor an eternal part of Islamic message - except their strictly religious and ritualistic contents.

    This writer is constantly reminding the Muslim readers about the grievous error in their notions so that they cannot have the excuse for their obvious manipulation of the Qur'anic message to oppress and dehumanize their womenfolk, hate the others, languish in supremacist notions, circumvent the social, moral and ethical tenets (ahkamat) of the Qur'an and also have the religious sanction of committing heinous crimes from terrorism, flesh trade, child abuse to even incest in the name of Islam. No doubt it is a fractional minority that is committing heinous crimes in the name of Islam, but if they are not exposed, the heinous crimes become part of Islam and hence this commentators, as a witness to the Qur'anic message is obliged to constantly voice his concern on this very serious issue that may displease those bent on denying the truth - the kafirin of this era among the Ulamas, radical intellectuals and rationalists. 
    By muhammad yunus - 3/9/2015 5:38:48 AM



  • Many argue that there is no definition of fundamentalism and fundamentalist. I suggest that the following definition for New Age Islam so that there us no confusion for readers.
    Definition of Muslim Fundamentalism and Fundamentalist
    Ordinary contemporary Muslims often are confused Divine Law with Fiqh (understanding of Divine Law).  Both are different things. fiqh (“understanding”) is only a human articulation and elaboration of the Divine Law through jurisprudential analysis  (“ijtihad”) of scriptural sources. Thus, “Sharia” is the Divine Law of God, and fiqh is the body of legal rules created for those who want to live by that Law. Sharia is Divine incontestable and infallible and perfect while fiqh (understanding of sharia) is of human origin, and so imperfect and potentially flawed. Thus, for Muslims there has always been one Law of God (Sharia), but many schools of Fiqh, such as Maliki, Shari, Hanafi, Humbali, Jafari, etc, articulating Divine Law here on earth. only God knows who is right and no Muslim religious-legal scholar  (fuquha) can insist that his or her conclusions (Fiqh) are the correct articulation of Sharia (Divine Law)  as against all others.
    I define: Muslim fundamentalists are those Muslims who believe Fiqh (understandings of Sharia) are Divine, perfect, infallible and such a belief is fundamentalism. By Shanavas - 3/9/2015 4:04:24 AM



  • THE TRUTH IS THE AUTHENTICITY OF AHADITH INCLUDED IN THE SAHIH HADEETH WAS DEBATED BY THE EARLY COMPILERS OF HADITH THEMSELVES.
    Imam Muslim, raises this point, albeit obliquely, in the foreword (Muqaththimah) to his compilation. He talks about an arbitrary critical scholar, who would authenticate an account, only if there was clear evidence that its narrators and recipients in each of the preceding generations had personally met at least once; but would be suspect of those accounts that lacked this evidence. Muslim then goes on to state: “If we discuss about all those accounts which are held authentic before the learned, and suspect by this (arbitrary) scholar - we would simply be tired (because they are so large in number).”

    Imam al-Bukhari, quotes a tradition that calls for dismissing all those accounts, which conflict with the Qur’anic message:

    “Why do people impose conditions which are not in Allah’s book (kitab il lah)? Whoever imposes such conditions as are not in Allah’s Laws (kitab il lah), then that condition is invalid even if he imposes one hundred such conditions, for Allah’s conditions (as stated in the Qur’an) are truth and more valid” -  Sahih al-Bukhari, English translation by Mohsin Khan, New Delhi 1984, Acc. 364, 735, 893/Vol.3.

    By muhammad yunus - 3/8/2015 10:34:24 PM



  • Dear pcs, Quran being created doesn't mean by any stretch of imagination created by the Prophet (pbuh), it means created by God. The debate is on whether it is word of God, created by God or Divine like God, God Himself, another God, fit only for reverence and parrot-like recitation (Qir'at) the way most Muslims treat the Quran. As God Himself, it is considered unapproachable, not necessary to understand, be treated as a book, even if containing words of God. Perhaps for Arabs, or Arabic-speaking people, it won't be such a big issue, as they would understand the message, even if they are simply reciting without making a particular effort to understand. 

    Anyway, this discussion has nothing to do with your question about "created by Prophet." I could not understand your statement: "As per hadees, there are few claims by Umar -2nd khalifa - that he said so and the next revelation -was his words !!! "

    If there is any such hadees, please give some reference and quote the hadees. In any case hades doesn't have much credibility for any rational Muslim in terms of its authenticity. A Muslim may or may not consider any particular hadees authentic.  Even nice-sounding ahadees, compatible with Quran and the character of the Prophet as a saint, do not necessarily have to be authentic. Some very nice were discovered in early years by the collectors to have been concocted by otherwise very good Muslims who put some nice thoughts into the mouth of the Prophet just so these thoughts would have greater credibility. Don't forget that ahadees were collected  centuries after the demise of the prorphet; out of six hundred thousand ahadees, only around four thousand were found to have correct chain of narration, meaning that the people mentioned in the chain of narration actually existed in that era, and there was a possibility of these ahadees being authentic. This is all that collectors of sahih ahadees claim. But if Muslims, and admittedly most Muslims, consider them authentic, that is their problem.

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/8/2015 1:20:10 PM



  • The book is a created one - agreed

    As per hades,there are few claims by Umar -2nd khalifa - that he said so and the next  revelation  -was his words !!!

    Some educated people should read this and explain  who created the book .. God or prophet ? 

    By pcs - 3/8/2015 10:35:13 AM



  • THE NEXT PART OF THE VERSE

     

    The vast majority of Muslim clerics say the group cherry picks what it wants from Islam's holy book, the Quran, and from accounts of Muhammad's actions and sayings, known as the Hadith. It then misinterprets many of these, while ignoring everything in the texts that contradicts those hand-picked selections, these experts say.

     

    The group's claim to adhere to the prophecy and example of Muhammad helps explain its appeal among young Muslim radicals eager to join its ranks. Much like Nazi Germany evoked a Teutonic past to inspire its followers, Islamic State propaganda almost romantically depicts its holy warriors as re-establishing the caliphate, contending that ideal of Islamic rule can come only through blood and warfare.

     

    It maintains its worst brutalities — beheading captives, taking women and girls as sex slaves and burning to death a captured Jordanian pilot — only prove its purity in following what it contends is the prophet's example, a claim that appalls the majority of the world's 1.6 billion Muslims.

     

    Lee Keath & Hamza Hendawi

    How 'Islamic' is the Islamic State? Not very, say experts

     

    The Christian Science Monitor

    March 2, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.facebook.com/readingisliving

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/4/2015 10:00:40 AM



  • TO TEACH CHILDREN HOW TO THINK

     

    In public schools, however, disinterested teachers with dismal salaries, combined with a lack of regulatory frameworks for ensuring the quality of education, translates into poor capabilities of public school students. The last recourse available for aspiring younglings is the seminary, where not only is the education relatively cheap — or in most cases free — but so are the dining and lodging facilities. Seminaries face no trouble in raising funding for financing their education wings, since they appeal to the religio-charitable susceptibilities of their donors. However, because of their insistence on suppressing dissenting minds and their propagation of millenarian ideologies, contemporary Pakistan is yet to see genuine research coming out of such places.

     

    The problem is compounded further when you factor in the different curricula that are taught in each of these three categories of schools, as well as the dissimilar avenues of schooling available to the differing genders. Some schools emphasise the instruction of English language over everything else, whereas others reject western education in its entirety. Furthermore, gender discrimination manifests itself in terms of the number of primary, secondary and higher-level schools available for girls, and helps little in disrupting the rigid perception that affords only a limited role to females in our society.

     

    However, even if we can control such imbalances, there is a major disconnect between the texts that students are made to learn in class and what they experience in their real lives. While some of the more theoretical aspects of the curriculum may never be used in practice, most of the stuff has to do with daily experience. Be it the sciences or the arts, the real purpose of education is to make sense of the world around us but Pakistani students remain forever stuck in an artificial divide between the classroom and everything outside of it.

     

    The purpose of any and all education must be to teach children how to think, not what to think.

     

    Syed Rashid Munir

    E for education, R for reform Link to the Article

     

    Daily Times               

    March 3, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.facebook.com/readingisliving

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/4/2015 8:56:36 AM



  • OUR CHILDREN DESERVE A CONSISTENT INTELLECTUAL FOUNDATION  

     

    The inconsistency in this curriculum is obvious. For example, at the outset of the school year, my son brought home a list of student rights and responsibilities. Had he already read the lesson on fact vs. opinion, he might have noted that the supposed rights of other students were based on no more than opinions.

    According to the school’s curriculum, it certainly wasn’t true that his classmates deserved to be treated a particular way — that would make it a fact. Similarly, it wasn’t really true that he had any responsibilities — that would be to make a value claim a truth. It should not be a surprise that there is rampant cheating on college campuses: If we’ve taught our students for 12 years that there is no fact of the matter as to whether cheating is wrong, we can’t very well blame them for doing so later on.

     

    Indeed, in the world beyond grade school, where adults must exercise their moral knowledge and reasoning to conduct themselves in the society, the stakes are greater. There, consistency demands that we acknowledge the existence of moral facts. If it’s not true that it’s wrong to murder a cartoonist with whom one disagrees, then how can we be outraged? If there are no truths about what is good or valuable or right, how can we prosecute people for crimes against humanity? If it’s not true that all humans are created equal, then why vote for any political system that doesn’t benefit you over others?

     

    Our schools do amazing things with our children. And they are, in a way, teaching moral standards when they ask students to treat one another humanely and to do their schoolwork with academic integrity. But at the same time, the curriculum sets our children up for doublethink. They are told that there are no moral facts in one breath even as the next tells them how they ought to behave.

     

    We can do better. Our children deserve a consistent intellectual foundation. Facts are things that are true. Opinions are things we believe. Some of our beliefs are true. Others are not. Some of our beliefs are backed by evidence. Others are not. Value claims are like any other claims: either true or false, evidenced or not. The hard work lies not in recognizing that at least some moral claims are true but in carefully thinking through our evidence for which of the many competing moral claims is correct. That’s a hard thing to do. But we can’t sidestep the responsibilities that come with being human just because it’s hard.

     

    That would be wrong.

     

    Justin P. McBrayer

    Why Our Children Don’t Think There Are Moral Facts

     

    The New York Times       

    March 2, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.facebook.com/readingisliving

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/3/2015 11:26:41 AM



  • I WAS SEDUCED BY THE IDEOLOGY

     

    Challenging the notion of statehood, democratic theory and Middle Eastern power politics certainly takes a degree of intellectual sophistication, but it does not make an idealistic young person less vulnerable to exploitation by skilled recruiters. Regardless of good grades, they may suffer from a crisis of identity or grievances that radicalizers can prey on.

     

    The desire to impose any religion on society is an inherently repugnant idea, but it is not so among many British Muslims. For decades, we’ve allowed Islamist ideologues to work unfettered across our communities, to the extent that Islamism has become the default form of political expression for many young Muslims in Britain and across Europe.

     

    The leap from being an ordinary British teenager to joining the Islamic State is huge. But it is a much smaller step for someone raised in a climate in which dreams of resurrecting a caliphate and enforcing a distorted form of Islam are normalized. Until we confront this seeming legitimacy of Islamist discourse at the grass roots, we will not stop the scourge of radicalization.

     

    Maajid Nawaz

    The Education of ‘Jihadi John’ Link to the Article

     

    The New York Times

    March 3, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.facebook.com/readingisliving

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/3/2015 11:24:37 AM



  • A MOSQUE AND A TEMPLE EXIST IN HARMONY

     

    Perhaps serious revision of text books that portray minorities as the other could be the first step in this direction. Pakistani state’s attempts to overhaul the country in the face of existential nihilistic Taliban threat would remain meaningless unless well-being and equality for minorities is not ensured. It is now or never for Pakistan to understand diversity is a strength that needs to be nurtured. The sooner it is realised, the better it would be for the state at crossroads and corroding from within courtesy Zia’s toxic legacy of exclusion dating back to the 1980s.

     

    Sameer Arshad

    Pakistani Hindus are a resilient minority tooLink to the Article  

     

    The Times of India

    February 25, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.mohammedrafiqlodhia.wordpress.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/1/2015 11:33:53 AM



  • A WITCH-HUNT ON CAMPUSES

     

    Hardliners have long been waiting for an excuse to pounce. In November members of the Chinese Red Culture Institute, a group of scholars and retired senior officials, held a meeting in Beijing at which they complained that Marxism was in retreat and that scholars with Western backgrounds had “sneaked” into academia and government, according to Chinese Social Sciences Today, a journal. “Those who smash the Communist Party’s cooking pot...we will take away their bowls,” participants are said to have vowed.

     

    Class Struggle

    The Economist

    February 28, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.mohammedrafiqlodhia.wordpress.com

     

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/28/2015 10:26:58 PM



  • OPEN MINDS WILL MAKE A LASTING CHANGE

     

    There are those in Afghanistan who do not want women and girls to be educated. If we are to make lasting change, we need to open the minds of all who are still ignorant. They need to see that an educated girl or boy is not a threat to their culture, but is someone who will help to improve the whole community.

     

    The women who come to our centers feel the same way. Men and boys need to be educated, not ignored. They need to be included in workshops and seminars with women and girls so that they can listen and exchange ideas and know that education is not a threat to them but is something that improves the lives of everyone.

     

    Dr. Sakena Yacoobi

    In Afghanistan, teaching men that education is not a threat

     

    The Christian Science Monitor

    February 19, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.mohammedrafiqlodhia.wordpress.com By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/28/2015 10:24:12 PM



  • A SETTING FOR A MORALLY INSTRUCTIVE YARN

     

    The American conversation about Islam may be noisy and confusing, but it isn’t new. And these forgotten images remind us to avoid the old tendency to portray Muslims—now millions of our fellow citizens—solely as caricatured villains in scary stories or cardboard paragons in moral ones.

     

    Peter Manseau

    America’s Forgotten Images of Islam Link to the Article

     

    The Wall Street Journal

    February 27, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.mohammedrafiqlodhia.wordpress.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/28/2015 8:59:58 PM



  • In 1400 years Muslims have killed the blasphemers of the prophet. what is the result? If God allows the God, the Quran and prophet be blasphemed, why Muslims are killing and are being killed for blasphemy? or Allah has commanded Muslims to do so?
    why there is always a cry and demand for heads of blasphemers and apostates?
    Islam needs more apostates and blasphemers.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/26/2015 10:35:15 PM



  • Solidarity with Cherlie Hebdo!
    The coalition of state terrorists -along with 40 heads of states, displayed their unity in Paris on 11/01/15 and showed their deep hatred against the Muslims. They killed more than a million in Iraq and Afghanistan in the recent wars. Did they show a single moment’s silence in their memory? France herself killed 1.5 million Algerians in its war of occupation in the sixties. Did they pay any homage to those innocents who were killed there? Recently the Christians killed thousands of Muslims in Central African Republic. Where is the solidarity with the innocent victims of the genocide? 
    But they showed solidarity with Cherlie Hebdo! They chanted chorus not only in Paris but also in all major European cities: “We are all Cherlie”. What does that mean? It means, like hateful Cherlie Hebdo they too declared that they are equal abuser and hater of our beloved prophet (peace be upon him).  They are not ready to retreat an inch from that abusive path. The butcher of Gaza -the Israeli PM was cordially welcomed in their midst.
    They talk about protecting western values and culture. Do we need any lecture to understand the western values and culture? Didn't they display those values and culture during the last several centuries all over the world? Is it not the values and culture of military aggression, occupation, colonisation, imperialism, ethnic cleansing, slave-trading, genocide, World Wars, gas chambers, dropping atom bombs, waterboarding, Guantanamo Bay, Abu Gharib, Sabra, Satilla and Gaza? They killed 75 million only in two World Wars! Who else can match their brutality? Their war machines are still not withdrawn from the Muslim lands.
    "THOU SHALL NOT KILL," is one of the Ten (10) COMMANDMENTS   of God Almighty given
    to Prophet Moses (Peace be upon him), literally engraved in stone, which cannot be changed.
    If anyone kills another human being without due Justice, he is neither a Jew, nor a Christian,  
    nor a Muslim, because he disobeys one of the COMMANDMENTS of God Almighty. PERIOD!
    By Dr. M. A. QAZI - 2/26/2015 9:27:33 PM



  • Thanks Lodhia Saheb for sharing thoughts of so many intellectuals with appropriate headlines. 
    Takfirism (apostatising, denouncing other Muslims as Kafir or Mushrik and deserving death) cannot be countered with Takfirism. This is what Muslims have done throughout history and look where we are. Hardly any Muslim today is Muslim in the eyes of all other Muslims. We are all Khwarij (renegades, outlaws of Islam) for some or the other Mullah. If IS militants or The Taliban (literally students of Islamic schools or madrasas) are renegades, what about the Salafi-Wahhabi theologians whose books they were taught in their madrasas. If the murderer of Governor Salman Taseer is an outlaw of Islam, then what about the Bareilwi community members who continue to support him, throw rose petals on him, at least do not oppose him either in Pakistan or India. There was hardly any one denouncing him in the Pakistani or Indian Urdu Press.
    So let us moderates not take to a Takfiri path. There is no end to it. 
    By Sultan Shahin - 2/26/2015 9:02:55 PM



  • THE STRUGGLE WITHIN ISLAM  

     

    President Obama is inclined not to describe the Islamic State as “Islamic,” and the king supports this, saying, “They’re looking for legitimacy that they don’t have inside of Islam.” But the truth is that it’s irrelevant what Obama wants to call these terrorists. What matters is what the king and other locals here in Jordan and across the Arab world call them. And uniformly, they choose not to call it the Islamic State, ISIS or ISIL. Instead, they call it Daesh, a rough acronym that is seen as derogatory because it sounds like the Arabic word “daes,” which means to crush underfoot. The word that King Abdullah prefers is “khawarij,” which translates to “outlaws” or “renegades” of Islam.

     

    “It’s not a Western fight,” the king said to me. “This is a fight inside of Islam where everybody comes together against these outlaws.” He wants international support and involvement, of course, but is wary of Western troops. Jordan is on the front line of this battle, but other countries, from Iraq to Egypt, are finally joining in, and not just on the battlefield. This week, the head of Cairo’s Al-Azhar University, Sunni Islam’s most prestigious academy, denounced “extremist violent groups” that have “corrupt interpretations” of Islam.

     

    Fareed Zakaria

    How to fight an ideological war Link to the Article

    February 26, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.mohammedrafiqlodhia.wordpress.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/26/2015 7:47:16 PM



  • THE ROOTS OF EXTREMISM

     

    The doctrines of jihad and takfir are central to the debate. Extremists interpret jihad as mandating offensive holy war, though they may disagree about when and against whom it should be waged. The evidence from the hadith (the Prophet’s sayings) and renowned scholars that Islam is a religion of the sword is “so profuse that only a heretic would argue otherwise”, claims the most recent issue of Dabiq, the magazine of Islamic State (IS). Extremists differ, too, about takfir, the process whereby Muslims declare other Muslims to be apostates or unbelievers, for which the penalty is death. Al-Qaeda applies the doctrine with some limits to avoid alienating Muslims from its cause; IS invokes takfir wholesale, especially against Shias, perhaps in the belief that cinematic gore is the stronger lure.

     

    Mainstream clerics are trying to rebut such views. “Jihad does not mean holy war but striving to achieve peace and anything good in obedience to Allah,” says Dauda Bello, an imam from Nigeria’s north-eastern region, where Boko Haram, an Islamist insurgent group, rampages. Last year 120 Muslim scholars wrote to Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, IS’s leader, saying that he had misconstrued Islam by ignoring the context of the Koran, classical teaching and the current era. Takfir, they said, can only be pronounced on those who have openly professed unbelief. It is properly carried out only by ulema (a group of recognised experts in sacred law and theology), which will first offer the opportunity to repent. To prove the point, al-Azhar will not call IS non-Muslims.

     

    The Economist

    February 28, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.mohammedrafiqlodhia.wordpress.com

    By THE ROOTS OF EXTREMISM - 2/26/2015 3:09:00 PM



  • THE PEOPLE OF THE BOOK

     

    The relations of Jews, Christians, Israel and the entire Judeo-Christian Western world with Islamic world are determined not by the proclaimed attractive slogans but ultimately by the fact that both sides are the people of the Book, and they are guided by their Books. The Jews are famous as the people of the Torah; the Christians revere the Bible, and the Muslims are guided by the Koran. Thus all people are the people of the Book – people of their Books. And even atheists are a sort of people of the Book since they follow the moral prescripts of their Books without acknowledging the Supreme Power as the author. At the core of current adversary relationships of Jews and Christians with Islamists are profound differences in the moral prescripts of Torah/Bible and Koran.

     

    The majority in the Judeo-Christian world believes in the unique moral and economic benefits of Western civilization based on the moral concepts of the Jewish Torah and the Christian Bible – that is Ten Commandments and their derivatives. They consider their duty to help the rest of the world to realize the advantages of this civilization and to begin gradually moving to this civilization’s moral prescripts. Of course in this civilization there are killers, rapists, terrorists, but these days they don’t justify their actions by referring to the Torah/Bible prescripts – they are sinning against those prescripts.

     

    The majority in the Islamic world follows the Koran’s guidance. For Muslims, Koran is the ultimate life guidance, and Koran is calling for eradication of unbelievers-infidels with no mercy for Jews and some mercy for Christians. All terrorist acts of Islamists against Jews and Christians, all abusive actions against their own women and murderous actions against their people with non-traditional life-style are being made with the reference to Koran’ guidance. While Judeo-Christian world acknowledges and accepts the validity of other religions, Islamic world is trying to eliminate all other religions but Islam.

     

    Vladimir Minkov

    How to handle Islamic assault on Jews, Israel and Judeo-Christian world

     

    Link to the Article

     

    The Jerusalem Post

    February 25, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/26/2015 11:32:59 AM



  • Good Morning Dev Ji,

     

    You have been persistent in passing along “Philosophical Thoughts, to ponder over. I appreciate your kind gesture. Though, I must point out that New Age Islam forum is not for philosophical discourse so to speak. In short, to your question, “Where do I stand?” Here is my answer:

     

     

    My fellow Muslims are not bothered to read any philosophical discourses. Meanwhile, I would like to invite you to visit the following blogs:


     Blessed Are The Meek
     Reading is Living
     We The Moderate Muslims
    Knowledge Is Power

     

    Perhaps, we can exchange private emails. For your kind information, my email address is: rafiq@thelodhiacenter.org

     

    Have a cheerful day. May Bhagwaan/Ishwar bless you and your loved ones.

     

    Compassionately yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia           

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/25/2015 11:42:59 PM



  • As to the million dollar question, “When will that day ever come?”, It can be hastened I think  Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  saheb  when we begin with ourself.

    I have not been able to make out where you stand on the question of the Quran being created or uncreated. I gather you tend to be a conformist in this matter.

    The articles and dogmas of a religion are mind-made things and, if you cling to them and shut yourself up in a code of life made out for you, you do not know and cannot know the truth of the Spirit that lies beyond all codes and dogmas. When you stop at a religious creed and tie yourself in it, taking it for the only truth in the world, you stop the advance and widening of your inner soul. But if you look at religion from another angle, it need not always be an obstacle to all men. If you regard it as one of the higher activities of humanity and if you can see in it the aspirations of man without ignoring the imperfection of all man-made things, it may well be a kind of help for you to approach the spiritual life. Taking it up in a serious and earnest spirit, you can try to find out what truth is there, what aspiration lies hidden in it, what divine inspiration has undergone transformation and deformation here by the human mind and a human organisation, and with an appropriate mental stand you can get religion even as it is to throw some light on your way and to lend some support to your spiritual endeavour.
    By Dev - 2/25/2015 10:47:30 PM



  • A GENUINE AMERICAN SENTIMENT ON THE MIDDLE EAST CRISIS

     

    If Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Bibi) were smart, he could simultaneously avoid being used as an anti-Obama Republican tool, present himself as a statesman and peacemaker and improve U.S.-Israel relations.

     

    What if Bibi thanked America for helping build Israel’s economy, supporting it domestically and internationally, and consistently vetoing anti-Israel U.N. resolutions? Then he could mention that America’s in a bind: Its Iraq and Afghanistan wars helped create al-Qaida and the Islamic State, destabilize the Middle East and surrounded Israel with violence. America subverted, vilified and sanctioned Iran, helped kill hundreds of thousands of Iranians and Kurds with U.S. weapons, and now asks for help to defeat the Islamic State, while making anti-nuclear demands. How would you expect Iran to react?

     

    Israel is dealing with 4 million stateless Palestinians, refugees from the 1948 war that Egypt, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, Iraq, Saudi and Iran started. Only Jordan helped resettlethose refugees. America needs to help pressure all seven countries to help resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But that won’t happen until the U.S. stops making a mess of the Middle East.

     

    It’s time America helped rebuild Middle East economies — so their unemployed young men and women can go to work instead of war. It’s time for America to stop propping up dictators, start supporting democracy, fight corruption, and move away from dependence on Middle East oil.

     

    Martin Westerman

    Netanyahu’s visit: The U.S. is in a bind Link to the Article

     

    The Seattle Times

    February 23, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/25/2015 3:28:05 PM



  • THOSE WHO EMBRACE JIHADIST IDEAS ON SOCIAL MEDIA

     

    Instead, we should think small, in part because in the West the problem involves small numbers of potential terrorists: thousands, not millions. The focus should be on high-risk communities, both Muslim and non-Muslim. Prisons, for example, are breeders of terrorists, and ensuring that radicals do not dominate religious instruction behind bars and that there are programs (and intelligence agents) in place to stop terrorist recruitment is vital.

     

    Particularly important is targeting what terrorism expert William McCants calls “law -abiding supporters” — those who embrace jihadist ideas on social media or are otherwise clearly at risk of joining a terrorist group, but have not yet broken the law. Using community interventions and other means to move these people off the path of violence will prevent the stark choice of jail or Syria, and give family members of potential recruits a reason to seek out government help.

     

    Daniel Byman

    Five myths about violent extremismLink to the Article

     

    The Washington Post

    February 13, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/25/2015 3:04:47 PM



  • In response to  my "polite comment to Asif Reyaz Saheb" which came to you as a surprise, you are not being very polite, if I may say so, Lodhia Saheb. .Why on earth would I "encourage those commentators from insulting Islam?" 

     As for insults, different people may have different parameters. I feel insulted at blind faith in Ahadees as "authentic"  sayings of the Prophet, while knowing full well that some of them are scurrilous in nature and clear attempts at character assassinations of the Prophet.

    You feel insulted when someone quotes a hadees to show you a mirror. If you don't like your face in the mirror, please do something about your face, don't break the mirror and don't abuse the mirror-holder. I have, of course, censored ahadees on this site, as they were truly unprintable. But, in principle, no Islamic website should be expected to ban Qur'anic verses and ahadees, as long as Muslims consider all verses of Quran, including the contextual and belligerent as eternal guidance for them, and have blind faith in all ahadees in the six so-called authentic books of ahadees. Let us do something about this blind faith, instead of feeling insulted. Feeling insulted, breaking mirrors, abusing or killing mirror-holders, is not going to help. It only makes us an object of ridicule.

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/24/2015 1:53:55 PM



  • Dear Lodhia Saheb, You are "simply dumbfounded" about my "expressing concern" at Ghulam Ghouse Saheb being forced to reply to a question on which he would want to remain silent. Lodhia Saheb, everything has to be done within a limit. It's ok to ask questions, even to remind once or twice, but if someone wants to maintain silence on some question, do not hound him. Silence itself is a form of communication sometimes. Try to interpret it.

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/24/2015 1:47:36 PM



  • THE INFLUENCE OF WESTERN POLITICAL THINKING

     

    A fast-growing number of families are sending their children to America earlier to study (and moving with them) as well. In 2013 about 32,000 Chinese received visas for study at secondary schools in America, up from just 639 in 2005. The growth has occurred despite a steep decline since 2010 in the number of Chinese aged between 18 and 22, from 121m to 89m this year.

     

    Several converging trends explain this. One is growing demand for education beyond the compulsory nine years. In 2011 nearly 25m Chinese were enrolled in senior secondary school (the level feeding into universities), more than twice as many as in 2000. Helped by a rapid increase in recent years in university places, the number of undergraduates has soared. But the quality of instruction is poor at all but a handful of universities, where a total of just a few thousand places are available each year. As well as its Ivy League colleges, America has dozens of high-quality private universities and large colleges funded by states, such as Georgia Tech, which are world class.

     

    Another trend is growing middle-class wealth: many more Chinese families can now afford to send their children abroad. They prefer a well-rated university overseas to a second-tier option at home. Their choices are swayed by an educational system in China which many regard as too rigid and ideologically stifling. The world has also become more welcoming: visas to study have become easier for Chinese to obtain in many developed countries, especially America.

     

    American universities, keen to take on fee-paying Chinese students, have helped this by lobbying the government to issue more visas. They send teams to China’s best secondary schools to encourage applicants. Some American campuses have set up courses to help newcomers from China improve their English.

     

    The Economist

    February 21, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/24/2015 12:23:48 PM



  • IT SHOULD BE MADE CLEAR TO THE  MODERATE MUSLIMS

     

    There are thousands of different interpretations of the New Testament, yet these various versions of Christianity accept certain core beliefs, including turning the other cheek rather than forcibly trying to convert or kill those who do not believe. Not so with Islam. There are passages in the Koran that speak of the need to kill the unbeliever. A majority of Muslims, according to public opinion polls, reject those interpretations. However, opinion polls in the major Muslim countries show that there are substantial minorities that endorse at least some radical versions of Islam. After reviewing many of these polls, Middle East analyst Joshua Muravchik concluded that perhaps 20 percent of the world’s Muslims support terrorism “often or sometimes,” which amounts to some 300 million people.

     

    President Obama and other leaders frequently make the statement that the Islamic State, or ISIS, and other Islamic terrorist organizations are not Muslim. The facts do not bear them out. The Islamic State and the others can and do point to specific passages in the Koran that support their interpretation rather than those of the moderates. Most non-Muslim-majority countries have increasingly protected the rights of minority religions, while almost all majority Muslim countries have not. Few Muslim majority countries even pretend to be democracies, and many argue that their religion is incompatible with democracy. It should be made clear to the moderate Muslims (those who are tolerant of others’ beliefs and practices) that they are welcome in the United States and elsewhere, provided they do not seek or expect special privileges (restrictions on others’ speech or dress, new holidays or the imposition of Shariah law). That is, they should adapt to the majority culture, not vice versa. The act of putting a Koran in the toilet should not be considered a hate crime while doing the same with a Bible is labeled “art.”

     

    Richard W. Rahn

    Pushing back against Islamist aggression

     

    The Washington Times

    February 23, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/24/2015 11:44:51 AM



  • CORRUPT INTERPRETATIONS OF THE QUR’AN

     

    The rise of terrorism stemmed from “historical accumulations of tendencies of extremism in our heritage, which originated from corrupt interpretations of some of the texts of the Quran and the Sunnah,” he said, referring to the teachings of the Prophet Muhammad.

     

    Sheik Ahmed al-Tayeb

    Grand Imam of Al-Azhar

     

    Ahmed Al Omran & Tamer El-Ghobashy

    Top Cleric Calls for Educational Reform in Muslim WorldLink to the Article

     

    The Wall Street Journal

    February 23, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/24/2015 12:24:58 AM



  • Dear Dev Ji,

     

    There is a saying, “You learn something new every day.” For the sake of knowledge, I must express my immense appreciation to you for pointing me towards the link to the lecture of one fine gentleman named Rajiv Malhotra. I must honestly admit, it was quite a refreshing experience.

     

    Unfortunately, “Purva Puksha, is something my people have not yet learned. They have remained inward looking and unable to assimilate into another culture. Yes, it does take a lot of efforts to understand the other side. In order to know about others, one must begin by “Reading,” and “Learning.” The crux of the problem with the Muslims is that they have become intellectually stagnant for not wanting to “Read” anything that will help to enhance their knowledge about others.

     

    “Spark of Divinity, is instilled in each and every human that is born. I do agree with Rajiv Malhotra that we are all originally divine. Little wonder that every human finger print is different from one another.

     

    “Celebrate Diversity, is what Muslims must learn to do. That’s how the Creator wanted it from the get go. Therefore, we humans must embrace diversity and learn to live in peace and harmony with one another.

     

    Thank you kindly, Dev Ji, for sharing the knowledge. Muslims desperately need reformation of their minds. Like Rip Van Winkle, they have been sleeping for way too long now. The sooner they learn to practice “Purva Puksha, the more enlightening their minds will become. Now, the million dollar question is, “When will that day ever come?” Your guess is as good as mine!

     

    Have a blessed day. Heads Up & Smile.

     

    Affectionately yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/23/2015 11:43:23 PM



  • Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia saheb,
    The contribution of religions to human progress is a mixed bag of good and evil. There is a varying range of  human responses to it. Look at these responses in this discussion:
     Harees Sohail: MUSLIMS NEED REFORMATION. ISLAM NEVER NEEDS ANY REFORMATION. IS HE [SULTAN SHAHIN ] NOT MAKING A NEW SECT? 
    R. Upadhyay: It requires a high voltage campaign to clarify that except Quran, other religious scriptures are man made.
    Asif Reyaz: After all Hadith has to be defended against the onslaught on this forum.

    In this case all the circumspection seems to originate in the fear of violence that may not be peculiar Islam. Sultan Shahin's article however echos this sentiment which finds favour with me:
    Religion belongs to the higher mind of humanity. It is the effort of man's higher mind to approach, as far as lies in its power, something beyond it, something to which humanity gives the name God or Spirit or Truth or Faith or Knowledge or the Infinite, some kind of Absolute, which the human mind cannot reach and yet tries to reach. Religion may be divine in its ultimate origin; in its actual nature it is not divine but human. In truth we should speak rather of religions than of religion; for the religions made by man are many. These different religions, even when they had not the same origin, have most of them been made in the same way. [CWM2, 3:76]

    The problem hare seems to be the doctrine of Final Truth. Rajiv Malhotra explains it succulently. Just watch this video from minute 27 onwards:
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-XdG6v-RWk
    By Dev - 2/23/2015 9:32:18 PM



  • TOWARD A PATHWAY FOR POSITIVE, PROGRESSIVE HEALING

     

    Muslim leaders have to realize that grievances expressed on the streets—like

    the tragic murder of three Muslims in Chapel Hill, N.C., last week—become the

    material of terrorism videos, and we have to lead our communities out of a

    culture of “wound collecting,” and toward a pathway for positive, progressive

    healing.

     

    The alternative is more horrifying scenes like the video on the beach. But

    spilled blood should inspire—not paralyze—us. Moderates must unite, to see

    that “revenge” isn’t our answer and that end-time eschatology doesn’t become

    something very dangerous: a self-fulfilling prophecy.

    Asra Q. Nomani

    Will It Take The End of the World For Obama To Recognize ISIS As 'Islamic'?

    Link to the Article

     

    The Daily Beast

    February 20, 2015


    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com


    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/23/2015 8:21:35 PM



  • Good Morning Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Subject: Are we the readers not allowed to ask uncomfortable questions?

     

    Your polite comment to Asif Reyaz Saheb came as a surprise. Given that you hardly object to, but instead encourage those commentators from insulting Islam, I am simply dumbfounded about your expressing concern.

     

    No doubt, uncomfortable questions will create irritations. In the debate ring, one has to be able to answer questions and not go into hiding. You should know by now how person like “Secular Logic,” who thrives in provoking, but runs away from answering. You do not seem to object to those who are hell-bent on creating ruckus, but on ther other hand, why would you be so overly concerned about Asif Reyaz’s insistence on extracting honest answers from Ghulam Ghaus Saheb?

     

    No one is saying that Ghaus Sahab is not sincere. If he portrays himself as a staunch believer in the “Authoritativeness of Hadiths,then he will be questioned by those who need clarifications about certain Qur’anic verses. Why should it be so difficult for him to answer?  

     

    You are right in stating that, “He just believes in what you can call popular Islam. He should not be hounded for these beliefs and made to defend them, if he doesn't want to.” Yet, as concerned Muslims, we also have a right to ask a Muslim holding a degree in the “Science of Hadiths,” to answer any questions with clarity and honesty. No one is hounding Ghaus Saheb.

     

    By consistently answering in a vague manner can only be characterized as deceptive. Surely, Ghaus Saheb can avoid creating such an impression in the minds of the readers. After all, this is your forum, and you wholeheartedly invite everyone to contribute in the commentary column. Hence, if you welcome the Muslim bashers, then why would you object to commentators like Asif Saheb? He expressed his high regards for Ghaus Saheb, however, it is quite apparent from his reminder that he felt disappointed. I believe that’s a respectable way, and has nothing whatsoever to do with what you termed it as “hounding.”     

     

    For now, I want to highlight your own remark, “The fact that Ghouse Saheb realises the importance of context clearly means that he doesn't really consider Quran uncreated, God-like, though, of course, he doesn't know or acknowledge it yet.” With this being said, “Why is there so much emphasis on one single word, uncreated?” Can you be kind to enlighten your readers?

     

    Thanks & Regards,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com


    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/23/2015 5:32:04 PM



  • Dear Asif Reyaz Saheb, we should not be hounding any commentator into irritation and rage. Let them be. Ask them questions, clarifications, for sure, remind them politely maybe once or twice, if need be and if you are very keen on a reply, but finally leave it to their discretion to respond or not. 

    Ghulam Ghouse Saheb does a very good job of refutation of Jihadi literature. In many cases this amounts to pointing out the contexts in which those verses were revealed or those ahadees may have been fabricated or actually something like that said by the Prophet (saw), and the moment you do that you are saying, certainly implying that contextual verses or ahadees were meant for those times and are not applicable today. But not everyone may have the intellectual clarity to realise that and say that in so many words.  This doesn't mean this person is not honest or is a hypocrite.

    Try to see how change comes in ideological positions without being acknowledged. Let me give you an example. Indian Jamaat-e-Islami joined or maybe perhaps actually founded along with journalist Kuldip Nayyar a group called Forum for Secularism and Democracy or something like that during Emergency in 1975-76, if my memory serves me right. Today, it patronises a political party. Obviously, they are now light years away from Maulana Maududi's thoughts on certain vital beliefs, but they continue to print and sell his books and make money. The same has happened with nearly all communist parties, except those hardliners who now call themselves Maoist. So change often comes without being acknowledged.

    The fact that Ghouse Saheb realises the importance of context clearly means that he doesn't really consider Quran uncreated, God-like, though, of course, he doesn't know or acknowledge it yet. In any case, as I have said before, the debate about createdness or uncreatedness is not important. If someone simply says that such and such instructions in Quran are no longer applicable to Muslims in today's context, as they were revealed in an entirely different context, that is good enough for me. This is not the Jihadi or ahl-e-Hadeesi position.

    Asif Saheb, I do not know much about the extent of your knowledge, but I wonder if you know what an ahl-e-hadeesi is. Ghouse Saheb is certainly not one. Belief in Hadees doesn't make one an ahle Hadeesi. He comes from a Sufi background. His beliefs are not exceptional. He just believes in what you can call popular Islam. He should not be hounded for these beliefs and made to defend them, if he doesn't want to.

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/23/2015 10:30:03 AM



  • ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Kawakibi (d. 1902) on the Nature of Oppression: “Oppression manipulates facts in people’s minds, leading people to believe that whoever seeks truth is sinful, that whoever abandons his rights is obedient, that the one who cries out [against oppression] is mischievous. that the perceptive and intelligent are godless, and that the useless one is upright. It transforms genuine advice into intrusiveness, caring for others into enmity, magnanimity into transgression, enthusiasm/zeal into foolishness, mercy into illness, just as it considers hypocrisy to be a policy, manipulation to be civility, and pettiness/villainy to be kindness.”

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/23/2015 9:41:07 AM



  • Ghulam Ghaus Saheb, I am glad you finally mustered the courage to call Sultan Shahin's ideas rotten. Every ahl-e-Hadithi will agree with this. But unlike other ahl-e-Hadithis you are also promoting peace. How come?

    Merely calling these ideas rotten doesn't help. By calling them rotten, you are saying that all verses of Quran including the sword verses and intolerant verses are applicable to us today, so we should be constantly fighting others including non-ahl-e-hadithis, as Jihadis are; all ahadith in Bukhari etc are authentic and authoritative, which means we should follow them in their letter and spirit and go to war with others, and consider terrorism justified as according to an authentic Bukhari Hadith the Prophet (peace be upon him) did; and that Sharia is divine, so we should seek its application in our societies, as Jihadis everywhere are doing. Where do, then, your  refutations of Jihadi literature, your contextualisations of Quranic verses, your quest for peace,fit into this narrative.

    Why do you stop at believing in Quran as God, ahadith as authentic and authoritative, Sharia as divine and not follow their dictates? Would you say "Khlafia" Abu Bakr Baghdadi is right in punishing this kind of hypocrisy?

    By Asif Reyaz - 2/23/2015 8:15:40 AM



  • Mr. Shahin, I have read your Jan 15 article, 'Muslims must confront...' and noted from the comments the uphill task you face in putting your view across.

     

    In Islam, the practice of takfir, or excommunication, is theologically perilous. “If a man says to his brother, ‘You are an infidel,’” the Prophet said, “then one of them is right.” If the accuser is wrong, he himself has committed apostasy by making a false accusation. The punishment for apostasy is death. And yet Zarqawi heedlessly expanded the range of behavior that could make Muslims infidels.

    Maqdisi wrote to his former pupil that he needed to exercise caution and “not issue sweeping proclamations of takfir” or “proclaim people to be apostates because of their sins.” The distinction between apostate and sinner may appear subtle, but it is a key point of contention between al-Qaeda and the Islamic State.

    Denying the holiness of the Koran or the prophecies of Muhammad is straightforward apostasy. But Zarqawi and the state he spawned take the position that many other acts can remove a Muslim from Islam. These include, in certain cases, selling alcohol or drugs, wearing Western clothes or shaving one’s beard, voting in an election—even for a Muslim candidate—and being lax about calling other people apostates. Being a Shiite, as most Iraqi Arabs are, meets the standard as well, because the Islamic State regards Shiism as innovation, and to innovate on the Koran is to deny its initial perfection. (The Islamic State claims that common Shiite practices, such as worship at the graves of imams and public self-flagellation, have no basis in the Koran or in the example of the Prophet.) That means roughly 200 million Shia are marked for death. So too are the heads of state of every Muslim country, who have elevated man-made law above Sharia by running for office or enforcing laws not made by God.

    Following takfiri doctrine, the Islamic State is committed to purifying the world by killing vast numbers of people. The lack of objective reporting from its territory makes the true extent of the slaughter unknowable, but social-media posts from the region suggest that individual executions happen more or less continually, and mass executions every few weeks. Muslim “apostates” are the most common victims. Exempted from automatic execution, it appears, are Christians who do not resist their new government. Baghdadi permits them to live, as long as they pay a special tax, known as the jizya, and acknowledge their subjugation. The Koranic authority for this practice is not in dispute.

    theatlantic.com/features/archive/2015/02/what-isis-really-wants/384980/

    By devindersingh gulati - 2/23/2015 7:46:39 AM



  • Mr. Asif, 

    Do you want to force me to debate with you again and again on the same old-rotten topic? 

    I have given my standpoints in this thread. Please see the previous comments.
     
    By Ghulam Ghaus - 2/23/2015 4:11:30 AM



  • But Ghulam Ghaus Saheb, you seem to be actually running away from the debate. Should I consider it just your failure or that of all ahl-e-Haditis? Do ahl-e-Haditihis have no answer to the questions posed in this article? 
    Mr. Sultan Shahin makes some very challenging statements. You should clearly support or oppose them, for the benefit of the community and religion. Can we follow his suggestions. He says:
    "If the ulema really want to save Islam from being considered synonymous with terrorism, they should at least make the following commonsensical declarations, which are also consistent with the faith:
     "1. Quran is a created book of God, not divine as God Himself;
    " 2. contextual, particularly militant verses, in Quran are no longer applicable to Muslims;
    " 3. Hadees is not an Islamic scripture a la Quran.
    " 4. Shariah cannot be considered divine.
    Are these propositions acceptable to you and should they be acceptable to Muslims.  This is a serious issue. Ghulam Ghaus Saheb, you should not run away from the debate on the excuse of time or anything else. Maybe you can ask some other ahl-e-Hadithi to respond. The challenge put forwar4d by ahl-e-Quran should be faced. You have made some remarks but they arte  clearly not sufficient and authoritative enough. By Asif Reyaz - 2/23/2015 3:05:22 AM



  • Mr. Asif Reyaz,

    I have already answered you and Mr. Rafiq Lodhia on authoritativeness of Hadith under the thread of my article:

    Shared Values among Religions and the Call for Interfaith Dialogue

    http://newageislam.com/interfaith-dialogue/shared-values-among-religions-and-the-call-for-interfaith-dialogue/d/11584

    Please go through the given link of the article and comment under the thread of the same article.

    Also, Sorry for being late to answer you. I was busy in other pieces of work. Please keep it in your mind that my disappearance does not mean that I have no answer for you. If it was your illusion, please keep it away now and do not think so.   

    By Ghulam Ghaus - 2/23/2015 1:40:20 AM



  • Good Morning Asif Reyaz Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Guess what! I have been called “Bulldog, and “Rainmaker, by quite a number of friends. Wow! “A Dogged Stalker, is something new.

     

    Maulana Ghulam Ghaus Saheb’s disappearance is not surprising at all. I recently posted “Ten Quranic Surahs,” on the blog: www.readingisliving.com. Knowing that you are an avid reader, therefore, after reading the verses, you need to remind Maulana Ghaus Saheb to translate its meaning with the help of “Science of Hadiths.”

     

    Oops! I forgot to mention the good name of respected Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi Saheb. It is obvious that this pious Muslim is also having a difficult time answering a simple question. Isn’t it amazing?

     

    In any case, I will wait patiently. You should know by now that answering honestly is not an easy task. If Muslims proudly claim to believe in the Holy Quran as a divine revelation, then one ought to ask, “Why the double standard and/or hypocrisy, is applied towards one’s own divine book?” I am afraid, the answer to the “Authoritativeness of Quran, will hardly be given by them. Even if there be a sincere attempt, then I will not be surprised that it will be more or less vague as always. .

     

    Very sincerely yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/21/2015 11:54:39 PM



  • Good Morning Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Patriots Forum, posted the same article titled, “Islamic Reformation, by R. Upadhay.

     

    Mr. Upadhay wrote, “An advisory notes of Sultan Shahin have the potential to challenge Islamic terrorists.” Interestingly, “Tabligh Jamaat, is also mentioned in the article.

     

    Now then, are you going to get into the debate ring or are you going to continue to let couple of commentators to rule and disrupt your forum?

     

    We are all ears, Sultan Shahin Saheb.

     

    Kind personal regards,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/21/2015 11:11:27 PM



  • But Harees Sohail, this "silly" article seems to have silenced ulema like Janab Ghulam Rasool and Ghulam Ghaus, who made some antithetical comment on the uncreated ness of Quran and authenticity of Hadith and then fell silent when he was asked some explanation about his views. Even a dogged stalker like Lodhia Saheb has now stopped pursuing Maulana Ghulam Ghaus. I like Ghaus Saheb and was expecting to learn more from him about the authoritativeness of Hadith and uncreatedness of Quran that could have finally sealed the matter. These are not issues that can be left hanging in the balance. But this "silly" article is being allowed to go unchallenged. This will only help a new sect to be formed, as you seem to fear. By Asif Reyaz - 2/21/2015 11:04:51 PM



  • A SILLY MAN ALWAYS WRITES A SILLY ARTICLE. MR SULTAN IS A VERY SILLY MAN. 

    HE IS TRYING TO WAGE FIGHT AMONG MUSLIMS BY WRITING IT IN A SILLY WAY. 

    MUSLIMS NEED REFORMATION. ISLAM NEVER NEEDS ANY REFORMATION. BUT SULTAN SHAHIN PRETENDS TO BE APPEAR AS A THEKEDAR OF PEACE WHILE HE IS IN THE REAL SENSE THE BIGGEST ENEMY OF PEACE. IS HE IS NOT MAKING A NEW SECT?  

    TO EARN MONEY THROUGH INCREASING DEBATE ON SUCH SILLY QUESTIONS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    MUSLIMS CAN SEE THIS SITE ALWAYS PUBLISH ANTI-ISLAMIC STUFF FOR CREATING MORE VIOLENCE.  

    MUSLIMS SHOULD NOT READ SUCH A SITE. THEY SHOULD BE AT PEACE AT THEIR HOMES.   
    By Harees Sohail, - 2/21/2015 9:02:18 PM



  • IN THE HEARTS AND TWEETS OF MUSLIM WOMEN

     

    No wonder more Muslim women are taking to social media, the streets, or spiritual jihad. Even as bombs rain down on Islamic State, the real battle may lie in the hearts and tweets of Muslim women in Turkey and elsewhere.

     

    The Monitor’s View

    Turkey's protests by women: jihad of a different sort Link to the Article

     

    The Christian Science Monitor

    February 18, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/21/2015 5:49:10 PM



  • "As for Ghulam Ghaus, he should not fear answering a simple question about the “Authoritativeness of Quran. I remain baffled as his poor excuse." --- rafiq lodhia
    Just a reminder for Mr. Ghulam Ghaus. He also needs to give concrete examples of how Quran cannot be understood without Hadith. His many fans are waiting, a bit bewildered at his lack of interest. Was his claim just hot air?
    Some other ahl-Hadithi may also take up the subject. After all Hadith has to be defended against the onslaught on this forum.
    By Asif Reyaz - 2/20/2015 10:11:52 PM



  • A HIGH VOLTAGE CAMPAIGN

     

    “The recent Islamist terrorist attacks on the Charlie Hebdo cartoon journalists in Paris and army children in Peshawar school perhaps prompted Sultan Shahin , Indian Editor of New Age Islam to write an advisory paper entitled “Muslim must confront Islamist terror ideologically –An Islamic reformation required”. While it is conceded that reforms within Islam will have to come from within, this paper examines whether at all it is possible when indications are to the contrary!

     

    Another author Muhammad Yunus in the Urdu section of the same web site maintained that “Hadith Is Not a Divine Scripture of Islam”.

     

    Similarly, on Jauary 23 a group of Muslim intellectuals led by Anjum Zaidi protested at India Islamic Cultural Centre against inviting Zakir Naik, a “terror sympathiser” and owner of a controversial TV channel Peace. Zaidi also lodged a complaint in police for arresting Zakir Naik under terror Act (Pioneer dated January 24).

     

    Egypt’s president opened the New Year with a dramatic call for a “revolution” in Islam to reform interpretations of the faith entrenched for hundreds of years, which he said have made the Muslim world a source of “destruction” and pitted it against the rest of the world.”

     

    “In view of the scientific revolutions that have produced new ideas and thoughts, the professed goal of the above writers who want to bring radical reform in Islam may be to purge the Islamic texts of extremist ideas of intolerance and violence that fuel various Islamist terror groups and motivate them for launching war to create Islamic state. But how far they would be able to stop the long march of the Islamic movements which are propagating the extremist ideology of the seventh century faith is a million dollar question. Since the endeavour of the above rational thinkers is contrary to the Islamic teachings which are being propagated by various institutions, its acceptance in Muslim society may be a difficult task.

     

    The modern world may believe in societal laws which are rational, realistic and in accordance with the contemporary reality. But despite the fact that Sharia (Islamc law) and fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) are not divine revelations like Quran, the terrorists as well as Muslim orthodoxy misinterpret them as Allah’s law and therefore they are not ready for any reform in these Islamic texts. Apart from it, numerous wars were fought on interpretation of Islamist theory in Arab world and as a result the Ulema following the different schools of Islam are also divided on this issue.

     

    The problem as I see it is that the younger generation of the Muslims has developed a mindset that there is a lot of injustice to their community locally and internationally. Result- they get sadistic pleasure in the destructive and supremacist view of the terror groups that are armed with the ideological motto -“The prophet is our leader, Quran is our constitution, jihad is our way and death in the service of Allah is the loftiest of our wishes”. Interpreting Quran as a tool to justify the oppressive and violent Jihad, the Islamist terrorists will never be ready for any saner debate as they are rigidly following the Quranic concept of war

     

    It requires a high voltage campaign to clarify that except Quran, other religious scriptures are manmade and that can be moderated according to the contemporary and realistic requirements of the time. The intellectual initiatives taken by the rationalist Muslims are therefore a welcome step and if the ‘moderate’ section in the community could stir the Ummah against the Islamist terror ideologically, they would not only save the Islamic community from the slur they are facing due to terror violence but would also serve the humanity.”

     

    R. Upadhyay

    Islamic Reformation- with special reference to India Link to the Article

     

    Sri Lanka Guardian

    February 13, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 9:26:06 PM



  • INCUBATORS OF VIOLENT EXTREMISM

     

    “The actual problem is what’s taught in the madrassa, because that curriculum breeds hatred, violence and legitimizes violence against non-Muslims.”

     

    Imtiaz Gul - Executive Director

    Centre for Research and Security Studies

    Islamabad, Pakistan

     

    Kamran Haider & Khurrum Anis

    Cutting Off Terrorism at Its Roots Link to the Article

     

    Bloomberg Business

    February 19, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 6:41:37 PM



  • A FOUNTAIN OF HATE

     

    Doha’s Grand Mosque has long been a stopover for militants from across the region heading to wage jihad in the Levant. And despite the emirate’s membership in the coalition against ISIS, and while U.S. warplanes launch their bombing raids on the militants in Syria and Iraq from the American airbase in Qatar, the landmark mosque has remained a top venue to hear radical Islamic sermonizing.

     

    Jamie Dettmer

    An American Ally’s Grand Mosque of Hate Link to the Article

     

    Daily Beast

    February 19, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 6:21:52 PM



  • INDIA POSSESSES UNTOLD PROMISE

     

    If India is to thrive, it needs bold reforms and political courage to match. The tried-and-tested development strategy is to move people from penurious farm jobs to more productive work with better pay. China’s rise was built on export-led manufacturing. The scope to follow that model is limited. Supply-chain trade growth has slowed, and manufacturing is becoming less labour-intensive as a result of technology. Yet India could manage better than it does now. It has a world-class IT-services industry, which remains too skill-intensive and too small to absorb the 90m-115m often ill-educated youngsters entering the job market in the next decade. The country’s best hope is a mixed approach, expanding its participation in global markets in both industry and services.

     

    The Economist

    A CHANCE TO FLYLink to the Article

    February 21, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

     

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 3:53:41 PM



  • INDIA POSSESSES UNTOLD PROMISE

     

    If India is to thrive, it needs bold reforms and political courage to match. The

    tried-and-tested development strategy is to move people from penurious farm

    jobs to more productive work with better pay. China’s rise was built on export-led

    manufacturing. The scope to follow that model is limited. Supply-chain trade growth

    has slowed, and manufacturing is becoming less labour-intensive as a result of

    technology. Yet India could manage better than it does now. It has a world-class

    IT-services industry, which remains too skill-intensive and too small to absorb the

    90m-115m often ill-educated youngsters entering the job market in the next decade.

    The country’s best hope is a mixed approach, expanding its participation in global markets in both industry and services.

     

    The Economist

    A CHANCE TO FLYLink to the Article

    February 21, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 3:52:23 PM



  • AFGHANISTAN’S NEW FIRST LADY RULA GHANI

     

    She dared Afghan students who have studied abroad on scholarship to pay their dues by coming home to help the country rebuild.

     

    She dared foreign aid agencies to stop creating a culture of dependency, and instead focus on teaching Afghans how to build their own society.

     

    She dared the Western press to stop portraying Afghanistan as a hopeless backwater.

     

    Nina Easton

    Afghanistan's first lady dares the world to view her country differently

     

    Fortune

    February 19, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 2:57:33 PM



  • FOR POLITICAL AND STRATEGIC REASONS

     

    President Obama stands accused of political correctness for his unwillingness to accuse groups such as the Islamic State of “Islamic extremism,” choosing a more generic term, “violent extremism.” His critics say that you cannot fight an enemy you will not name. Even his supporters feel that his approach is too “professorial.”

     

    But far from being a scholar concerned with describing the phenomenon accurately, the president is deliberately choosing not to emphasize the Islamic State’s religious dimension for political and strategic reasons. After all, what would be the practical consequence of describing the group, also known as ISIS, as Islamic? Would the West drop more bombs on it? Send in more soldiers to fight it? No, but it would make many Muslims feel that their religion had been unfairly maligned. And it would dishearten Muslim leaders who have continually denounced the Islamic State as a group that does not represent Islam.

     

    Fareed Zakaria

    The limits of the ‘Islamic’ label Link to the Article

    February 19, 2015 

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 2:49:51 PM



  • My Dear Ritesh Ji,

     

    Thank you kindly for your reply. I am honored to be in your good books. It sure feels very refreshing after getting bruised by a handful of commentators on this forum.

     

    For long, I have held this view about “Muslim leaders need to do more. My only regret is that American Muslim leaders and many prominent Muslims living in America have simply lost “The Spirit of Collaboration.

     

    Sultan Shahin Saheb has remained relentless in his mission to promote the much needed “Awareness,among the Muslims. I am afraid, he also tend to take “Politically Correct, stand every once in a while.


    Surely, Sultan Saheb and his dedicated staff will get around to post the entire speech of President Barack Obama. One thing we must all agree upon is that he does his very best to post all the relevant articles on his website.

     

    Have a cheerful and blessed day. Ritesh Ji. Heads Up & Smile.

     

    Kind personal regards,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

     

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 12:26:57 AM



  • Dear Asif Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Good to read your feedback. It is much appreciated. Kindly allow me to request you not to divide the Muslims into two categories, that is, ahl-Quran and ahl-e-Hadith.

     

    You are absolutely right in stating that “Dawah,” is the most important work for a Muslim. Keep in mind that in the digital age, “Dawah,” work can be conducted in many ways. One does not have to sport a beard and roam around the world leaving behind the family. Spreading “Good Words, is the only “Dawah,” that I know of. Simply put, we the Muslims, must first learn to become an outstanding “Earthly Citizens.   

     

    As for Ghulam Ghaus, he should not fear answering a simple question about the “Authoritativeness of Quran. I remain baffled as his poor excuse.

     

    Thanks again for the moral support. Have a blessed day.

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/20/2015 12:09:25 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    With endless recycling over the same old subject matter on “New Age Islam” forum, I have painstakingly created another one of my blogs as follows: http://www.readingisliving.com

     

    It is truly very sad that Muslims belonging to the Islamic Civilization have collectively betrayed its own sacred text. In other words, we have deliberately neglected to reflect and ponder over the meaning of the Qur’anic verses.

     

    Every single day in the news channel around the world, it is only one single word that has dominated all the headline news. The religion of Islam is being questioned, and the majority of Muslims are missing in action.

     

    Knowing that there will hardly be any “Readers,nonetheless, I have managed to post at least nine sections in the blog. It is as follows:

     

    The Heights Of The Qur’anic Thought

     

    A Simple Thought In Its Plain Simplicity

     

    The Simplicity Of The Quranic Manner

     

    The Disposition Of The First Generation Of Muslims

     

    The Qur’an Is So Simple To Understand

     

    The Real Meaning Of The Qur’an

     

    The Qur’an Was Lost In A Maze Of Far-Fetched Conceits

     

    The Beauty And Attraction Of The Qur’anic Method of Argument

     

    The Plain Meaning Of The Plain Word Of The Quran

     

    All in all, the nine short paragraphs are excerpts from the book titled “The Tarjuman al-Qur’an” by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (May Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace). Happy Reading, my fellow Muslims. Of course, all of my fellow humans are equally welcome to read them as well. Why not? We are all “One Family Of Humanity,to which Holy Qur’an carefully refers to as “O Mankind.

     

    Very compassionately yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/19/2015 10:40:54 PM



  • Is President Obama taking tuition from Sultan Shahin these days? His latest speech seems to be almost entirely based on the above article, though short on details.
     Thank you Lodhiaji for posting the text of this very important speech.  You have also given it a very apt title. Muslim leaders need to do more and speak clearly. This I think is what Sultan Shahin is also demanding. New Age Islam should have posted this speech separately. 
    By Ritesh Kumar - 2/19/2015 9:56:40 PM



  • Ghulam Ghaus Saheb, you need to prove to the ahl-Quran on this site that Quran cannot be understood without Hadith. Please give concrete examples. Many silent readers are all waiting.
     Lodhia Saheb also asked you about your belief in all verses of the Quran being eternal, universal, uncreated. If uncreated, why should we worry about context, we should just follow them. God demands just obedience, not application of your mind.
    Mr. Sultan Shahin's thesis has to be either supported with further explanations or refuted. It cannot be ignored. 
    As a spokesperson on this site for ahl-e-Hadith you must guide others not hide behind the excuse of being busy with other work. Daawah is the most important work for a Muslim. 
    By Asif Reyaz - 2/19/2015 9:27:27 PM



  • THERE IS NO DEBATE ABOUT THE DARKNESS

     

    The roots of terrorist acts, even those committed by those from faiths other than Islam, have long been difficult to pin down. Rather than give them substance, the better course remains in shining light on their darkness. If there is a struggle, it may be in choosing the best light. But there is no debate about the darkness.

     

    The Monitor’s View

    A beaming White House summit on 'extremism' Link to the Article

     

    The Christian Science Monitor

    February 17, 2015  

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/19/2015 3:17:16 PM



  • THERE IS NO DEBATE ABOUT THE DARKNESS

     

    The roots of terrorist acts, even those committed by those from faiths other than

    Islam, have long been difficult to pin down. Rather than give them substance, the

    better course remains in shining light on their darkness. If there is a struggle, it

    may be in choosing the best light. But there is no debate about the darkness.

     

    The Monitor’s View

    A beaming White House summit on 'extremism' Link to the Article

     

    The Christian Science Monitor

    February 17, 2015  

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D0460A.B0B45550  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/19/2015 3:15:33 PM



  • To Be Fair To Barack Obama Muslim Leaders And Ulema Must Declare Isis, Al Qaida, Boko Haram As 'Kharijites' [Outlawed From The Pale Of Islam]  As Proposed In The Following Articles:

    Call for international Fatwas to declare the terrorists who advocate wanton killing of innocent people in the name of Islam as ‘Terrorist Apostates’, like the Kharijites of early Islam.

    http://www.newageislam.com/islam,terrorism-and-jihad/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/call-for-international-fatwas-to-declare-the-terrorists-who-advocate-wanton-killing-of-innocent-people-in-the-name-of-islam-as-‘terrorist-apostates’,-like-the-kharijites-of-early-islam/d/14090

    Declare The ISIS As The Kharijites (Those Who Seceded From Islam) As This Article Demonstrates And Declares: Global SOS To The Ulama, Muftis, Intellectuals And Scholars Of Islam

    http://www.newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/declare-the-isis-as-the-kharijites-(those-who-seceded-from-islam)-as-this-article-demonstrates-and-declares--global-sos-to-the-ulama,-muftis,-intellectuals-and-scholars-of-islam/d/101373 By muhammad yunus - 2/19/2015 10:26:32 AM



  • MUSLIM LEADERS NEED TO DO MORE - EVERYBODY HAS TO SPEAK UP VERY CLEARLY      

     

    First, we have to confront squarely and honestly the twisted ideologies that these terrorist groups use to incite people to violence.  Leading up to this summit, there’s been a fair amount of debate in the press and among pundits about the words we use to describe and frame this challenge.  So I want to be very clear about how I see it.

     

    Al Qaeda and ISIL and groups like it are desperate for legitimacy.  They try to portray themselves as religious leaders -- holy warriors in defense of Islam. That’s why ISIL presumes to declare itself the “Islamic State.”  And they propagate the notion that America -- and the West, generally -- is at war with Islam.  That’s how they recruit.  That’s how they try to radicalize young people.  We must never accept the premise that they put forward, because it is a lie.  Nor should we grant these terrorists the religious legitimacy that they seek.  They are not religious leaders – they’re terrorists.  And we are not at war with Islam.  We are at war with people who have perverted Islam. 

     

    Now, just as those of us outside Muslim communities need to reject the terrorist narrative that the West and Islam are in conflict, or modern life and Islam are in conflict, I also believe that Muslim communities have a responsibility as well.  Al Qaeda and ISIL do draw, selectively, from the Islamic texts.  They do depend upon the misperception around the world that they speak in some fashion for people of the Muslim faith, that Islam is somehow inherently violent, that there is some sort of clash of civilizations.

     

    Of course, the terrorists do not speak for over a billion Muslims who reject their hateful ideology.  They no more represent Islam than any madman who kills innocents in the name of God represents Christianity or Judaism or Buddhism or Hinduism.  No religion is responsible for terrorism.  People are responsible for violence and terrorism. 

     

    And to their credit, there are respected Muslim clerics and scholars not just here in the United States but around the world who push back on this twisted interpretation of their faith.  They want to make very clear what Islam stands for.  And we’re joined by some of these leaders today.  These religious leaders and scholars preach that Islam calls for peace and for justice, and tolerance toward others; that terrorism is prohibited; that the Koran says whoever kills an innocent, it is as if he has killed all mankind.  Those are the voices that represent over a billion people around the world.

     

    But if we are going to effectively isolate terrorists, if we're going to address the challenge of their efforts to recruit our young people, if we're going to lift up the voices of tolerance and pluralism within the Muslim community, then we've got to acknowledge that their job is made harder by a broader narrative that does exist in many Muslim communities around the world that suggests the West is at odds with Islam in some fashion.

     

    The reality -- which, again, many Muslim leaders have spoken to -- is that there’s a strain of thought that doesn’t embrace ISIL’s tactics, doesn’t embrace violence, but does buy into the notion that the Muslim world has suffered historical grievances -- sometimes that's accurate -- does buy into the belief that so many of the ills in the Middle East flow from a history of colonialism or conspiracy; does buy into the idea that Islam is incompatible with modernity or tolerance, or that it's been polluted by Western values.

     

    So those beliefs exist.  In some communities around the world they are widespread. And so it makes individuals -- especially young people who already may be disaffected or alienated -- more ripe for radicalization.  And so we've got to be able to talk honestly about those issues.  We've got to be much more clear about how we're rejecting certain ideas.

     

    So just as leaders like myself reject the notion that terrorists like ISIL genuinely represent Islam, Muslim leaders need to do more to discredit the notion that our nations are determined to suppress Islam, that there’s an inherent clash in civilizations. Everybody has to speak up very clearly that no matter what the grievance, violence against innocents doesn't defend Islam or Muslims, it damages Islam and Muslims. 

     

    And when all of us, together, are doing our part to reject the narratives of violent extremists, when all of us are doing our part to be very clear about the fact that there are certain universal precepts and values that need to be respected in this interconnected world, that’s the beginnings of a partnership.

     

    President Barack Obama

    February 18, 2015

     

    http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/02/18/remarks-president-closing-summit-countering-violent-extremism

     

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/19/2015 10:12:21 AM



  • Good Morning Ghulam Ghaus Saheb – Reminder No. 1

     

     As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Subject: NO NEED TO BEAT AROUND THE BUSH

     

    From your reply, I get a feeling that you have other work to attend to. Carry on.

     

    For your kind information, I am only interested in knowing about your personal belief in “Authoritativeness of Quran.The main reason being that you are insisting upon getting your point across first. That’s just not going to happen, till I get a better understanding as to where do you stand on the subject matter, Quran. All I earnestly request you to give me, is an honest answer to one single question, “Do you consider Quran to be a divine book?”

    I am sorry for not getting involved into what you termed it as “Science of Discourse.” For more than 1,200 years, the so-called discourse has been going on with no final consensus among the Islamic scholars over the falsely fabricated Hadiths. That’s a downright shameful act. If you term such a major indecision as the “Science of Discourse,” then shame on all the scholars.

    Again, the only subject I wish to select for the time being is, “Authoritativeness of Quran. and nothing else. What is your scholarly opinion? That’s as simple of a question which I can ask you as an ordinary Muslim layman. If you are going to remain vague and cannot answer, then try to be upfront about it. There is absolutely NO NEED TO BEAT AROUND THE BUSH.

    Very respectfully yours,

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia 

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/17/2015 10:44:13 PM



  • Lodhia  

    kiya hua teraa waada wo qasam wo iraada......
    your address to Editor keeping "rational's comments" is a proof that your plan didn't work.
    Sau chuhe khhkar billi haj ko chali.
    what is offensive? A comment offensive to you may be totally non-offensive to others.
    there are some good Muslims on this forum who knows how to respond to unpleasant/insulting in your mind comments of their adversaries. Bad news for you, and good news for me that you are not one of them.
    your level of tolerance is below zero. i would rather say that it is not even in germinating stage because either there is no seed or the Qur'an has eaten up that seed.
    regarding whether i am a Muslim or not is none of your business.
    i may be a Muslim and i may not be. we are discussing Islam it can be done without believing in it.

    My advise you to is that instead of getting red hot on my comments, you should write like Observer, Ghulam Ghaus, Ziaur rahman sahebaan.
    you should learn from them.
    you can take a breath of relief that your comments against hadith were more effective than the supporting comments of Ghulam Ghaus saheb. I found him weak and you strong.
    you will not find a person like rational who can praise even people like you.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/17/2015 10:09:45 PM



  • Good Morning Sultan Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Subject: NO CENSORSHIP, PLEASE!

     

    It is absolutely unfair to delete offensive comments made by “Ex-Tablighi.” It will nice for the readers to know as to how mentally sick the man is.

     

    Many readers know very well that whenever “Ex-Tablighi,” make offensive and insulting comments against Islam, you seem to approve it under the banner of “Freedom of Speech. That’s generous on your part, but why would you go an extra-mile to cover-up his sins?

     

    I say, let the “New Age Islam, readers learn more about “Ex-Tablighi’s” offensive comments against Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia. Don’t you think, it will be wise for the readers to make a final judgment of his character? Didn’t the man bluntly made a comment as follows:

     

    The problem is with the Quran which feed terror into minds of people.

     

    Let’s face one single fact that, “Ex-Tablighi,” is a Muslim. He hates Islam, but is having a real hard time giving up the religion in which he was born in. Yet, he takes utter delight in mocking the Prophet of Islam without any remorse.

     

    I, therefore, earnestly request you to post every single word used against any commentator. I know that “Ex-Tablighi,” has issues with my comments. If you are worried that many of your readers will feel awkward to read about his offensive comments, then you need not be worried about it. Many are “Silent Spectators,anyway. If you believe that Muslims can learn from his comments, then why do you even bother to delete his offensive comments? Let there be a free flow of speech. NO CENSORSHIP, PLEASE!

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia    

      

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/17/2015 9:37:44 PM



  • Lodhia 
    tabiyat to theek hai na? Dushman ko yaad nahi kiya.
    Muslims are like Mr modi. They speak the language of peace only when beaten up.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/17/2015 8:02:19 PM



  • The Dark Days Of Bigotry, Fanaticism And Bloodshed

    Prime Minister Narendra Modi remarks must be taken to heart by all peace-loving Indians, be they Hindus, Muslims or Christians living in India  

    “The world is at a crossroads which, if not crossed properly, can throw us back to the dark days of bigotry, fanaticism and bloodshed.”

    “Delhi has given the message that in India there is no vote for beating up on anybody. People want peace.”

    Ellen Barry

    Modi Condemns Religious Violence in India

    http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/18/world/asia/india-narendra-modi-religious-violence.html?ref=world&_r=0

    Whatever the case, Mr. Modi has now positioned himself on the side of respect for religious differences. And he has given hope to those who believed his campaign promises to build a modern India, based on economic development, that will lift millions of people out of poverty. Such an ambitious vision could never be realized if he allowed or enabled India to devolve into religious turmoil.

    Carol Giacomo        

    Indian Prime Minister Modi Condemns Religious Violence

    The New York Times

    February 17, 2015

    http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/2015/02/17/indian-prime-minister-modi-condemns-religious-violence

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/17/2015 2:41:31 PM



  • Mr GRD
    You dragged syed ahmed khan on issue of createdness/uncreatedness of the Quran, but didn't tell what do you believe in?
    Is Quran created or not created?
    To syyed ahmed khan it was perfectly natural to see arzals in contempt and ashrafs in high esteem.
    How one can reconcile with two opposite beliefs. Islam was natural to him yet he believed and practiced in cast system.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/17/2015 9:38:03 AM



  • While debating the createdness,  uncreatednes and other themes of the holy Qur’an, it would be also interesting to glance through the views of the modernist Muslim scholars in India. For instance, Sayyid Ahmad Khan, who was a rationalist with reformist ideas

    in the tradition of Shah Wali Ullah, writes:

    “I hold for certain that God has created us and sent us his guidance. This guidance corresponds fully to our natural constitution, to our nature. ... It would be highly irrational to maintain that God’s work [the natural world, including humankind] and God’s word [the revelation of the Qur’an] are different and unrelated to one another. All beings, including man, are God’s work and religion is His word; the two cannot be in conflict. ... So I formulated that “Islam is nature and nature is Islam.” (Quoted in Troll, 1978: 317)

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 2/17/2015 5:40:49 AM



  • Lodhia
    The problem is not with Iran. The problem is with the Quran which feed terror into minds of people. Mullahs and ayatollahs and lodhias are product of jumbled book Quran. All Muslim countries are not in peace because they call this book peace book while it is not.
    Haath kangan ko aarsi kiya, padhe likhe ko faarsi kiya.
    Don't find fault with people but see how the Quran inspire them to carry terrorist activities.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/16/2015 10:11:21 PM



  • Lodhia
    Your best treament is to beat you with verses of the jumbled book Quran which has produced so many terrorists.
    Just see all over the world your believer brothers in the Quran are enagaged in murder, mass killing, rapes, live burning etc.
    [Offensive comments deleted, Editor]
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/16/2015 10:05:03 PM



  • To: All Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam


    Subject: AB TUM KHUD HI FAISLA KAR LO.

     

    Well, just as predicted the man who calls himself “Secular Logic,” once again proved that he is nothing but a downright “Buzdil.

     

    Not to worry. Watch out, he will be back in the debate ring with another mentally deranged “Ex-Tablighi,” and not to mention, with his usual “Holier Than Thou, attitude against the Muslims.

     

    Of course, one would expect an “Intellectual Bigot,to behave as such. He is totally incapable to contribute on the subject matter that relates to his own religion. Why should he ever get involved? Sure, he does not want to be insulted, but he has no issue whatsoever to insult other religion.

     

    In any case, the man consistently shows his spectacular immoral character. It is truly disappointing to realize that the “Perverted Logic,” is always applied. Instead of answering the impurity and pollution of the “Ganges River, he simply diverts the subject matter to yet another provocative subject in order to inflame the hatred. What else is new?  

     

    Perhaps, this bigot should listen to the song of Mohammed Rafi Saheb (May Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace) as follows:    

     

    Mai Madrasi, Mai Gujarati, Mai Ek Rajasthani

    Mai Madrasi, Mai Gujarati, Mai Ek Rajasthani

    Bada Purana Ek Marathi, Naya Naya Haryani

    Mai Kuchh Bhi Hu, Mai Kuchh Bhi Hu

    Lekin Sab Se Pehle Hindustani, Hindustani

     

    Ganga Meri Ma Ka Naam, Baap Ka Naam Himala

    Ab Tum Khud Hi Faisla Kar Lo, Mai Kis Sube Wala

     

    That’s right, my fellow Muslims. AB TUM KHUD HI FAISLA KAR LO.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/16/2015 6:21:14 PM



  • PREDILECTION FOR TERROR

    The problem is: Iran really loves terrorism. Since 1979, it has used terrorism as a tool of statecraft like no other nation. In his testimony Thursday before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, Nick Rasmussen, the head of the National Counterterrorism Center, said Iran and Hezbollah "remain committed to conducting terrorist activities worldwide and we are concerned their activities could either endanger or target U.S. and other Western interests."

    Iran's leaders have been implicated in terrorist attacks in South America, Europe and the Middle East. The Justice Department in 2011 accused Iran of attempting to kill Saudi Arabia's ambassador to Washington at a popular Georgetown restaurant, Cafe Milano. For the Islamic Republic to give up its predilection for terror would require a cultural revolution inside its defense establishment. What would the Quds Force be without car bombers and kidnapping? 

    Some might argue that the 2013 election of President Hassan Rouhani, a supposed reformer, signifies just this kind of change. But there is little evidence he is opening up Iranian society. State executions of gays and arrests of dissidents continue. Even though Rouhani tweeted in 2013 a Jewish New Year message to his followers on Twitter, the regime remains steeped in ugly anti-Semitism. In response to the Charlie Hebdo massacre in Paris last month, a cultural center in Iran with close ties to the regime announced a Holocaust cartoon contest. Despite Rouhani's campaign promises, the leaders of the country's green movement, the people who took to the streets to protest the 2009 elections, remain under house arrest or brutal detention in the country's prisons. If Iran is unwilling to stop terrorizing its own people, why should anyone think it will stop terrorizing the citizens of its historic enemies?

    Eli Lake

    Iran's Peace Letter from a Poison Pen Link to the Article

     

    BloombergBusiness

    February 16, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/16/2015 5:52:23 PM



  • Dear Sultan Saheb, I tracked down some information on the web:

    loc.gov/law/help/apostasy/index.php

    Rather bleak, all the countries which punish apostasy seem to be Islamic. Even Algeria, which I thought was the one Islamic country that was not hostile to other religions, punishes apostasy:

    Algerian law does not include a criminal offense of apostasy.[9] Offenses related to religion include article 144 bis(2) of the Penal Code, which provides that any individual who insults the prophet and the messengers of God, or denigrates the creed or prophets of Islam through writing, drawing, declaration, or any other means, will receive three to five years in prison, and/or be subject to a fine of between 50,000 and 100,000 Algerian dinars (approximately US$631 to $1263).[10] In addition, although Algeria permits religious organizations to participate in humanitarian works, it makes proselytizing by non-Muslims an offense punishable by a fine and up to five years’ imprisonment.[11]

    Indonesia - In addition to the blasphemy laws, Indonesia also has in place a targeted ban on proselytizing.  In 2008, the government issued a ministerial decree specifically banning the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community from proselytizing.[26]

    Saudi Arabia of course is a champion!

    Islamic Sharia’a is the law of the land in Saudi Arabia.  The country has no penal code.  One of the main sources of Islamic law is the hadith or ascribed sayings of the Prophet Mohamed.  Islamic law imposes the death penalty on apostates based on the following statements attributed to the Prophet Mohamed in some hadith collections:

    (1)  “If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him[,]”[67] and (2)  “The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam and leaves the Muslims.”[68]

    It appears that apostasy is understood to be more than mere conversion and the law against it is actively enforced.  For instance, in 2012 Saudi authorities charged Hamza Kashgari, a Saudi writer, with apostasy based on comments he made on Twitter expressing his personal religious views.[69] Although he initially fled the country, he was detained in Malaysia and extradited to Saudi Arabia where, after having repented, he was placed in protective custody.[70] In another incident, Saudi authorities detained two men and charged them with apostasy for adopting the Ahmadiyya interpretation of Islam.[71]

    I can think of many Christian countries where a Buddhist can happily live, practice and preach, but there does not seem to be even one single Islamic country for a person of a different faith (except perhaps Malayasia?).

    I do not know whom you refer to as a 'moderate muslim', but certainly an extended awakening is required!

    By Shiva Shankar - 2/16/2015 3:48:12 AM



  • Lodhia, I had a good laugh. Your unprovoked mention of my name brought a lovely song to my mind "Milo na tum toh hum ghabaraye, milo to aankh churaye - humein kya ho gaya hai."

    Not to worry. I am here. Having another good laugh at the verbal and logical calisthenics on the definition of the work "Kafir". 

    Since I am treating this particular exercise as a spectator sport, I have nothing to contribute, much as I hate to disappoint you. 
    By secularlogic - 2/16/2015 2:37:32 AM



  •  <>

    Dear Sultan Sahib, I have been reading some of your missives, and I have a question: can you please tell me one country with a majority of people followers of Islamwhich allows people to preach and follow Buddhism, say, (as I am a Buddhist). Is it possible for a Buddhist to convert a Muslim to Buddhism, in a Muslim majority country? I know this is not possible in any of the mid-east countries or Afghanistan or Pakistan, but in Algeria, Malayasia or Indonesia? In contrast, Christian majority countries such as the US, Canada, Brazil, Western Europe, even Russia, allow Buddhists to practice, preach and convert.
     Best wishes

    By Shiva Shankar - 2/16/2015 2:11:59 AM



  • Lodhia

    Quran (9:30) - "And the Jews say: Ezra is the son of Allah; and the Christians say: The Messiah is the son of Allah; these are the words of their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved before; may Allah destroy them; how they are turned away!"

     

    Quran (9:38-39) - "O ye who believe! what is the matter with you, that, when ye are asked to go forth in the cause of Allah, ye cling heavily to the earth? Do ye prefer the life of this world to the Hereafter? But little is the comfort of this life, as compared with the Hereafter. Unless ye go forth, He will punish you with a grievous penalty, and put others in your place.This is a warning to those who refuse to fight, that they will be punished with Hell.

    if you like Ahadith can be added to your benefit.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/16/2015 1:20:00 AM



  • To: All Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Ex-Tablighi,” finally showed his true color, just like his comrade, “Secular Logic.”

     

    One thing for sure, the crank has now proven that he is nothing but “A Certified Islam Hater. Any comment that points out to the good moral conduct of Muslims, such bigots will be at forefront to discard it. Imagine, how these loons think about Muslims! What amazes me is that, they continuously remain under the impression that we all are stupid and do not know how to answer them.  

     

    Having said this, let’s look out for a comment from “Secular Logic.” Perhaps, he might well decide to be missing in action. For long, the man has been lecturing Muslims. Now let’s see how he proposes to clean up the “Ganges River.”

     

    Guess what! It could well be that he will come out swinging with his same old mantra, “I don’t believe in any religion. If that be the case, then the readers should ask, Sultan Shahin Saheb, “What on earth is he doing on New Age Islam forum?” Well, unless Sultan Saheb himself takes delight in allowing all the insulting remarks against Islam by a handful of bigots. One can only learn something from the other person, if he/she is brave enough to look at his own people’s fault too.

     

    Unfortunately, the reverse rule is applied. Sultan Saheb wholeheartedly believes that, we the Moderate Muslims,” can learn plenty from such critics of Islam. That’s fine and dandy. We heard it all. Now let’s see if “Secular Logic,” will have something worthwhile to add about the holy river that has long been neglected by the Hindus.

     

    For sure, “Joy of Provocation,drives him to this particular forum. It seems like the man has nothing better to do in life than to insult Islam and Holy Quran. Let’s wait and see his reaction.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   


      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/15/2015 10:24:53 AM



  • Lodhia
    A identity crazy guy. Not able to convey to editor on 'how something should be done".
    In one way or another way pushing censorship agenda. That means Islam can't stand against  criticism.
    A guy who craves for praises.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/15/2015 6:28:52 AM



  • To: Sultan Shahin, Editor @ New Age islam

     

    Dear Sultan Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Subject: HUM KISISE KUM NAHEEN

     

    First of all, I would like to draw your kind attention to your own message as follows:

     

    “Lodhia Saheb you seem to have seen too many boxing bouts of your hero Mohammad Ali? New Age Islam is not a boxing ring, Sir. And we are not associated with your "Clint Eastwood Club" either. We are not in the business of disarming Taliban either as Naseer Saheb Observer wanted us to do. We are merely trying to present a positive view of Islam and refute the claims of Jihadis within our very limited means.” 

     

    By Sultan Shahin  - 2/8/2015 2:53:12 PM

     

    You stated loud and clear about your mission in the following words, “We are trying to present a positive view of Islam.” Surely, this very sentence should also include Indian Muslims too.

     

    Well, if this be the case, then you should invite, “Secular Logic,” to “Come on Down,to share his respective thoughts about one dentist from Moradabad, India named Mairaj Uddin, who has become a “Ram Ganga Mitra.Given that you dislike boxing matches, but after all, you cannot ignore the fact that you are operating “A Debate Forum.” Every boxing and singing contest has winners and losers. That’s just part of life. Hence, instead of carrying on with the usual defeatist attitude, you should encourage Muslims’ point of view, and not get carried away with others who thrash Islam, and are Muslim haters.    

     

    Do you recall not stepping in when an outrageous comment was posted by none other than “Secular Logic”? It is as follows:

     

    “That Surah Fatiha is beautiful in what way? If believers are described by Islam as those who believe in Allah and only Allah, who follow the dos and don’t's laid down by him and who consider Mohammad to be God's prophet (and the last one at that), and disbelievers are described as those people who do not confirm to these descriptors, the verse is indeed a war cry against all other faiths.”

     

    Now, let us find out from “Secular Logic,” who intentionally made such a statement to read an article titled, “The Ganges: Holy, Deadly River. The man is so obsessed with the “Joy of Provocation, that he seems to have not looked into his own backyard lately. Perhaps, the moral act of Mairaj Uddin, will likely to serve as a big wake-up call for the man who has openly expressed his doubts about the very first chapter of Holy Quran. 


    Another thing which I like to point out to you is that, there are certain known “Intellectual Bigots,who are too busy spewing hatred against Islam and Muslims on the cyberspace. One such well known person is, “Satya Narayana Dosapati.” I am sure he has many silent admirers, but sadly, they all pretend to be innocent. For such kind of people, everything wrong that goes around in the world is mainly due to the religion of Islam and nothing else.

     

    Talking about the height of ignorance, there you go. May be, another YouTube video might help to open Satya’s own naked eyes as well. His intense hatred for Islam is all too readable in his hate-filled messages which he joyfully circulates to everyone.  These self-serving bigots never fail to give dictation to Muslims to behave, but they dare not look into the misdeeds which takes place in their own society. Little wonder that the late great Raj Kapoor named his last film appropriately: Ram Teri Ganga Maili.      

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zy6JNSCJTSA

     

    Sultan Saheb, you can play the role of Gandhi as long as you want, but never ever forget that the winners in life are those who possess what is called “A Fighting Spirit.No, it does not have to be a bloody one at all. It can be a non-violent one, provided the response is bold and courageous enough, to enable the Muslims to feel proud and proclaim to their fellow humans: HUM KISiSE KUM NAHEEN.  

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mVuxB3GKBYY

     

    Hai Agar Dushman (Dushman)

    Zamana Gum Nahin, Gum Nahin

    Koi Aaye

    Koi Aaye, Koi Aaye, Koi Aaye, Koi

    Hum Kisise Kum Nahin, Kum Nahin

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/14/2015 8:01:32 PM



  • GUESS! WHO HAS BECOME A RAM GANGA MITRA (CRUSADER? 

     

    “When I was young this river was very clean and we could even see the riverbed,” says Mairaj Uddin, a Moradabad dentist who has become a Ram Ganga Mitra (crusader), one of a group of anti-pollution volunteers formed by WWF-India. As he speaks, someone hurls a plastic bag of rubbish from the walls of the nearby Ganga Mandir, a Hindu temple, straight into the river. “Now it’s dead. All the sewage from the city comes into the river. But things should change once the sewer line is laid . . . And I really hope that I’m going to help make this river go back to its original state. Maybe I’ll be too old to bathe in it. But I want my children to bathe in it.”

     

    Victor Mallet

    The Ganges: holy, deadly river       

     

    The Financial Times

    February 13, 2015

     

    http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/2/dadfae24-b23e-11e4-b380-00144feab7de.html#slide0

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/14/2015 3:51:55 PM



  • THE DEMONIZATION OF ISLAM AND MUSLIMS

     

    Omid Safi, director of Duke University’s Islamic Studies Center, compared the murders to the killing of Emmett Till, a crime that galvanized the African-American civil rights  movement in the 1950s.

     

    “In some ways, this vile and heinous crime is the strange fruit of 15 years of the demonization of Islam and Muslims from the most public airwaves in this country,” Safi wrote. “It’s a vicious combination: repeated dehumanization of Muslims and association of Islam with the worst of violence on one hand, and the sad reality of America being a nation with 300 million guns for 300 million people.”

     

    David Francis

    After Criticisms, Obama Speaks Out on Killings of Muslims in N.C.

     

    Foreign Policy

    February 13, 2015

     

    Link to the Article

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/14/2015 2:39:28 PM



  • To: Sultan Shahin, Editor @ New Age Islam

     

    Dear Sultan Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Subject: BE PRAGMATIC

     

    First of all, it will be appropriate to set aside the word “wise,” as it has more to do with “wisdom.” For the time being, my earnest advice is to BE PRAGMATIC.

     

    Two of the recent articles extracted from the “Christian Science Monitor,posted on https://www.facebook.com/mohammedrafiqlodhia, should give you and all the readers, the clue of what has drastically went wrong in the Islamic world. On my Facebook page, I tend to pick the subject title from the core message of the articles. For instance:

     

    The outcome is going to be determined in the classrooms.

     

    You being a practical Muslim should have no problem in agreeing with such a statement made by U.S. Secretary of State, John Kerry. The classrooms of Islamic Madrassas and Tablighi houses are where the problem arises. They shun the modern education, resulting in young Muslims having real difficult time to cope up in the 21st century.

     

    To be out of touch with the people’s models of thought.

     

    No doubt, the old mental mode continues to plague the Muslims mind. Your forum has no problem in allowing the vehement critics of Islam to have their field day, but as an “Editor,” you ought to do your level best to highlight the encouraging news coming out of the Arab world, such as the one from Tunisia.

     

    More importantly, it will be splendid if you can inspire the young Muslim readers to participate in the debate. You know all too well that the older generation of Muslims are expressing their thoughts and participating in the debates. You claim to have more than half-a-million or so readers. If that be the case, then where are the young Muslims?

     

    If you recollect, last year I was the one, who strongly recommended you to set the rules for those who comment; to reveal, “Name & Town, if you wish to opine. Granted that you have your own good reasons not to divulge the names, nonetheless, you should be aware by now that the unknown and mysterious commentators will continue to disrupt any productive debates out of their hatred towards Muslims. You have seen it happen over and over again, but you remain adamant that so much can be learned from the haters. May be so, but you miserably fail to see the reverse impact of such a policy.  

     

    Disconnect between a person’s thinking and action.

     

    Who will dare confront the harsh and bitter reality? Here again, the most pragmatic question asked by Abdennour Bidar in his article titled, “Dear Muslim World, was, “How can a civilization so betray its own sacred text?” Let’s face it, Sultan Saheb. We the Muslims, from all walks of life, simply ignored one of the most important Quranic commandments as follows:

     

    “Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good; enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong; they are the ones to attain blissfulness,"

     

    Surah: Al-‘Imran (The Family of ‘Imran) – Chapter: 3 - Verse: 104 - 105  

     

    Well then, under the banner of “Freedom of Speech,” if you allow the band of fools, morons, hecklers and bigots to dominate the debates, then you will never ever be able to set the mapping agenda for the 21st century for the Muslims. We all need to move beyond the negativity and promote more positive and healthy debates that relate more to the modern world. We should not be continuously confined to the 7th century, as certain commentators are hell-bent in doing all day long. Self-inflicted mindset known as “Victimhood, is the direct consequences of allowing all the negativity to dictate the discourse, period. Always remember, reformation can only commence with positive mindset, Sultan Shahin Saheb.  

     

    Thanks again for understanding, I remain

     

    Very truly yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia     

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/14/2015 2:22:21 PM



  • TO BE OUT OF TOUCH WITH THE PEOPLE’S MODELS OF THOUGHT

     

    The old mental model of Arab countries as incapable of pluralistic and tolerant self-governance, or too divided over the role of religion, must come to an end. Like the World Bank staff, many current Arab leaders seem to be out of touch with the people’s models of thought.

     

    The very model of a modern Arab democracy

    The Monitor’s View

     

    Christian Science Monitor

    February 5, 2015

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/13/2015 8:32:25 PM



  • THE OUTCOME IS GOING TO BE DETERMINED IN CLASSROOMS

     

    Only an estimated 5 percent of Saudis sympathize with the goals of IS. But that is enough to keep a flow of fighters to the group. Drying up the flow requires that Arab leaders and others provide a stronger – and nonviolent – purpose to young Muslims.

     

    The Monitor’s View

    Christian Science Monitor

    February 4, 2015

     

    “Ultimately, this fight is not going to be decided on the battlefield. The outcome is going to be determined in classrooms, workplaces, houses of worship, community centers, urban street corners, in the perceptions and the thoughts of individuals, and the ways in which those perceptions are created.”

     

    United States Secretary of StateJohn Kerry

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/13/2015 8:24:22 PM



  • BLESSED ARE THE HONEST JOURNALISTS

     

    I am a humble American Muslim with an immense appreciation for my fellow Americans who are journalists, engaged in covering the Middle East region and highlighting the on-going struggle for the human rights of Palestinian people.

     

    To express my deepest sorrow for Bob Simon (73), a brave American journalist,  who recently died in a car crash, I dedicate a quote of John Donne, an English poet and a cleric in the Church of English, which I believe reflects his service to mankind. It is as follows:

     

    “All mankind is of one Author, and is one volume; when one Man dies, one chapter is not torn of the book, but translated into a better language; and every chapter must be so translated; God employs several translators; some pieces are translated by age, some by sickness, some by war, some by justice; but God’s hand is in every translation; and His hand shall bind up all our scattered leaves again, for that Library where every book shall lie open to one another.” 

     

    Bob Simon once remarked, “your language is pretty much that of a martyr.” Yes indeed. It was Almighty God who employed him to cover the war zone as a journalist. More importantly, He bestowed upon him the wisdom to give an honest report to all of his fellow men and women around the world.

     

    We, the American Muslims, will miss him on “60 Minutes.Bob at one time said that, “I like to be remembered for irony.” The irony of fate is that he died as a martyr, who served mankind with honesty and truthfulness.

     

    May the good Lord be with him in his heavenly home. Rest in peace, Bob Simon.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

    February 12, 2015

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A7XtT91yO6g

     

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

     

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/13/2015 5:42:26 PM



  • Lodhia
    If you carefully study the names of Arab people and non-Arab people, you will find Arabs are not fanatic about adding Mohammed, Ahmed, Mehmood, Ali, Hasan etc as prefix or suffix to their names.
    you must have heard "aankh ka andha naam nainsukh". as nainsukh has nothing to do with the blindness of the person, similarly adding names like mentioned above  has nothing to do with merits and demerits of the person.
    A ***Ram. and ****ahmed can be criminals.
    Even Abdullah (most preferred name by the prophet) can be a criminal.
    So come out from the darkness of your blind reverence to names and face the harsh reality.

    How long you dwell in this nonsense?
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/12/2015 11:15:04 PM



  • THE “NEW AGE ISLAM” FORUM – CROWN JEWEL   

     

    That is why I always refer to you with your name which you have not abandoned yet: Mohd Yunus and add rational as your takhallus, also to avoid confusion with Muhammad Yunus Saheb. Why not you too call yourself Mohd Yunus Rational or Mohd Yunus (Rational).

     

    By Sultan Shahin  - 5/21/2013 7:55:28 PM

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/12/2015 9:53:57 PM



  • Jehadi lodhia complete failure to guide Editor.
    Crying hoarsly to inject censorship on newageislam.
    Such is the tolerance of pseudo moderate. And he is on board to carry reform. It is not reform it is advocacy of one form of sectarian Islam.over others.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/12/2015 8:25:56 PM



  • WHAT IS THERE TO LEARN FROM SUCH COMMENT, SULTAN SHAHEB?  

     

    Lodhia - 10/23/2014 4:54:50 AM

     

    keep complaining in full force. your prophet terminated them from the life and made their females his slaves and had sex on the same night.

     

    are jews making your females captive to enjoy the free sex sanctioned by the Allah.

    are your crocodile tears going to help them either.

     

    your prophet did a lot to other faiths and you and we are reaping the fruits of the tree your prophet planted and watery it with blood of people and cursed them where he couldn't murder them.

     

    we are paying the price for our elders did to others. and  your merciful tyrant god keep watching  all destructions.

     

    By rational mohammed yunus - 10/23/2014 11:15:33 PM 

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/12/2015 8:19:44 PM



  • Sultan Shahin – Editor – New Age Islam

     

    You wrote:

     

    Nearly all Muslims are blind followers of Hadees. Imam Bukhari and Muslim, etc. rescued us from nearly half a million concocted ahadees.

     

    My response:

     

    Why shouldn’t they be? The question that ought to be raised should be, “How can a civilization so betray its own sacred text?” Look at Ghulam Ghuas Saheb, who is trying so hard to convince the readers about the “Authoritativeness of Hadith.” Your own “In-House Islamic Scholar,” Sultan Saheb.

     

    You wrote:   

     

    We should continue to allow freedom of expression without which there can be no progress.

     

    My response:

     

    I have no issues with “Freedom of Expression. However, I do have concerns with the “Freedom to Provoke. Your forum should be to conduct healthy debates and not filthy debates.

     

    You wrote:

     

    What does an editor do? Should one ban pornographic Hadees and militant verses of the Quran from an Islamic website? I can assure you many Muslims do not even know such verses and such hadees exist and they need to know. You cannot conduct a debate in the absence of this knowledge.

     

    My response:

     

    You are right, but you simply fail to realize that the Muslims hardly make sincere attempt to learn the Holy Quran. If you think by exposing them with the Quranic verses along with the fabricated Hadees, then you got to be kidding. All you need to do is to look back at your forum’s archives. See for yourself what you have accomplished thus far? It is the same old recycling of debates that never seem to enlighten any readers.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/12/2015 8:09:21 PM



  • I am apparently not very wise, Lodhia Saheb and will require more explicit instructions from you. What do you expect me as an editor and moderator to do? 
    As for what you call my “In-House Islamic Scholars,you should have understood by now that my policy is to have all shades of opinion associated with New Age Islam. I do have a view of my own which can be characterised as moderate-liberal, but even within that range their are different shades of opinion. For instance, I am completely against Takfirism. I do not believe we can wash our hands off the Jihadis by declaring they are out of the pale of Islam. This is none of my business and beyond any Muslim's jurisdiction, in my view. But some of my biggest supporters on the website do not agree with me. Which is completely fine. My team does have some blind fathers too and you should debate with them in a scholarly manner. I wish my team also had some Salafi, Wahhabi, Deobandi, Shia, Ahmadi scholars and perhaps even Christian, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Yazidi, scholars of Islam as well. After all we Muslims  just have to live in an inclusive world. Our world is practically a village now. 

    I believe that in today's world no one scholar can give us all-round guidance. We need to brainstorm along with all others. Gradually, eventually, over time, a consensus will emerge. People of all faiths will come round to this consensus. Those believers who still do not agree with this consensus will find themselves in the position of Khwarij, not just from Islam but from the goodwill of humanity. We will not need to declare them Kharjis. But before we reach this point their will be a ghamasan battle of ideas and it should be allowed to take place, within of course, the range of decency, that the Editor and Moderator can decide.

    The above comments are apropos the following section of one your comments:

    "You know that you have totally skipped answering my two comments? One relates to Sahih Bukhari, and another updates about “Knowledge is Power. What you need to do is to encourage your “In-House Islamic Scholars,” to confront certain Hadiths and be courageous enough to submit their explanation to the readers. The truth of the matter is, you, Sultan Shahin Saheb, should take a lead, as you are the “Editor & Moderator, of your very own forum. The words to the wise is sufficient."
    By Sultan Shahin - 2/12/2015 7:55:15 PM



  • Dear Lodhia Saheb, nearly all Muslims are blind followers of Hadees. Imam Bukhari and Muslim, etc. rescued us from nearly half a million concocted ahadees. But we are stuck with the rest, still several thousand, some of which sound quite reasonable and ennobling, corresponding to the spirit of the essential verses of Quran which should have universal applicability. The best one can say about these appealing  ahadees is that the Prophet may have said something like this, though they can still not be considered sayings of the Prophet saw. Some other ahadees are character assassinations of the Prophet as they had been fabricated to please the rulers who had come to power after liquidating nearly every member of the prophet's family. However the same blind followers of Hadees get infuriated when some Islamophobe mocks their blind faith by quoting from Hadees and then instead of fighting against this blind faith demand that I should ban the publication of Hadees. But while campaigning for sanity and campaigning against blind faith, we should continue to allow freedom of expression without which there can be no progress. No debate is possible unless you allow blind faithers who are the overwhelming majority of Muslims to give their opinion in support of their blind faith. And of course Islamophobes will continue to mock them by quoting scurrilous, pornographic ahadees. What does an editor do? Should one ban pornographic Hadees and militant verses of the Quran from an Islamic website? I can assure you many Muslims do not even know such verses and such hadees exist and they need to know. You cannot conduct a debate in the absence of this knowledge. 
    I wonder if you came across the following:
    Free Speech and Islam: Could Voltaire be Muslim

    By B.C

    Jan 9th 2015

    CAN classical Islam be reconciled with freedom of expression as a modern, liberal-minded person would understand the term? It is not merely Wednesday's horrible events in Paris which make that question urgent. In Saudi Arabia today, a liberal blogger, Raif Badawi,received the first 50 of the 1,000 lashes to which he has been condemned (along with a 10-year prison sentence) because of the allegedly impious contents of a website he founded. And in Pakistan, where the judiciary and the lynch mob take turns to persecute people on ever-crazier blasphemy charges, a man accused of that offence, and then deemed mentally unstable, was killed by fanatics soon after being released from jail.

    Let's consult an authority who is considered moderate in the spectrum of traditional Islam, Mohammad Hashim Kamali, an Afghan-born, British-trained law professor who now heads an institute of Islamic studies in Malaysia. His copious writings on the matter are adamant that Islam does allow, indeed insist on, freedom of religious choice, and on diversity of opinion about many matters. He has written approvingly of cases in Malaysia where apostasy (leaving Islam) was allowed, although recently Malaysian courts have taken a harsher line. 

    But as the professor presents things, there are clear limits to free speech. As he describes it, early Islamic lore (whose precedents can't be ignored) is overwhelmingly concerned with the avoidance of Fitna, a term that can mean many undesirable things from sedition to confusion to war or anarchy; Islam deplores (though you can argue about how severely it seeks to punish) any kind of speech that leads to or in itself amounts to Fitna. And in early Islamic polities, sedition and heresy were almost indistinguishable. If you tried to overthrow a caliph who was carrying out the will of God, that was impiety as well as treason; and if you poisoned the well of religious truth, you were undermining the political community as well as the faith. On a broader note, the professor writes:

    The right to criticise government leaders and express an opinion, critical or otherwise, in public affairs...is the right of every citizen, Muslim and non-Muslim alike. However...in matters that pertain to the dogma of Islam, criticism either from Muslims or non-Muslims will not be entertained, as personal or private opinion does not command authority in such matters. 

    That sounds alarming to a modern libertarian ear. On the other hand, the holder of such beliefs isn't necessarily asking the state to enforce them, let alone enforce them brutally. For a devout Roman Catholic, it is equally the case that "personal or private opinion does not command authority" in fundamental matters of doctrine, but today's Catholics don't usually expect the state to punish those who challenge those core doctrines. Even Professor Kamali acknowledges the need to change with the times: in some cases "the formulations of established schools of (Islamic) law...may not serve the needs of harmony and cohesion and multi-religious societies of our time."

    Perhaps the best hope is that they lived experience of Muslims who are citizens of Western countries will evolve faster than these complex theoretical constructs. Consider the tweet which many articulate Muslims have been exchanging since yesterday, in tribute to the policeman who died in the Paris attack: "I am Ahmed the dead cop. Charlie ridiculed my faith and culture and I died defending his right to do so." Consciously or unconsciously this was written in imitation of another Parisian, Voltaire, and his apocryphal declaration that "I do not agree with what you say but I will defend to the death your right to say it..." Personally I find Ahmed's posthumous message, issued by his co-religionists, more moving than the French philosopher's famous line, which at best was a summary of his thinking, by a biographer, rather than anything he actually said.   

    Source: http://www.economist.com/blogs/erasmus/2015/01/free-speech-and-islam

    URL: http://www.newageislam.com/islam-and-human-rights/bc/free-speech-and-islam--could-voltaire-be-muslim?/d/100987

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/12/2015 7:09:43 PM



  • Ignore the previous one

    https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gHGDN9-oFJE By Observer - 2/12/2015 11:26:11 AM



  • https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gHGDN9-oFJE&sns=em

    By Observer - 2/12/2015 11:21:23 AM



  • Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    How can any sane Muslim encourage another Muslim to be cheerful? Many of our fellow Muslims have a difficult time to act with humility.

     

    Yes, only the blind followers of Hadiths are stuck in the 7th century. Those who have kept abreast with modern day heroes, do not have the same mind set. May I ask, “Which snipers and fighters are you referring to?” It seems just like “Ex-Tablighi,” you are also taking messages out of context only to throw a negative light on it.

     

    You keep forgetting that Clint Eastwood, Muhammad Ali, Robin Williams, are all American legends. Does that mean that ordinary Americans are also inflicted with the same mindset? If you carry such an opinion, then I am sorry to say that you are dead wrong. Keep in mind that, I am an American Muslim.

     

    Do you know that you have totally skipped answering my two comments? One relates to Sahih Bukhari, and another updates about “Knowledge is Power. What you need to do is to encourage your “In-House Islamic Scholars,to confront certain Hadiths and be courageous enough to submit their explanation to the readers. The truth of the matter is, you, Sultan Shahin Saheb, should take a lead, as you are the “Editor & Moderator, of your very own forum. The words to the wise is sufficient.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  

     

    https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-1/c19.0.50.50/p50x50/10345544_1491807221063517_7769720302369747775_n.jpg?oh=80509f0c6d690f4702f16870d2bb7629&oe=54EE53DD&__gda__=1423852305_041818bb1b6a67438ac420e6d88337f6  mohammedrafiqlodhia 

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/12/2015 9:58:19 AM



  • I am glad Lodhia Saheb you are recognising how difficult a task encouraging Muslims to change is. I remember the tag-line. But you should also understand that our community is still stuck in the seventh century mindset. In fact even the Clint Eastwood Club and hero worship of boxers, snipers and other fighters is only an indication of the same mindset. Hadees and Seera was created by this mindset which cannot accept a peace-loving, compromise-loving, bloodshed avoiding person as a hero. Our Prophet was not a sword wielding warrior. He was a dweller of caves, someone who would spend weeks on end contemplating the ills of society and ways of reform. But those who wanted a warrior prophet as their hero created one through fabricating ahadees and giving universality to contextual, aggressive, militant verses of Quran.

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/12/2015 5:33:01 AM



  • Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    It is truly shocking that the Muslim intellectuals are so much obsessed with the two words, “Kafir,” and “Jihad.”

     

    “Knowledge is Power, is what our fellow humans believe in, whereas, all the “Muslim Jihadists, know is “Killing is Holy. Worst of all, the Muslim intelligentsia somehow want to be dragged endlessly into futile debates.

     

    Without a shadow of doubt, it is the blind followers of Hadiths, I repeat, the blind followers of Hadiths, who have collectively made it a living hell for the millions of Muslims around the world. They are deeply indoctrinated so such an extent that no one can even dare change their mindset. It is a lost cause, so to speak.

     

    It is truly “Mind Boggling,that your forum, “New Age Islam, with a tag line, “Mapping an Agenda for the 21st Century,” has remain engulfed in the quagmire of continuously being involved in the same old debates over and over again. In this day and age, the grown-up Muslim intellectuals are not able to catch up with speed, as to what is happening in the world.

     

    I, hereby, invite all the readers to visit the recently developed blog:

     

    https://knowledgeexiststobeimparted.wordpress.com/

     

    Let the respected readers, especially the Muslims, reflect and ponder over, and think as to how much of the worldly knowledge do they possess? That’s a million dollar question, Sultan Saheb.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/12/2015 1:46:23 AM



  • By the way, the article "Who is a kafir according to the Quran" is for promoting healthy inter faith relations between Muslims and non-Muslims and remove any inhibitions on the part of the Muslims regarding the non-Muslims on the grounds that these are "kafir". No one, irrespective of his faith, is a kafir unless he is an open enemy of Islam and the Quran does not prevent friendship with non-Muslims, but on the other hand requires that non-Muslims be treated with kindness and justice on par with the treatment given to one's own close kin.

    To prevent the youth joining "jehad" there are other articles:

    Read those articles: Part 1: The Four Principle Of ‘Jihad As War’

    Part 2: Refutation of the Excuses or Justifications Offered By the Terrorist Groups

    By Observer - 2/12/2015 12:40:18 AM



  • Hello Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    You wrote, “I am merely saying that in the age of the internet we cannot deal with issues by remaining silent. It's no secret that many ahadees and Quranic verses, are used for terrorist indoctrination. In order to save our children from joining militant armies and turning into suicide bombs which they are now doing in growing numbers, we need to talk about them and explain if these verses continue to guide our conduct today.”

     

    Your request to get into yet another round of debates pertaining to the selected verses of Quran do not make any sense at all. Your so-called “In-House Prosecutor,” or should I say, your “In-House Tormentor,” who happens to be an “Ex-Tablighi,” will disrupt everything.

     

    Spare your own energy and time. Better yet, spare the readers of witnessing the joy of provocation. In fact, as an editor of “New Age Islam, your first and foremost task should be to remain absolutely focused on finding out the reason as to why certain Hadiths are circulating without being challenged by your own “In-House Islamic Scholars.” For instance:  

     

    Bukhari: 4:52:220 Allah's Apostle said "I have been made victorious with terror (cast in the hearts of the enemy)"

     

    Ibn Ishaq: 572 “Muhammad is the man, an Apostle of my Lord. Evil was the state of our enemy so they lost the day. Fortunes change and we came upon them like lions from the thickets. The armies of Allah came openly, flying at them in rage, so they could not get away. We destroyed them and forced them to surrender. In the former days there was no battle like this; their blood flowed freely. We slew them and left them in the dust. Those who escaped were choked with terror. A multitude of them were slain. This is Allah’s war in which those who do not accept Islam will have no helper. War destroyed the tribe and fate the clan.”

     

    Thanks again for reading, I remain

     

    Very truly yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/11/2015 11:50:28 PM



  • Compilation of the Quran some 20 years after the Prophet's death may raise the question of possible over-inclusion which can justify scholarly attempts to separate the revealed verses from the sermons of the Prophet. But Muslims will never permit such a project. By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 2/11/2015 3:46:00 PM



  • Mr Shahin says: “Mr Naseer Ahmed will do a great service if, as a Quran expert, he could contextualise these verses and explain why they were revealed and under what circumstances.

    My article contextualizes all verses dealing with the kafaru among the Muslims, Jews, Christians and the Polytheists as necessarily referring to the people in the Prophet’s times since, kafaru is not a term that the Quran uses for people of any faith. This has been brought out very clearly. The common misconception is that Kafir, Mushrik and idol worshipper are synonyms. In another thread, it is being discussed that  Al Azhar is unable to say whether the Christians of today are kafir or not! The article takes into account every verse containing kafir or its grammatical variants to drive home the point that the Quran, at no stage, treated all people belonging to any faith as kafir and always kept the distinction between those who are kafir among the Muslims, Jews, Christians and Polytheists and those who are not. Since the fighting is only against the kafaru and every verse regarding fighting gives an explicit reason for fighting without exception, there is nothing more that is required. Considering that even Al Azhar is confused about the meaning of kafir  in the Quran, my article goes a long way in making things clear.

    Islam was under dire threat of extinction without waging war on those who wanted to annihilate it and fighting was ordained. The Muslims had to be persuaded to fight a numerically superior enemy and there are verses that make fighting mandatory for those Muslims who were in Medina with the Prophet. Fighting was not ordained for those who stayed behind in Mecca as that would have amounted to treason. The Muslims were advised to migrate to Medina and there is a verse which specifically prohibits the Prophet from helping the Muslims who stayed behind in Mecca in any manner except in matters of religion.  This covers all the verses exhorting the Muslims to fight.

    By Observer - 2/11/2015 1:44:30 PM



  • "The implication unfortunately is that Islam is a religion of violence if the “rest is not ignored”!


    This is Mr. Naseer Ahmed Observer's view, not mine.


    I am merely saying that in the age of the internet we cannot deal with issues by remaining silent. It's no secret that many ahadees and Quranic verses, are used for terrorist indoctrination.' In order to save our children from joining militant armies and turning into suicide bombs which they are now doing in growing numbers, we need to talk about them and explain if these verses continue to guide our conduct today. Are the terrorist ideologues justified in misusing the Muslim belief in Quran as an infallible and universal source of guidance for promoting violence. I believe Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance, but I also believe that merely saying so repeatedly and quoting verses promoting peace and co-existence is not going to help us in the present age. Militancy is growing. An army of suicide bombers emerges from Muslim societies wherever some vested interest needs them. This should cause great concern in the community.


     Mr Naseer Ahmed will do a great service if, as a Quran expert, he could contextualise these verses and explain why they were revealed and under what circumstances. Our prime task at the moment should be to save our children from taking the path of militancy in their impatient quest for Heaven. Apart from a host of ahadees available on Taliban and other terrorist websites, a moderate Muslim thinker, Dr. Shabbir Ahmed of Florida too has cited the following Qur'anic verses in this regard and tried to explain some of them. We will need to contextualise and explain all these verses individually. All I am saying is we cannot ignore them, or stay silent about them any more. We will be happy to host Naseer saheb's essay contextualising these verses and explaining their circumstances and guiding the community if we Muslims still need to consider them as God's exhortation for us in this day and age:


    2:216 Fighting is ordained for you, even though it is hateful to you. But it may happen that you hate a thing that is good for you, and it may happen that you love a thing that is bad for you. For, God knows and you know not. [See 2:190-193, 22:39]


    2:217 They ask you about fighting in any Month of Security. Say, “Fighting in the prescribed Months of Security is a great transgression. (2:194). However, repelling men from the Way of God, and rejecting His Command of peace in those Months and turning people away from the Masjid of Security and the Prescribed Way of Life, and evicting its people from there, are greater offences in the Sight of God. Persecution is a crime far greater than killing.” They will not cease from fighting against you until they make you revert from your Way of Life, if they can. He among you who goes back from his Deen and dies in disbelief these are the ones whose works are rendered vain in this world and the Hereafter. These are the companions of Fire, to abide therein.


    2:244 Fight in the Cause of God, and know that God is Hearer, Knower.


    [This is propagated as a verse of universal value, even forgetting the verse which says: Fight only in self-defence and against oppression since God does not love aggressors. 2:190-194]


    8:37 God will distinguish the bad from the good, then pile the bad on top of one another and cast them together in the Hellfire. They are truly the losers. [The clans of rejecters will join hands to fight the believers, but the battleground will become Hell for them]


    8:38 (O Prophet) Tell the disbelievers that if they cease hostilities, all their past will be forgiven. But if they return, they will meet the example of the old nations.


    8:39 Fight and subdue those who persist in aggression until persecution is no more, and absolute freedom of religion is established. People must be able to adopt a religion only for God’s Approval, and as free choice (2:193, 12:108). If they cease from aggression, God is the Seer of their actions, and therefore you shall leave them alone.


    2:246 (Sustained commitment to the Divine Order with wealth and person is not an easy undertaking.) After the times of Moses, some leaders of the Israelites promised their Prophet (Samuel), “If you appoint a king for us, we will fight in the Cause of God.” The Prophet said, “Is it your intention to refrain from fighting if it was decreed to you?” They said’ “Why should we not fight in the Cause of God when we have been driven out of our homes with our children?” Yet when fighting was ordained for them, they turned away all but a few. God is Aware of the wrongdoers.


    3:13 (Only recently at Badr) there was a sign for you in the two armies that met in combat. One was fighting in the Cause of God, the other denying Him. With their own eyes the two armies saw each other as twice their number. But God strengthens people with His support according to His Laws. This must be a lesson for people of vision for all times.


    3:167 And that He might mark out those afflicted with hypocrisy. They had been told, “Come! Fight in the Cause of God, or at least defend (the city).” They answered, “If we knew that confrontation was forthcoming, we would have indeed joined you.” On that day they were closer to disbelief than belief, uttering with their mouths something that was not in their hearts. But God was best Aware of what they were trying to conceal.


    3:168 Those who sat at home said of their brethren, “If they had listened to us they would not have been slain.” Say (O Messenger), “Then avert death from your own selves if you are truthful.”


    3:169 Think not of those, who are slain in the Cause of God, as dead. Nay, they are living! And by their Lord they are well provided for. [2:154, 3:156]


    3:170 They are happy in the Bounty that God has given them - and pleased for those left behind, who have not yet joined them - that upon them shall be no fear, nor anything to regret.


    3:171 They rejoice because of the favor from God and the Bounty. For, God never fails to reward those who have conviction in His Laws.


    3:172 For those who respond to God and the Messenger even after harm has struck them - and continue to work for the betterment of humanity and live upright, is a tremendous reward. [8:24]


    3:195 Thus their Lord accepts and answers their prayer, “Indeed, I never let the work of any worker, male or female, go vain. You are members, one of another. Hence, those who emigrate, and are driven from their homelands, and suffer harm in My Cause, and fight, and are slain, I shall certainly blot out their faults, erasing the imprints of their misdeeds on their ‘self’. And certainly, I shall admit them into Gardens with streams flowing beneath - a handsome return from God's Presence. For, with God is the fairest return of actions. [2:186]


    2:191 Subdue them regardless of their tribal affiliations, and drive them out of where they drove you out. For persecution, (terror, torture, oppression) is a crime even more grievous than killing. Do not fight against them near the Masjid of Security (a haven of amnesty) unless they attack you therein. But if they attack you there, then you shall fight against them. Such has to be the rebuttal of those who reject (the Standard of Peace).


    2:193 Hence, fight them only until there is no more harassment, and Deen may be adopted for the sake of God alone. And if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against those who replace peace with aggression. 2:194 You may fight during the Months of Peace and Security if you are attacked, for, a violation of sanctity will activate the Law of Just retribution. So, the one who attacks you should expect retaliation in like manner. Be mindful of God, and know that God is with those who live upright.


    2:195 (Defence of the Divine Order calls for sacrifice of wealth and person.) Hence, keep open your resources in the Cause of God, and let not your own hands throw you into destruction. Be beneficent! Indeed, God loves the doers of good. [You might throw yourselves into destruction by withholding contributions to this noble Cause]


    4:74 Let them fight in God’s Cause, all those who sell the life of this world for the other. Whoever fights in God’s Cause, be he slain or be he victorious, We shall soon give him an immense reward.


    4:75 What has happened to you that you do not fight in the Cause of God? Defenceless men, women, and children are being oppressed and crying, "Our Lord! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors, and raise for us protectors and helpers." [God does not fight in person, or send His armies or angels physically. 22:39]


    4:76 Believers fight in the Cause of God, that is, for the removal of tyranny and in self-defence (benign aggression). And the rejecters of the Truth fight in tyranny and for their selfish desire to oppress people (malignant aggression). So fight against those friends of Satan. Surely, Satan's plan is feeble because the selfish desire fails before the Divine Law of Requital.


    4:77 Have you seen those who have been told, “Curb your hands, and establish the Divine System and set up the just Economic Order?”But as soon as the Command came to fight, some of them feared men as they should have feared God, or even more. They say, "Our Lord! Why have You ordained fighting for us? If only You had granted us a little more delay!" Say, “Brief is the enjoyment of this world, whereas the life to come is the best for those who live upright. None of you shall be wronged a hair’s breadth.”


    4:78 Wherever you may be, death will find you, even if you live in fortified castles. When something good happens to them, they say, “It is from God.” And when affliction befalls them they say to each other, “This is from you O fellow-man!” Tell them, “All things happen according to God’s Laws.” What is amiss with these people, they do not understand a thing?


    4:84 (O Messenger) Fight in the Cause of God. You are responsible only for yourself. Inspire the believers (to conquer all fear). God may well curb the might of the unbelievers (who are bent upon destroying the System). For God is the Strongest in Might, and Strongest in the ability to deter. [2:151]


    4:91 You will find others who desire peace for their people and make peace with you. But at the slightest opportune moment they come to fight against you. If they neither leave you alone, nor offer peace, nor hold their hands, subdue them regardless of which group they belong to. In their case, God has given you a clear Authority to fight.


    5:33 The just punishment for those who wage war against God and His Messenger and endeavor to commit bloody crimes on earth, is that they be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet severed on alternate sides, or be entirely banished from the land. Such is their disgrace in this world, and an awful suffering awaits them in the Hereafter.


    8:43 God made them few in your vision. Had He made them appear more numerous (and you got intimidated by their great numbers), you would have been discouraged. And you would have disputed among yourselves (whether fighting them at Badr was a good idea).

    But God saved you from faltering. He is fully Aware of what is in the hearts.


    8:44 When the two armies faced each other, He made them appear few in your eyes, and made you appear weak in their eyes (3:12).

    God willed that to be the Day of Distinction. All matters go back to God’s Laws as their source.


    8:45 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! Whenever you meet an army, be firm and remember God much, that you may be successful. [8:10]


    8:57 When you encounter them in war, deal with them to set an example for those who come after them, that they may remember.


    8:59 Let not the rejecters suppose that they can get away with their violations. They cannot escape the Law of Requital.


    8:60 Make ready for them all the power you can muster, and all the equipment you can mobilize so that you may deter the enemies of God, and your enemies. And others beside them whom you know not, God knows them. Whatever wealth and effort you spend on your defences, will be your spending in the Cause of God, and it will be repaid to you generously. And you shall not be wronged.


    8:65 O Prophet! Inspire the believers (to conquer all fear of death) in times of war. If there be twenty of you who are patient in adversity, they shall overcome two hundred, and if there be one hundred of you, they shall overcome one thousand of those who are bent upon denying the Truth. This is because the rejecters of the Truth are people who cannot understand (the Eternal rewards that motivate the believers).


    8:66 For the time being, however, God has lightened your burden, for He knows that you are weak. And so, if there be one hundred of you who are steadfast in adversity, they should be able to overcome two hundred; and if there be one thousand of you, they should be able to overcome two thousand by God’s Leave. For, God is with those who are steadfast in adversity.


    9:12 If they keep breaking their pledges after their treaty, and assail your System, then fight the chiefs of the disbelievers. They have no respect for their binding oaths. This action will help restrain them from aggression.


    9:13 Will you not fight a folk who keep breaking their solemn pledges and did everything to drive out the Messenger, and did attack you first? What! Do you fear them? Nay, it is God alone Whom you should more justly fear, if you are truly believers.


    9:14 Fight them! God will punish them at your hands, and He will humiliate them, and give you victory over them, and He will soothe the bosoms of those who believe.


    9:16 Do you think that you will be left alone without God distinguishing those among you who strive in His Cause, and take none for ally except God, His Messenger, and the believers? And God is Aware of what you do.


    9:29 Fight back against those who do not believe in God, nor in the Last Day, nor do they prohibit what God and His Messenger have prohibited, nor do they acknowledge the True Deen - among those who were given the Scripture, until they pay Jizya in humility.


    9:32 They (Jews and Christians) seek to extinguish God’s Light (the Qur’an) by their utterances. But God will not allow this to pass, for He has willed to spread His Light in all its fullness even though the rejecters may detest it.


    9:33 He it is Who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the True Religion (Deen = The System of Life), that He may cause it to prevail over all religions and systems of life, even though the idolaters may detest it. [9:31-33, 13:31, 14:48, 18:48, 41:53, 48:28, 51:20-21, 61:8-9]


    [Commentary by Dr. Shabbir Ahmed: “the Qura’nic Deen will prevail over all other systems of life. This refers to religions such as Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism and all other forms of religion, including the sects that are now present in Islam. But next to religions, the Qur’anic Deen will also prevail over all political systems of the world such as Communism, Secular Democracy, Theocracy, Monarchy and it will rule over all ways of life as Humanism, Socialism and so on. This will happen as humanity willingly realizes the supremacy of The Qur’an”.]   


    9:36 God has ordained twelve months in one year. This has been God’s Ordinance since the day He created the heavens and the earth. Four of these Months are Sacred, forbidden for all warfare. This is the Firm Religion, the right way. So, do not wrong yourselves by fighting during the Sacred Months. However, you may fight the idolaters in any or all these months if they fight against you in any or all of them (2:194). And know that God is with those who restrain themselves.


    9:38 O You who have chosen to be graced with belief! What is amiss with you that, when called upon, “Go forth in the Cause of God,” you cling heavily to the ground? Do you choose pleasure in the life of this world rather than in the life to come? The enjoyment of this life is but a paltry thing compared to the Hereafter.


    9:39 If you did not go forth in God’s Cause, He (His Law) will afflict you with a painful doom. He will replace you with another nation. You cannot harm Him in the least. All things transpire according to the Laws appointed by God. [Only the competent nations live honorably on earth. 21:105, 24:55]


    9:41 Go forth lightly armed, or heavily armed and strive with your wealth and person in the Cause of God. This is best for you if you but knew.


    9:44 Those who have conviction in God and the Last Day, do not ask you for exemption from striving with their wealth and persons. And God is Aware of those who live upright.


    9:47 Even if they had gone forth they would have only caused trouble and run to and fro seeking sedition among you. In your ranks are some apt to listen to them and in your ranks are spies of the enemy. God knows the wrongdoers.


    9:48 They have sought to create dissension among you before, and raised difficulties for you (O Prophet). They did that till the Truth came and the Decree of God prevailed, though they detested it.


    9:49 Of them is he who says, “Grant me leave, and do not draw me into trial.” Have they not fallen into trial already? In fact, Hell is all around the disbelievers.


    9:52 Say, "Can you expect for us other than one of two things?" - (Victory or martyrdom). On the other hand, we expect for you that God will send His retribution from Himself, or by our hands. Wait then expectant, and we shall hopefully wait with you.”


    9:53 (Some hypocrites want to make financial contributions.) Tell them, "Your contribution is not accepted whether you pay willingly or unwillingly. You are a people who drift away from the System at the first opportune time."


    47:4 If you meet the disbelievers in battle, then, strike at their Command centres. Until you have subdued them, then, bind them firmly. And thereafter, must be an act of kindness or ransom when the battle lays down its weapons. And if God willed, He could indeed punish them Himself, but that He may let you test one by means of another (as to which nation remains vigilant.) And, as for those who are slain in the Cause of God, He does not render their actions vain.


    [8:37, 38:40. Commentary by Dr. Shabbir Ahmed (available at www.ourbeacon.com)]: “Free the captives as an act of kindness or ransom, such as in exchange for your men in their captivity. There is no third option. Fadharb ar-riqaab is usually rendered as ‘smite their necks.’ A little contemplation, however, makes it plain that in a battle of swords and arrows no commander would order his soldiers to aim for the necks alone. Therefore, the stated term has been used idiomatically, indicating knocking out the command centres. It is interesting to note that even in today’s encounters with high technology this principle is given a top priority.”

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/11/2015 11:36:03 AM



  • It is indeed an irony that both Muqallids (followers of imams in Islamic jurisprudence) and Ghair Muqallids (those who claim to follow none) have closed the doors to ijtihad (rethinking) and tajdeed (reformation) in Islam and Shariah. 
    While Ghair Muqallids, who are also known as Ahle Hadisis, have placed the hadith reports at a pedestal above the holy Qur’an, most Muqallids believe that the Islamic scholars and ulama no longer need to study and rethink the original sources (the Qur'an and hadith) in new emerging issues. Rather, they must be confined to the four schools of Islamic law (madhahib) regardless of time and place.
    The four Islamic law schools came into being around the late 10th century. Named after their founders, they are geographically based, such that different parts of the Muslim world have come over time to be associated with one or other of the four. In India, the predominant school is the Hanafi, named after Imam Abu Hanifa of Iraq (d. 767).The schools are distinguished by minor differences of judgment between them.
    No doubt, all the imams of different Islamic schools were right in their research and rethinking of the religious and theological issues in their effort to meet the responsibilities placed on them. But they did not put an end to this process, neither had they claimed so. Then, what made the ulema hesitate to go directly to the sources (the Qur'an and the prophetic traditions) instead of relying on the judgments of the founding jurists on major issues. In practice, today’s ulema and classical Islamic scholars have literally closed the gate of ijahad or independent reasoning. Once the medieval jurists had judged something to be forbidden or permitted, based on the guidance of the Qur'an and prophetic traditions as well as the political circumstances, all that later generations of scholars had to do was to follow in their footsteps. They no longer had to consult the original sources themselves. But while this was generally the case, in fact independent reasoning never ceased as new issues constantly arose, needing fresh interpretation and judgment by the ulama. 

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 2/11/2015 8:03:55 AM



  • Mr Shahin says: “Sufis used to emphasise the positive teachings of Islam and simply ignore the rest”
    The implication unfortunately is that Islam is a religion of violence if the “rest is not ignored”!
    Nothing can be further from the truth as brought out very clearly in the article below.
    A summary of the article:
    There is not even one verse in the Quran that directs Muslims to treat the non-Muslims in any manner, except with kindness and justice.
    All the verses regarding being harsh, not making friends etc are for the kafaru among the Muslims (hypocrites), Christians, Jews and the Polytheists. The Quran makes a clear distinction between the terms kafir, mushrik and the idol worshipper and these are not synonyms. Very clearly, in the Quran, not all Muslims, Christains, Jews or polytheists are kafir. Kafir is a faith neutral term used for people indulging in specific acts of kufr.
    Every verse that refers to the kafaru in the Quran, is therefore necessarily referring to the kafaru of the Prophet’s times, and does not apply to any of the people today, as this term is not based on a persons’ faith.
    NAI can hold a discussion on the subject with the ulema after distributing a translated version and I am prepared to defend it.
    Who is a Kafir in the Quran? (Part 1)
    Muhammad Marmaduke Pickthall says: “In the Qur’an I find two meanings (of a Kafir), which become one the moment that we try to realize the divine standpoint. The Kafir in the first place, is not the follower of any religion. He is the opponent of Allah’s benevolent will and purpose for mankind - therefore the disbeliever in the truth of all religions, the disbeliever in all Scriptures as of divine revelation, the disbeliever to the point of active opposition in all the Prophets (pbut) whom the Muslims are bidden to regard, without distinction, as messengers of Allah.
    The following article is a result of researching every occurrence of Kafir and Mushrik (polytheist) and their grammatical equivalents in the Quran. The Quran makes a very clear distinction between Kafir, Mushrik and idolator. These are not synonyms. Unfortunately however, most translators have been careless and treat these as synonyms. Even Yusuf Ali who is otherwise one of the better translators, is guilty of mistranslating on many occasions.
    Who is a Kafir in the Quran?
    Moses is kafir!
    The word kafir is used by Pharaoh for Moses.
    (26:18) (Pharaoh) said: "Did we not cherish thee as a child among us, and didst thou not stay in our midst many years of thy life? (19) "And thou didst a deed of thine which (thou knowest) thou didst, and thou art an ungrateful wretch (min-al-kafirin)!"
    The word kafir therefore denotes the trait of ingratitude, rebellion, active opposition and has nothing to do with faith.
    Muslims displaying certain characteristics are referred to as kafir
    (2:253) For fighting with each other (2:254) For not practicing charity  (2:264) Those who cancel their charity by reminders of their charity or by injury. Those who spend of their substance only to be seen by men, but believe neither in Allah nor the last day.  (4:37) those who are niggardly or enjoin niggardliness on others, or hide the bounties which Allah hath bestowed on them (3:130) Those who devour usury (3:32) Those who do not pay heed when asked to "Obey Allah and His Messenger"
    For the hypocrites among those who claimed to be Muslims
    (2:19)  Those who bartered Guidance for error. Those who rejected faith.
    All those who display the characteristics of Kufr
    (2:24) The doubters who said that Allah sends no revelations. They are asked to produce a Sura similar to any Sura in Quran and establish their charge with witnesses and if they fail to do so be prepared for the fate that awaits the Kafirin.
    (2:191) Those who turned the Muslims out from their homes and practiced tumult and oppression.
    (2:250) Goliath and his forces in the battle against David
    (2:286, 3:147) Those who fight/stand against the faith
    (3:141) For those who were in war with the Muslims
    (4:140) Those who defy and ridicule the signs of Allah.
    (4:150) Those who deny Allah and His messengers, and (those who) wish to separate Allah from His messengers, saying: "We believe in some but reject others": And (those who) wish to take a course midway,-
    (5:44) If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are (no better than) Unbelievers.
    (7:37) one who invents a lie against Allah or rejects His Signs
    (7:45) "Those who would hinder (men) from the path of Allah and would seek in it something crooked
    For Iblis or Satan
    (2:34) Who refused to obey Allah's command and bow down to Adam
    For the Jews/people of the Book
    (2:89 ) For refusing to believe in the Quran as a revelation although it is a Book from Allah confirming what is with them  (89) in insolent envy that Allah of His Grace should send it to any of His servants He pleases.
    (4:161) That they took usury, though they were forbidden; and that they devoured men´s substance wrongfully;
    Those who are not kafir
     (3:113) Not all of them are alike: Of the People of the Book are a portion that stand (For the right): They rehearse the Signs of Allah all night long, and they prostrate themselves in adoration. (114) They believe in Allah and the Last Day; they enjoin what is right, and forbid what is wrong; and they hasten (in emulation) in (all) good works: They are in the ranks of the righteous. (115) Of the good that they do, nothing will be rejected of them; for Allah knoweth well those that do right.
    (3:199) And there are, certainly, among the People of the Book, those who believe in Allah, in the revelation to you, and in the revelation to them, bowing in humility to Allah: They will not sell the Signs of Allah for a miserable gain! For them is a reward with their Lord, and Allah is swift in account.
    (4:162) But those among them who are well-grounded in knowledge, and the believers, believe in what hath been revealed to thee and what was revealed before thee: And (especially) those who establish regular prayer and practise regular charity and believe in Allah and in the Last Day: To them shall We soon give a great reward.
    (5:69) Those who believe (in the Qur´an), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), and the Sabians and the Christians,- any who believe in Allah and the Last Day, and work righteousness,- on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.
    (10:40) Of them (applies to all non-Muslims) there are some who believe therein, and some who do not: and thy Lord knoweth best those who are out for mischief.
    The Polytheists or the Mushrikin
    While polytheism is described as an unforgivable sin and there are many verses which stress the point that the Prophets were not among those who associate others with God, there is not a single verse directed against any community or people of any faith including the Jews, Christians and the Polytheists unless they are also kafir or indulge in acts of kufr.
    (2:105) It is never the wish of those kafaru among the People of the Book, nor of the Pagans (mushrikin), that anything good should come down to you from your Lord. But Allah will choose for His special Mercy whom He will - for Allah is Lord of grace abounding.
    (98:1) The kafaru, among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, were not going to depart (from their ways) until there should come to them Clear Evidence,-
    (98:6) The kafaru, among the People of the Book and among the Polytheists, will be in Hell-Fire, to dwell therein (for aye). They are the worst of creatures.
    Very clearly not all Polytheists, Jews or Christian or non-Muslims are kafir in the Quran which is why the verses specifically refer to only the kafir among these people.
    To summarize, the Quran does not identify kafir by his/her belief system or faith but by certain specific characteristics that make the person an active enemy of Religion, God and the people of faith. A kafir is one who actively hinders people from practicing their faith, persecutes people of faith, opposes humanitarian practices such as giving of charity, shunning usury etc. A kafir could be a Muslim, Jew, Christian, polytheist, atheist and the term is faith neutral.
    Who is a Kafir in the Quran? (Part 2)
    In part 1 of the article, we have seen that kafir is a term that the Quran does not associate with any faith or belief system but uses it only for people who indulge in acts of kufr. These acts of kufr have been detailed in the previous part.
    Muslim – Kafir relationship
    Muslims are asked not to befriend the kafirin.
    (3:28) Let not the believers Take for friends or helpers kafirin rather than believers: if any do that, in nothing will there be help from Allah: except by way of precaution, that ye may Guard yourselves from them. (4:139) Yea, to those who take for friends kafirin rather than believers: is it honour they seek among them? Nay,- all honour is with Allah. (4:144) O ye who believe! Take not for friends kafirin rather than believers: Do ye wish to offer Allah an open proof against yourselves?
    (5:57) O ye who believe! take not for friends and protectors those who take your religion for a mockery or sport,- whether among those who received the Scripture before you, or among the kufaru; but fear ye Allah, if ye have faith (indeed).
    Verse 5:51 asks Muslims not to take Christians and the Jews as protectors because they are more likely to be protectors to each other. This is a context specific warning since 5:82 says that Christians are more likely to be nearest in love to Muslims (presumably when not making common cause with the Jews). There is nothing similar against the Polytheists except a warning in (5:82) Strongest among men in enmity to the believers wilt thou find the Jews and Pagans; and nearest among them in love to the believers wilt thou find those who say, "We are Christians":
    There is however no prohibition on taking the polytheists as friends. The prohibition for taking of friends is from among the kafir or the open enemies.  
    While friendship with the kafir is prohibited, verse 2:221 prohibits marriage with the mushrikin or the polytheists. Here it does not matter whether the mushrik is also a kafir or not. (It may be noted that prohibiting marriage with a kafir is impractical since some among the Muslims are also kafir and not all non-Muslims are kafir).
    The following is a clear verse enjoining treating the non-kafir among the non-Muslims (Jews, Christians, Polytheists) with kindness and justice.
    (60:8) Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly (taburruhum) and justly (tuqsitu) with them: for Allah loveth those who are just. (9) Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances), that do wrong.
    The call for justice and fairness in dealing with non-Muslims who are neither at war with nor hostile to Muslims is the recommended golden rule. The verse clearly states the normal state for a relationship between Muslims and Non-Muslims should be based on the best morals and justice with those who declare peace and do not fight them.
    The Quran uses the word, “Bir,” which is typically used to describe the highest relationship one could have with parents. The Quran also uses “Bir” to describe the type of relationship we should have with Non-Muslims. “Bir” includes all the good things that a relationship should have, and excludes all the bad aspects of a relationship. For that reason, Muslim scholars said that “Bir” is the foundation of the relationship between Muslims and Non-Muslims.
     Verses that ask Muslims to fight
    Except for Surah 9 which will be discussed separately, none of the verses regarding fighting mention the enemy that the Muslims are called upon to fight by their faith but by what they do or by the term kafir.
    (2:190) Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.
    (3:13) "There has already been for you a Sign in the two armies that met (in combat): One was fighting in the cause of Allah, the other resisting Allah; these saw with their own eyes Twice their number. But Allah doth support with His aid whom He pleaseth. In this is a warning for such as have eyes to see."
    (8:38) Say to the kafaru (the people who fought the Muslims in the battle of Badr), if (now) they desist (from practicing oppression), their past would be forgiven them; but if they persist, the punishment of those before them is already (a matter of warning for them).(39) And fight them on until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah altogether and everywhere; but if they cease, verily Allah doth see all that they do.
    The Verses of Surah 9
    Surah 9 was revealed after the conquest of Mecca. As can be seen, the war was mostly with the Meccans and their allies and the Meccans were all mushrikin. Notice when mushrik is used and when kafir is used in these verses.
    Verses 9:1 and 9:2 declare amnesty of four months to all mushrikin but with a warning that the kafirun among them will be covered with shame at the end of the period.
    9:3 and 9:4 announces dissolution of all treaties with the mushrikin except with those who never broke their treaty and warns the kafirun (not mushrikin) of a grievous penalty.
    Verse 9:5 is a command to kill all mushrikin at the end of the four month period with the exception of:
    Those who never broke their treaty or never fought the Muslims
    Those who seek asylum
    If the command was to kill only the kafir, then the problem would have been how to identify them. The verse identifies the non kafir among the mushrikin through the exceptions listed above. The rest of the verses are by way of justification and evidence of the kufr practiced by those who are to be killed which covers all the mushrikin except those who never broke their treaty with the Muslims or never fought against them or those who seek asylum. Asylum seekers are not defiant and therefore not kafir.
    (9:1) A (declaration) of immunity from Allah and His Messenger, to those of the Pagans (mushrikin)  with whom ye have contracted mutual alliances:-
    (2) Go ye, then, for four months, backwards and forwards, (as ye will), throughout the land, but know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah (by your falsehood) but that Allah will cover with shame those (kafirun) who reject Him.
    (3) And an announcement from Allah and His Messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that Allah and His Messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the Pagans (mushrikin). If then, ye repent, it were best for you; but if ye turn away, know ye that ye cannot frustrate Allah. And proclaim a grievous penalty to those who (kafaru) reject Faith.
    (4) (But the treaties are) not dissolved with those Pagans (mushrikin) with whom ye have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term: for Allah loveth the righteous.
    (5) But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the Pagans (mushrikin) wherever ye find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practise regular charity, then open the way for them: for Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.
    (6) If one amongst the Pagans (mushrikin) ask thee for asylum, grant it to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah; and then escort him to where he can be secure. That is because they are men without knowledge.
    (7) How can there be a league, before Allah and His Messenger, with the Pagans (mushrikin), except those with whom ye made a treaty near the sacred Mosque? As long as these stand true to you, stand ye true to them: for Allah doth love the righteous.
    (8) How (can there be such a league), seeing that if they get an advantage over you, they respect not in you the ties either of kinship or of covenant? With (fair words from) their mouths they entice you, but their hearts are averse from you; and most of them are rebellious and wicked.
    (9) The Signs of Allah have they sold for a miserable price, and (many) have they hindered from His way: evil indeed are the deeds they have done.
    (10) In a Believer they respect not the ties either of kinship or of covenant! It is they who have transgressed all bounds.
    (11) But (even so), if they repent, establish regular prayers, and practise regular charity,- they are your brethren in Faith: (thus) do We explain the Signs in detail, for those who understand.
    (12) But if they violate their oaths after their covenant, and taunt you for your Faith,- fight ye the chiefs of (al-kufr) Unfaith: for their oaths are nothing to them: that thus they may be restrained.
    (13) Will ye not fight people who violated their oaths, plotted to expel the Messenger, and took the aggressive by being the first (to assault) you? Do ye fear them? Nay, it is Allah Whom ye should more justly fear, if ye believe!
    (14) Fight them, and Allah will punish them by your hands, cover them with shame, help you (to victory) over them, heal the breasts of Believers,
    Very clearly, even under the most trying conditions of war spread over 9 years meant to annihilate Islam, the Quran makes a clear distinction between the `kafir’ among the non-Muslims and others. There is not a single verse in the entire Quran that directs the Muslims to treat people of other faiths with anything other than kindness and justice. The war is only against the kafir among them for the exclusive kufr of:
    Those who fight the Muslims for their faith and drive them out of their homes.
    Those who break their treaties and fight or aid other enemies of the Muslims
    There is no verse in the Quran that asks the Muslims to fight with the kafir for any other form of kufr such as: Blasphemy, ridicule, rejecting faith etc. By Observer - 2/11/2015 4:53:34 AM



  • Hadith is used in the Quran for:
    The message, the recital or the speech of Allah including revelations in the form of dreams
    For true stories as a synonym for the other Arabic words used namely “naba” and “qisa”
    It also refers to the discussion between two or more persons or to the theme of the discussion.
     It also refers to a person's statement(s) or an account of his deeds.
    The Quran contains stories or narrations (qisas, naba) of previous prophets, people etcetera
    Moral lessons through parables which constitute Al Hikmah.
    The unchanging laws and the sunnat of Allah are part of the Al Kitab.
    The mode of delivery is the recital (Quran) or hadith.
    The Quran is however created by Allah as the Quran itself affirms unequivocally
    (10:37) This Qur´an is not such as can be produced/created/invented (yuftara) by other than Allah; on the contrary it is a confirmation of (revelations) that went before it, and a fuller explanation of the Book - wherein there is no doubt - from the Lord of the worlds.
    The word yuftara also occurs in the verse below:
    (12:111) There is, in their stories, instruction for men endued with understanding. It is not a tale invented (yuftara), but a confirmation of what went before it,- a detailed exposition of all things, and a guide and a mercy to any such as believe..
    Besides,
    The closest to being called uncreated is the Al Kitab part of the Quran but this is like saying that Allah had no choice in the matter of creating the universe in any other manner and with laws different from what they are except the way they are. This is the position that the atheists take. They simply say that things are what they are because there is no other way they could be and there is no God. The positions that the atheists take would have been strong for an “uncreated universe”. The cosmologists and the physicists have however spoilt their story by talking about creation of the Universe as a distinct event and of the beginning and end of Time.
    Verse 11:107 and 108 also talk about “as long as the heavens and the earth endure” which could metonymically  mean forever, or until end of Time after which perhaps there may be a new creation which is not talked about as that would make little sense to us. By Observer - 2/11/2015 2:38:42 AM



  • God is the creator of everything including what anybody says or thinks.  There can be nothing like God as part cannot be equal to whole. By Satbir Singh Bedi - 2/10/2015 9:26:14 PM



  • Is the Quran itself merely a form of Hadees? "Quran is uncreated, divine, like God Himself, but nevertheless, only a form of Hadees. After all, how did Quran come to us? It came to us from the mouth of the Prophet, spoken by the Prophet. So it is apparently a saying (Hadees) of the Prophet. But it is also uncreated, divine, God Almighty."

    This is the gist of what I heard at some length from  a classical Islamic scholar, having highest degrees from Sufi madrasas, visiting me a couple of days ago.

    I wonder, if any reader would share his or her thoughts and enlighten me on this further. Is Quran just a compilation of Ahadees and at the same time uncreated, Divine, God Almighty Himself. This clearly is not an idle thought of an aalim; this is the considered view of all ulema in our madrasas. Though this particular aalim is a product of Sufi/Bareilwi madrasas, as more or less the same books are taught in all madrasa, this must be the prevailing opinion of all our classical scholars.

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/10/2015 7:28:38 PM



  • Dear Mohammed yunus
    The questions is not why I quoted the questioin is why fabricators of these stories are revered by you. What their fabrication is not insult but their quotation is.
    You can assume I am not happy with Islam and I am unable to leave it for risk from your believer brothers.
    You are deliberately running on the periphery. You know exactly what is my complain is.
    Your claim that you follow prophet in patience, tolerate attack, is just a bogus claim. 
    You produce multiple verses from the Quran how prophet tolerated abuses. You tell the prophet is a model to emulate. You write musls should show patient and should not behave like they have behaved for example in Paris, France.
    What you yourself did against my provocation? I have said that my provocation was deliberate. If you are true follower why you didn't show restraint?
    You showed a cult mentality. Let me tell you on this forum, few people showed restraint but not you and Ghulam M. They registered their complaint but not abused. They didn't even call liar.
    I am sorry to say thotha chana baje Ghana is true in your case.
    Some have passed this test. My quotations and quotations were painful to them but they maintained their restraint against provocations.

    At last what is the response of those you sent your work to?




    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/10/2015 8:33:46 AM



  • Dear mohammed yunus
    You have posted this material so many times that now it doesn't attract.
    Let Mr Lodhia speak in a way he wants.

    We have talked a lot. I don't want to repeat it again.
    You left some questions answered on the compilers of ahadith. You can reply those questions.
    If you insist, let me repeat I never fabricated any story againat the prophet. Now I don't appeal to your conscious because you have sold it.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/10/2015 7:38:56 AM



  • Dear Rational Muhammed Younus,

    In your last comment to Rafiq Lodhia Sahab, you said: “You are doing what your prophet did to his opponents.” (Implying using abusive language when read in continuation with your preceding statement).

    The truth that is furnished by the Qur'an preserved in the memory of the huffaz since the Prophet's era (regardless of whether the Prophet made it up or God sent it down) is as follows:

    The Meccans called him impostor (30:58), insane (44:1, 68:51), and an insane poet (37:36), and ridiculed the Qur’anic revelation (18:56, 26:6, 37:14, 45:9). They found the revelation strange and unbelievable (38:5, 50:2), and condemned it as the legends of the ancients (6:25, 23:83, 27:68, 46:17, 68:15, 83:13). They questioned why Muhammad could not show any miracles (6:37, 11:12, 13:7, 17:90-93, 21:5, 25:7/8, 29:50), and why the Qur'an was not revealed to a man of importance from the two cities (43:31) and declared that other people coached Muhammad or dictated to him morning and evening (25:5, 44:14). They also charged him with forging lies and witchcraft (34:43, 38:4), forging lies against God, forgery and making up tales (11:13, 32:3, 38:7, 46:8), witchcraft (21:3, 43:30, 74:24), obvious witchcraft that was bewildering (10:2, 37:15, 46:7) and of being bewitched or possessed by a Jinn (17:47, 23:70, 34:8).

    The Qur'an also describes the Prophet as a noble messenger (81:19) and a man of sublime character (68:4).

    The problem as expounded in my article referenced below is as follows:

    Many sexually loaded, deeply misogynic, sadistic and hatred inducing Ahadith are also attributed to the Prophet. They are no more than human imageries of a later era that found expression in the ever expanding Hadith corpus in the first two centuries of Islam. Muslim Ulema never quoted them as they knew they were simply forged and fabricated (technically ‘weak’). Today they are quoted both by non-Muslims and radical Muslims to conflate them with Islamic message. But the truth is the Hadith is not a divine scripture of Islam as expounded in the following article:

    Hadith Is Not A Divine Scripture Of Islam – A La Qur’an

    http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/hadith-is-not-a-divine-scripture-of-islam-–-a-la-qur’an/d/100996

    Ref:

    Defending the Prophet of Islam against Vulgar Charges from both Islamophobic and Radical Islamic Intellectuals and So Called Rationalists

    http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/defending-the-prophet-of-islam-against-vulgar-charges-from-both-islamophobic-and-radical-islamic-intellectuals-and-so-called-rationalists/d/101128

    Incidentally, your adopted title puts you in the category of Muslims who bring vulgar charges against the Prophet as you said in your statement quoted above, without a shred of evidence. Unless you produce any evidence to what you implied: that is, the Prophet used abusive language to his opponents, you are either a quack or confounded or deluded if not a liar.

    By muhammad yunus - 2/10/2015 6:11:52 AM



  • No books including holy books were ever written by God in Arabic or any other language. It is a myth that holy books have been written by God. By Satbir Singh Bedi - 2/10/2015 3:18:52 AM



  • Geedar bhabki par utar aaya hai naamakool. If you start you will get back and you hide your face behind the editor.
    Abuses have never stopped me, and will never stop. 
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/10/2015 2:01:08 AM



  • Lodhia
    Why should one wonder a Quran only Muslim like you who emulates Allah in abusing? After all the Quran is full of abuses. Yatha raja tatha parja.
    You are doing what your prophet did to his opponents. No matter how much you hate hadith but you are following hadith too. Hadith is a extention Counter of the Quran from where 'abuse' is released.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/10/2015 1:56:57 AM



  • Lodhia
    When did you take the charge of editor? 
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/10/2015 1:49:04 AM



  • To: All Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Personal attack is perfectly alright whenever non-stop insults keeps pouring in regardless of how convincing of a reply is given. The fools and morons will never show any decency, hence, why should we continue to tolerate all the baseless insults against the religion of Islam?  

     

    Ex-Tablighi,” is basically acting as a “Prosecuting Attorney,on this forum. His sole purpose is to distort every single rebuttal so that he can brag about how bad is the religion of which he continues to hold to the name of its founder. The idiot is right. He alone is the root cause of all the debates of transformation and/or reformation going right down the gutter.

     

    Yes, I am acutely aware of my harsh words. However, under the circumstances, and at the same time, knowing well that everyone on this forum prefer to remain silent, then someone has to speak up. Unfortunately, Muslims have become a bunch of “Worthless Spectators.Little wonder that we cannot even stand up against anyone who assassinates the character of the Prophet of Islam. Imagine, how morally degraded we have become lately?

     

    For long, the “Ex-Tablighi,” has conducted his unruly circus by thinking in his own sweet mind that he is the only one who is capable of prosecuting the Muslims who believe in the Holy Quran. Now, he will be given a fitting reply, and that also indirectly. As for “Secular/Perverted Logic,” let the pompous windbag come in and out of the forum to play his usual game of provocation. One thing is clearly visible. He hates Muslims, period.

     

    All in all, if King Abdullah is finally “Standing Tall, against the evildoers,   then why can’t the rest of the Muslims? Be bold, be courageous and give your honest to goodness input on the “New Age Islam” forum. Do not fear about whether you are able to write or not. Just give it a try, and all of you will be splendidly surprised. Simply, have faith and defend Islam and our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/10/2015 1:15:08 AM



  • RELIGION IS ABOUT HUMILITY

     

    Obama is right. At its best, religion is about humility. It starts with a faith in

    something greater than yourself. Part of that faith is understanding that you’re

    not great enough to understand who God is. All you know is that he isn’t you.

     

    When you start to think that you know God’s mind, that he speaks only to you,

    that you alone are in possession of the truth, that’s when you become dangerous.

    And being a Christian won’t save you.

     

    William Saletan
    FOR CHRIST’S SAKE – Link to the Article

     

    SLATE

    February 9, 2015

     

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

     

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/9/2015 11:04:30 PM



  • IT’S DEED THAT MATTER, NOT WORDS

     

    One common criticism of public diplomacy is: It’s deeds that matter, not words. Happy talk about American tolerance means nothing when the United States is torturing Muslim detainees and locking them up in Guantánamo. Obama announced on his first day in office that the United States would forswear torture. He gave a major address in Cairo promising “a new beginning” in relations between the United States and the Arab world based on “mutual interest and mutual respect.” As an experiment in influencing Arab public opinion, this seems to have been little more effective than advertising happy talk. It would be good to perform the additional experiment of closing Guantánamo, another alleged irritant, but I can’t believe it would matter. Forging a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians would  constitute the supreme test — one of Beers’s successors, Karen Hughes, admitted to me that she told Bush that she wasn’t likely to get anywhere with Arab public opinion until Washington pushed Israel to make peace — but it probably wouldn’t do much to drain the swamp of jihadism.

     

    James Traub

    THE WORLD WAR INSIDE ISLAM

     

    Foreign Policy

    February 9, 2015

     

     

    https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-1/c19.0.50.50/p50x50/10345544_1491807221063517_7769720302369747775_n.jpg?oh=80509f0c6d690f4702f16870d2bb7629&oe=54EE53DD&__gda__=1423852305_041818bb1b6a67438ac420e6d88337f6  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/9/2015 5:54:15 PM



  •  

    IT’S DEED THAT MATTER, NOT WORDS

     

    One common criticism of public diplomacy is: It’s deeds that matter, not words.

    Happy talk about American tolerance means nothing when the United States is

    torturing Muslim detainees and locking them up in Guantánamo. Obama announced

    on his first day in office that the United States would forswear torture. He gave a

    major address in Cairo promising “a new beginning” in relations between the United

    States and the Arab world based on “mutual interest and mutual respect.” As an

    experiment in influencing Arab public opinion, this seems to have been little more

    effective than advertising happy talk. It would be good to perform the additional

    experiment of closing Guantánamo, another alleged irritant, but I can’t believe it

    would matter. Forging a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians would

    constitute the supreme test — one of Beers’s successors, Karen Hughes, admitted

    to me that she told Bush that she wasn’t likely to get anywhere with Arab public

    opinion until Washington pushed Israel to make peace — but it probably

    wouldn’t do much to drain the swamp of jihadism.

     

    James Traub

    THE WORLD WAR INSIDE ISLAM

     

    Foreign Policy

    February 9, 2015

     

     https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-1/c19.0.50.50/p50x50/10345544_1491807221063517_7769720302369747775_n.jpg?oh=80509f0c6d690f4702f16870d2bb7629&oe=54EE53DD&__gda__=1423852305_041818bb1b6a67438ac420e6d88337f6  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/9/2015 5:51:54 PM



  • OUR FAITH, VALUES AND HUMANITARIAN PRINCIPLES


    Abdullah, himself a former general, wasn’t bluffing: Not long after his meeting with U.S. lawmakers, the king returned home and Jordan’s air force immediately launched airstrikes on Islamic State positions, reportedly killing several enemy combatants.


    “The blood of the martyred hero Muath Kasasbeh will not go in vain,” he said Thursday, according to the Jordan Times. “We are waging this war to protect our faith, values and humanitarian principles.”

    And as Jordan continued to rain hellfire on militants, social media users everywhere began to learn more about Jordan’s so-called “Warrior King.”


    T. Becket Adams

    INTERNET FALLS IN LOVE WITH ‘WARRIOR KING’

     

    Washington Examiner

    February 7, 2015

     

     

    https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-1/c19.0.50.50/p50x50/10345544_1491807221063517_7769720302369747775_n.jpg?oh=80509f0c6d690f4702f16870d2bb7629&oe=54EE53DD&__gda__=1423852305_041818bb1b6a67438ac420e6d88337f6  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/9/2015 5:48:13 PM



  • Hypocrisy is the buzz word among Islamic scholars. when they disagree with each other they call each other hypocrite.
    kaafir, munafiq, faasiq, faajir, mal-oon, iblees etc are dear words Muslim scholars use freely.
    and what should you expect from who you thinks needs a professional help.
    if I can be called names, why i can't.
    If Editor feels hurt, he has many options.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/9/2015 5:13:13 AM



  • Mr Sultan Shahin should learn from this outstandingly brilliant comment by Cowboy:

    "Remember, once an “Tablighi,” always an “Tablighi.” Once a “Bigot,” always a “Bigot.” These two are classic example of nut cases. Hence, let them carry on with their hate-mongering.



    Mr Sultan Shahin is trying to bring some change. but if the destiny is just what cowboy suggested then he should close the NAI with immediate effect.
    All stories of transformations in the gutter.
    Indeed Islam needs such cowboys to defend Islam.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/9/2015 5:02:30 AM



  • Poor lodhia satated as:
    "Insutl for an insult is how the game will be played from hereon.  All that has to be done is to question their intelligence. Nothing more, nothing less."

    Think many times before you start the game. if you insult who will be insulted. it will be a violation of the Quran on your part.

    Ok Start. Hamen bhi dekhna hai zor kitna baazue qatil (buzdil)  men hai
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/9/2015 3:55:57 AM



  • can calling someone "stupid bigot" be considered personnal attack?
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/9/2015 3:04:18 AM



  • Let us agree Rational' soul job is Provocation.
    Is he successful? He provoked even those who were teaching lessons against provocations. Who is left? Provocation successful with varying degrees.
    Some are nothing their hairs. Some are ready to notch their hears. Some have finished it.

    Can somebody learn from provocation is a question to Editor. What is provocation? Is it always bad? Don't Muslims provoke others?
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/9/2015 2:41:29 AM



  • Alas! Ban Ban shouter is unable to say
    Job of Honest Muslim Editor:
    1. Publishing articles singing the glory of Islam
    2. Ban anything that goes against 1

    it might help lodhia
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/9/2015 2:28:56 AM



  • But Lodhia Saheb, how do you want me, an "honest moderator", to deal with varying opinions?

    What will convince you that I am an "honest moderator?"

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/9/2015 1:34:16 AM



  • To: Sultan Shahin, Editor & All Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Subject: GOD GIVE US MEN!

     

    First of all, let me quote you a poem which, I feel, reflects the current situation of modern day Muslims. It can be considered as a prayer ( dua ) a – longing for a strong and honest Muslim leadership, which reads as as follows:

     

    God give us men! A time like this demands strong minds,

    Great hearts, true faith and ready hands;

    Men whom the lust of office does not kill;

    Men whom the spoils of office cannot buy;

    Men who possess opinions and a will;

    Men who have honour, men who will not lie;

    Men who can stand before a demagogue

    And damn his treacherous flatteries without winking;

    Tall men, sun crowned, who live above the fog,

    In public duty and in private thinking.

    For, a while the rabble with their thumb-worn creeds.

    Their large possessions and their little deeds,

    Mingle in selfish strife, Lo! Freedom weeps,

    Wrong rules the land, and waiting Justice sleeps.

     

    May Almighty Allah give us Muslims true faith and a strong will, to hold opinions and stand before a demagogue. Today, we rarely find a sincere and a devout Muslims who dare speak out against fanaticism and narrow-mindedness which are still the dominant factors in everyday life of many Muslims.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

    March 5, 1994

     

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia - http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

     

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/9/2015 12:11:01 AM



  • Lodhia Saheb, I am still wondering what exactly is the job of an honest moderator?

    What do you expect me to do?

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/9/2015 12:00:19 AM



  • Perhaps, sir, you are describing yourself there?  By secularlogic - 2/8/2015 11:23:38 PM



  • To: All Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Ignore what? Continuous distortion of certain facts by “The Pompous Windbag.

     

    Nay! Provocation is something that Muslims are long used to. Insutl for an insult is how the game will be played from hereon.  All that has to be done is to question their intelligence. Nothing more, nothing less.  

     

    Sultan Shahin Saheb wants to play the role of Mahatma Gandhi. What he doesn’t realize is that the “Independence of India,was not won by Gandhi alone, but with the help of all of his comrades. One of them being Maulana Abul Kalam Azad (May Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace).

     

    Imagine, the man continuously reminds the Muslims about “Iota of Truth”! Bigots don’t know the actual truth, as they are too busy manipulating it all day long.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 11:21:57 PM



  • Al Jazeera is free and unbiased?

    Mr Lodhia, do a google search on the e-mail that went out to its reporters from the editorial headquarters on how the Charlie Hebdo attack was to be reported. What 'slant' was to be given to that news.

    While I am aware of Fox news' reputation, in this case the criticism is unwarranted. An unimaginably cruel act was carried out by ISIS. All Muslim organisations and all Muslim people have washed their hands off ISIS, saying "they are not Muslims". The Islamic state has no recognistion, not even from other Islamic countries. Why does an airing of their atrocities, then, bother you. They are evil without a religion, and your Surah Fatiha, as I have been freshly informed, only encourages you to fight evil. For this, people must first know the scale of evil, no? How do you expect to get support for a full scale war from your electorate, otherwise? If I understand correctly, Muslims do want western countries to play a more proactive role here. Its so funny. Here is a situation created by a particular interpretation of Islam. And it is, apparently, the duty of Western powers to solve this crisis according to Muslim thinkers. 
    By secularlogic - 2/8/2015 11:18:52 PM



  • To: All Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Guess what! “The Pompous Windbag” will eventually reveal to all, as to how stupid can one get.

     

    Perverted Logic,” has once again been applied. We all are fully aware of the fact that Al-Jazeera is the only channel that will show full and transparent news of the Middle East region. It seems like the man is living in a twilight zone.

     

    Perhaps, he has left his brain somewhere. What the fool misses is the burning of the Palestinian children by the bombardment by Israeli Air Force. That will not matter at all to a hate-monger anyway.

     

    Oh well, keep on reading, as more is yet to come. It’s high time to get the man in the ring, so that he will be compelled to answer tough questions. You all know, how he hides and cannot come out in the open.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 11:06:50 PM



  • Hahaha...

    Looks like Mr Lodhia is not taking Mr Shahin's advice (or his own advice to himself) too seriously :) 

    I am a clown, Sir. Ignore me and go on with your Mohammad Ali, Cowboy, Clint Eastwood stuff. Why do you even read what I say? Could it be that the iota of truth under all that 'provocation' gets under your skin? 
    By secularlogic - 2/8/2015 10:57:56 PM



  • To: All Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Subject: THE POMPOUS WINDBAG

     

    That’s right. This description fits “Secular Logic,” perfectly well. It means:

     

    “One who loves the sound of his own words so much that they have convinced themselves they actually know what they are talking about.”

     

    The stupid bigot continues to live in his own make believe world, that he exist, think, read, and can express an opinion. Well, doesn’t he know that we the “Moderate Muslims,are equally capable to think, read and express our opinions too? What a fool?

     

    Let’s face it, the man wakes up with an incurable itch coupled with a sheer joy of provocation directed only against Muslims. Talking about “Holier Than Thou, then one only need to take a hard look at “THE POMPOUS WINDBAG.

     

    Have a blessed day. Heads Up & Smile.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia - http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 10:52:40 PM



  • Natak mat karo. Yehi chahte ho naa ki rational, hats off and secular logic jaise logon ko Bahar kaa raasta dikhaao.

    Naak men dam kar rakha hai editor ke. 
    Beyond doubt Muslims can't take any voice against Islam.
    Tauhin e rasool to ek bahaana hai
    Maqsad to har and aawaz ko dabaana hai.
    Aman kaa kahin nishaan nahi milta
    Phir bhi pur aman hai dikhana hai

    Hangama hai kiyon barpa thodi so Jo pee like hai
    Daaka to nahi daala chori to nahi keep hai
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/8/2015 10:50:38 PM



  • Aah. now you want to censor the news channels. Burn the pilot, but don't show it to the people. Why? 

    Did not hear anyone shouting for censorship when the havoc wrought by Israeli bombing on Palestine was being shown in a loop on Al Jazeera?

    Both are reports from war grounds. Bound to be gruesome. 

    What are you going to do now. Shoot Fox News staff?

    By secularlogic - 2/8/2015 10:41:50 PM




  • Aise hi patak rahe hain jaiae tave pe makka/Ghana/til patak te hain.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/8/2015 10:40:51 PM



  • From: Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia
    Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2015 11:29 PM
    To: 'Mike Ghouse'
    Cc: 'Dr. Zuhdi Jasser'; 'Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser'; 'Salam Al-Marayati'; 'Nihad Awad'; 'Dr. Sayyid M. Syeed'; 'Naeem Baig'; 'Kashif Al-Huda'; 'Ahmed Rehab'; 'Hoda Elshishtawy'; 'Lea Benson'; 'Dr. M. A. Muqtedar Khan'; 'Iftekhar Hai'; Sultan Shahin; Muhammad Yunus ; Ghulam Mohiyuddin
    Subject: WHAT IS HONEST JOURNALISM ABOUT?

     

    Hello Mike,

     

    WHAT IS HONEST JOURNALISM ABOUT? That’s the question which was raised by one of the commentators in the “New Age Islam,forum.

     

    “Journalistic Integrity, of Fox News was questioned by Sadaf. It is amazing that the network, whom the Muslims as a whole dislike, will go out of the way to broadcast the 22 minutes, 30 seconds video of Flight Lieutenant Moaz al-Kasasbeh (May Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace). 

     

    BBC News reported, Fox News explains why it showed Jordan pilot video.

     

    It is a known fact that Fox News has never been sympathetic to the Palestinians cause. During last Gaza War, your friend, Sean Hannity was more so concerned about the casualties on the Israeli side, and he never bothered to show the massive destruction by the Israeli Defense Forces, let alone the death of so many children. What Fox News should have done was to post the YouTube Video link of Dr. Mads Gilbert, in order to inform the worldwide viewers about the sufferings and brutality caused by the American made armaments.  

     

    Nothing should come as a surprise to the Muslims. The need of the hour is to try to encourage the educated American Muslims to question Fox News as to what happened to their “Fair & Balanced, slogan which they feel so proud about.

     

    You and Dr. Zuhdi Jasser are always invited on Fox News, and as such, it will be good to know from either of you, as to how can Sean Hannity be reached. Most certainly, there are capable American Muslims across the country who can at least put good folks at Fox News on spot. Why not? You bet, many voices is bound to make them very uncomfortable. Yes, it is time to stand tall and be united in our collective efforts to address the U.S. foreign policy which has also been one of the root causes of breeding terrorism in the Middle East region.    

     

    Mike, let’s not forget that the social media is a powerful venue as you well know. The Muslim voices can be heard loud and clear, not only in America, but all over the world. In any case, I am attaching Sadaf’s comment, in order for you to catch a glimpse of his concerns about Fox News.

     

    Finally, make a note that I am posting this message on “New Age Islam’s” forum. I am also copying this to Sultan Shahin, Editor of the forum. With more than one million readers, I want my fellow Muslims to be made aware as to how hard it is to get a simple information about whom to address our concerns at the Fox News channel from the American Muslim leaders.       

     

    Awaiting the favor of your early reply.

     

    Very sincerely yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

     

    https://fbcdn-profile-a.akamaihd.net/hprofile-ak-xpa1/v/t1.0-1/c19.0.50.50/p50x50/10345544_1491807221063517_7769720302369747775_n.jpg?oh=80509f0c6d690f4702f16870d2bb7629&oe=54EE53DD&__gda__=1423852305_041818bb1b6a67438ac420e6d88337f6  mohammedrafiqlodhia - http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

     

     

    I am still trying to make out what is honest journalism about. Yesterday I saw the video clip of the Jordanian pilot being burnt alive. The video was made available by Fox news on their website and very soon it will be circulating through the social media across the globe. While presenting the 22 minute 30 second video, Fox news whom Muslims suspect to be playing politics, mentions that they know that showing such footage is against the principles of journalism because it contains gory and ghastly image, however they still are showing it for the larger good. Now i am wondering that does showing the footage as it happened helps in larger good when chances are that people will react more angrily against the perpetrators and on  not finding them will pour out their angst on them whom they suspect, or is it that the larger good lies in pacifying the people and let them bury their cries and tears, and move on? Isn't Fox really playing politics by continuing to stir people's anger? Is that honest journalism? Perhaps yes. Whatever was there, they just showed it. But then why do they refrain from showing such ghastly things otherwise. They should be doing it always as it happens all the time everywhere. Additionally, they should only be doing so without justifying that they want to make a positive change. What right do journalists have to try to change the course of history? Their job should have been to just report, without adding any mirch masala or subtracting the starch. Isn't it? The point worth pondering for all who are writing over here. 

    By sadaf - 2/8/2015 3:09:16 PM 

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 10:31:07 PM



  • Har musalmaan bhai ko ek bahri dushman ki zaroorat hai
    Aga Bahar na mile to andar koi kami to nahi hai.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/8/2015 10:29:08 PM



  • Har musalmaan bhai ko ek bahri dushman ki zaroorat hai
    Aga Bahar na mile to andar koi kami to nahi hai.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/8/2015 10:22:26 PM



  • Good Morning, gentlemen! I see I have momentarily usurped Rational as the favourite whipping boy of three worthies on New Age Islam. I must be doing something right. :)

    I fail to see what it is that is exercising your minds so much. The fact that I exist, think, read, and express an opinion that you don't like? 

    That Surah Fatiha is beautiful in what way? If believers are described by Islam as those who believe in Allah and only Allah, who follow the dos and donts laid down by him and who consider Mohammad to be God's prophet (and the last one at that), and disbelievers are described as those people who do not confirm to these descriptors, the verse is indeed a war cry against all other faiths.

    He could have easily used the words "good" and "evil" instead, if it were only a call to mankind to fight evil. 

    In fact, Islam considers disbelief to be evil, so even the "good" vs "evil" argument would have been a call to the Good Believers to battle against the Evil Disbelievers. 

    Mahatma Gandhi is not a person I consider to be the final authority on Islam, so my opinions are not in any way bound to defer to his. He was an impractical saint, and for his saintliness he gets my appreciation. But not agreement. 

    As for the holier than thou expectation that some 'miracle' was going to turn the critics into believers and "good Muslims", I would laugh if I were not so offended. Why can't you let us remain good Hindus and excellent atheists instead? What is this inner incurable itch to turn the whole world Muslim? 
    By secularlogic - 2/8/2015 9:41:12 PM



  • I am still trying to make out what is honest journalism about. Yesterday I saw the video clip of the Jordanian pilot being burnt alive. The video was made available by Fox news on their website and very soon it will be circulating through the social media across the globe. While presenting the 22 minute 30 second video, Fox news whom Muslims suspect to be playing politics, mentions that they know that showing such footage is against the principles of journalism because it contains gory and ghastly image, however they still are showing it for the larger good. Now i am wondering that does showing the footage as it happened helps in larger good when chances are that people will react more angrily against the perpetrators and on  not finding them will pour out their angst on them whom they suspect, or is it that the larger good lies in pacifying the people and let them bury their cries and tears, and move on? In't Fox tv really playing politics by continuing to stir people's anger? Is that honest journalism? Perhaps yes. Whatever was there, they just showed it. But then why do they refrain rom showing such ghastly things otherwise. They should be doing it always as it happens all the time everywhere. Additionally, they should only be doing so without justiying that they want to make a positive change. What right do journalists have to try to change the course of history? Their job should have been to just report, without adding any mirch masala or subtracting the starch. Isn't it? The point worth pondering for all who are writing over here.  By sadaf - 2/8/2015 3:09:16 PM



  • Now the question of the day is, “Are you going to play the role of an honest moderator, or are you going to sweep this remark under the carpet?

     

     By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 1:17:26 PM


    Would be interesting to know what exactly is the job of an honest moderator?


    Lodhia Saheb you seem to have seen too many boxing bouts of your hero Mohammad Ali? New Age Islam is not a boxing ring, Sir. And we are not associated with your "Clint Eastwood Club" either. We are not in the business of disarming Taliban either as Naseer Saheb Observer wanted us to do. We are merely trying to present a positive view of Islam and refute the claims of Jihadis within our very limited means.  

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/8/2015 2:53:12 PM



  • The video on you tube is not available sir.  By sadaf - 2/8/2015 2:49:55 PM



  • Sultan Shahin Sahab,

     

    Subject: True Grit

     

    Muslims are living through very difficult times. It is now far more dangerous than the time of the Prophet of Islam. We are now 1.6 billion strong, but lack the will to round up the evil doers in our midst.

     

    We the Muslims have always been known to be more tolerant towards people of other faiths. Tipping point was the Iranian Revolution of 1979, when the “Mullahs” took over a country. From thereon, the image of Islam downgraded and it continues to be the case till today.

     

    What Muslims must do is to learn to show their “True Grit. I know, you do not like any “Cowboys, but here is another one of the YouTube videos, which might give you a slight hint of what it will take to be brave and courageous to defeat ISIS, Boko Haram and al-Qaeda.   

     

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9-cPWheNyaA

     

    Get some fighting spirit, Sultan Saheb. We cannot let the “Jihadists,” and
    Mullahs,” destroy our Islamic Civilization.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 2:45:56 PM



  • No Lodhia Saheb, we should not abandon our tasks as the Prophet didn't despite initial failures. We should be patient and we should persevere in doing what we think is right. Only thing the Prophet was not allowed by God to do was to be angry, impatient, depressed, frustrated, in a word, negative. However, as we persevere, with a positive attitude and faith in God, we should look within, reconsider whether we are on the right path and if need be, revise our strategies, if we are not succeeding.

    We should not blame others for our failures. Mindlessly.

    And we should do all that we have set out to do without rancour. See, how Mahatma Gandhi overturned a whole imperialism, got us independence from the British, without hating them. Hate and anger are self-consuming. Gandhiji remained cheerful even in prison. So is Dalai Lama, ever-happy and cheerful, though he has spent a lifetime fighting occupation of his land. These are better examples to follow than those you are currently obsessed with.

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/8/2015 2:30:02 PM



  • Sadaf,

     

    Well, aside from you and Sultan Shahin Saheb, and of course, God, no one knows the true identity of “Ex-Tablighi,” and “Secular Logic.”

     

    Oh yes, the debate is going on fiercely. It is all “One-Sided,as Sultan Saheb has long given up playing the role of a “Moderator. Now, he is advising all the readers, “let us accept that.

     

    Remember, once an “Tablighi,” always an “Tablighi.” Once a “Bigot,” always a “Bigot.” These two are classic example of nut cases. Hence, let them carry on with their hate-mongering.

     

    I appreciate your response, and I do agree with you, 110%. Smile and let these two clowns continue to show their true colors.  

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 2:23:17 PM



  • Lodhia Saheb, Mahatma Gandhi considered Sura Fatoha as one of the most beautiful prayers in all religions and included it in his own collection of prayers that he used to sing every morning.  But Secular Logis, Rational and several others will differ. They have minds of their own. God has bestowed upon them a mind different from us. They think differently. God has made them different. Just accept that. Why get angry. Your anger is as much negative and self-destructive as Rational's hatred. These negative emotions kill us.

    Instead let us talk of the beauty of Surah Fatiha that has appealed to many much greater minds than Secular Logic and others. If we fail to convince them let us leave it at that. Prophet Mohammad too had failed to convince more than a few score people in ten years of hard work in Mecca. God had admonished him at his depression and frustration at this failure. God has his own ways and his plans that we are not aware of. If Islamic history is any guide, tomorrow both Secular Logic and Rational Mohd Yunus may turn into better Muslims than we can ever hope to be. History of Islam is full of miracles like this, as is the history of the world. Please control your anger, depression and frustration. God doesn't appreciate these negative emotions.  Let us express our gratitude at Mahatma Gandhi having embraced Sura Fatiha. Gratitude and Depression cannot live in the same space. Don't allow Rational and Secular Logic to programme your mind. Look at Mahatma Gandhi instead. Let us live our lives with an attitude of gratitude. We have much to be grateful for, despite radials, Jihadis, Islamophobes and so on. If the Prophet was not allowed to be depressed when he had less than a hundred followers after ten years of hard work in Mecca, what reason do you have to be so hyper-tense.  

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/8/2015 2:17:56 PM



  • secular logic is a typical uppercaste jansanghi coming from convent background so thinking too highly of himself, dear mr. rafiq lodhia sir. However he is deficient in understanding the concept of Islam and for him it is not the case like rational mohammad yunus that he is pretending that he doesn't understand but understands well but is just having the joy of provocation. This thing rational mohammad yunus is doing and this i too do to many people including these too. Secular logic fails to grasp like many well meaning muslims also do so that when Quran or Islam or Allah makes the distinction between believers and non-believers then, it is about as simple thing as that there are people who will continue to indulge in criminal activities without impunity that they will be accountable for it as they do not believe in such judgement, and then there are people who believe that ultimately they will bejudged so they avoid being ciminal as much as they can exercise their free will. Secular Logic doesn't understand that it is this belief and disbelief that makes the difference and having such beleif or not and exercising their free will to go ahead or stop themselves is all the freedom that they can have as per their own choice and not because Allah wished them to be so. Allah just created the individuals and set them free for some time and sees what they did with all that freedom. For Allah it is like, that very famous Hindi song which secular logic must have heard but couldn't make out the real meaning out of it, because of his mediocre studies. The song is: Rotey rotey, hansna seekho, haste haste rona, Jitni chaabi bhari raam ne utna chale khilona. When the lyricist mentioned Ram, it is Allah about whom it is being referred. Yeh paise ke zor pe badhiya se badhiya school se but jaise taise schooling kiya banda kya samjhega. maaf kariye isko. By sadaf - 2/8/2015 2:08:07 PM



  • Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    There you go again! Now you are shifting the blame on God. That’s awful.

     

    You stated, “let us accept that. That’s fine and dandy, but try not to cover-up “Ex-Tablighi” abusive remarks. If you are willing to accept the insults, then you should likewise let his remarks be read by your readers even if it might reflect bad upon New Age Islam’s forum.

     

    Sadly, what you are doing is to give a signal to all of your readers that the man’s rebuttals, no matter how insulting, is not his own fault, but God’s own fault. If such be the theory of forgiveness, then why are you so concerned about the bloody “Jihadists. You can easily assume that God made them the killers, so let us accept that too.

     

    Now, I am beginning to understand as to why you express concern about those Muslims who wants to go after the terrorists, even if it be King Abdullah of Jordan and his getting motivation from Clint Eastwood’s belief in “Hang ‘Em High.

     

    In case you are not aware, language of reason will never be understood by those who mock or violates God’s commandments. How many times did you reasoned with “Ex-Tablighi”? You eventually gave in and now the last resort is to conveniently blame it on God. Likewise, New Age Islam should also not worry about reforming the Muslims either. Why be so concerned about the Petro-Dollars? God gave Saudis the wealth and they are using it to produce more “Jihadists.Let us accept that.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 2:06:48 PM



  • I never ever cried for a ban on you. Liar. Wahabi rational mohammad yunus. I never believed that you are anything but a taqqiya practising wahabi. Wahabis pe ban lag jaayega to yahan hum garda kiska udaayenge. I just wanted that people know you are talking animatedly. And while doing so are becoming abusive too. In fact it is me who helped you find interest on this website and same i did for secular logic, because i wanted the debate to go on. I damn care about your time and other priorities. Humko usse kya, jharkhandi? By sadaf - 2/8/2015 1:42:23 PM



  • To: Sultan Shahin Saheb – Editor – New Age Islam

     

    Subject: A Sweeping Verdict Against Surah: Al-Fatiha.

     

    One can expect such a sweeping remark from none other than a first-class bigot named “Secular Logic,” who hangs around the “New Age Islam” forum. Perhaps, it will be wise for your forum’s regular readers to ponder over the following remark:

     

    “My quarrel with the Quran is that in its very first opening verse, it begins with a partition of mankind - the believers, who are the favoured, and the unbelievers, who are the scum of the earth who must be vanquished.

     

    People indoctrinated with this ideology are beyond cure.”

     

    Sultan Shahin Saheb, acting as a “Moderator,” can you ask this “Coward, to enlighten you and the rest of the Muslim readers about his verdict? Apparently, he alone must be reading certain books about Islam that 1.6 billion Muslims are not aware of. It will be all the more appropriate to find out from this man who is nothing but a dedicated hate-monger.

     

    For crying out loud, try not to remind the readers with your oft-repeated belief that Muslims can learn from the reasoning of “Perverted Logic.” The man hit and then run away without answering any questions. To put it on record, that’s all he is capable of doing.

     

    Always remember, bigots do not want to hear the “Truth,” therefore, they resort to such a despicable tactic to promote their agenda. Henceforth, I am sure that your fellow Muslims will expect you to clarify such “A Sweeping Verdict Againt Surah: Al-Fatiha.Bear in mind that this man is a regular commentator on your forum, and as such, it is your personal responsibility, acting as an “Editor,” to get a clarification from him. In short, do not give him a pass like you have been doing in case of “Ex-Tablighi.”

     

    All in all, maintain a “Fair and Balanced” approach towards the debate. If someone steps out of line, then it is you who must ask relevant questions to those who are in the business of what “Secular Logic,“ termed it as “Joy of Provocation.Now the question of the day is, “Are you going to play the role of an honest moderator, or are you going to sweep this remark under the carpet?

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia      

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 1:17:26 PM



  • Dear Lodhia Saheb, I do not value Rational Mohammad Yunus Saheb's opinion as highly as you seem to. See, I am not complaining, though I think he is wrong in putting GRD on a list from which GG and MH and AA, AN, and ZR, and several others from my team are missing. I am also not happy with the order in which he has put us. But, of course, he has a right to make his own assessments. It's God who has given him a mind different from ours. So, if anything, it's God's fault, not his. He is what God made him. Let us accept that.

    By Sultan Shahin - 2/8/2015 1:13:02 PM



  • To: Sultan Shahin Saheb – Editor – New Age Islam

     

    Ex-Tablighi,” asked, “Is this you learn from the Quran? How will you answer this question given that you have been identified as fourth in line of his accusation about your character in his comment?

     

    Let us recollect the verse from the chapter, “The Spider”? in the Holy Quran as follows:

     

    “Recite what has been revealed to you of the book, and pray regularly. Surely prayer restrains one from indecency and evil and remembrance of God is greater. God know knowledge of all your actions.”

     

    Now acting as an “Editor,” and also, “Moderator (?),” can you enlighten the respected readers about the very meaning of the word “Indecency”?

    For all I know, when a person who holds on to the name of “Muhammad, and insults his own religion, then such an ugly act can most definitely be qualified as  an act of “Indecency. Agreed!

     

    Quite frankly, at times I keep wondering about the mission of “New Age Islam, It is quite obvious that “Indecent, comments are allowed, and especially from a Muslim, who is nothing but an avowed hater of Islam. You being a firm believer in “Freedom of Speech, should allow all of his remarks to be posted, but at the same time, do not censor those remarks that are abusive. It is like covering up his sins, which you have done in the past. I say, let the readers know his true character.

     

    More importantly, there is no need for any of the Islamic scholars to give any references to the Hadiths. The verse from “The Spider, is self-explanatory. Modern day young Muslims should be explained about the moral teachings by ways of the Quran, and not by too many versions of the Hadiths.  

     

    Remember, Ghulam Mohiyuddin Saheb and Muhammad Yunus Saheb and many others, objected to relentless “Indecency, displayed by “Ex-Tablighi.” This is as simple an explanation which I can give you. Don’t forget, I belong to the lowest step, hence, even the person being that low can identify the act of “Indecency. What about you, Sultan Shahin Saheb?

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 2/8/2015 10:31:48 AM



  • A while ago, I too was thinking about this book. The way, people are rushing to middle east for jobs citing job insecurity and communalism in India, and sitting there, influencing the by and large peaceful Muslims of India and poisoning them with the toxic interpretations of Islam. It is alarming to us, and it should be alarming to the Govt. of India. Every household is getting influenced by the Wahabism and its intolerance, and before they become a dominant force in India, Indian govt. must come down heavily on them and stop them from either going there or later coming back or sending those millions of remittances. Just for the greed or need of remittances, Indian govt. must not put at stake India's internal security. Today, India is paying heavily in handling a Kashmir issue, tomorrow when these wahabis start behaving like the separatist Kashmiris, then the Govt. should not be saying that they they were not aware of the gravity of the things. Remittances can be had from other countries, but Middle-East remittances should not be fallen for. One idea is to ban Muslims of India from earning there which cannot be done because India cannot discriminate between a Muslim and a non-Muslim from making their livelihood. Also, India cannot stop anyone doing anything on other's soil. So the best way out is to make it compulsory that no Indian will be able to work in Middle Eastern countries if they do not meet minimum wage criteria and that minimum wage should be raised very high in comparison to Pakistan or Bangladesh labours toiling there. That way the Arabs will be looking for the more economical labours of Pakistan and Bangladesh and Indians won't be able to make the cut. Indians Muslims will also have no reason to complain because the Govt of India is asking their wages to be increased and not the vice versa. However the idea should be to discourage the greed for Petro-Dollars. Secondly, those who still are able to make the cut and find job there despite the high salary, they should be taxed, because anyways they are not being taxed there and since they continue to be citizen of India and as citizen of India enjoying higher salary or whatever salary, they must be paying taxes to the Indian govt. Just by these two measures, half of the problem of internal security of India will get solved, Inshallah. For rest of the issues some other ways and means have to be employed. All this in will help Muslim and Islam too as a bye -product, which except for chauvinist anti Muslims, and wahabis, no one else will mind. By sadaf - 2/8/2015 4:48:05 AM



  • I must say that the first chapter of Essential Message of Islam by Muhammad Yunus Saheb, (Jointly with Mr. AshfaqueUllah Syed), detailing the story of the Prophet, as seen through Quran and Quran alone, is a seminal work, a must read.  I wish his publisher would permit us to post it here. I think it would only encourage the sales of the book, so the publisher should have no problem. By Sultan Shahin - 2/8/2015 3:55:41 AM



  • Lodhia. Don't lick your spittle back. From the day you came you are applying every trick to put a ban. At least Mr GM admitted that he wanted a stop on rational. Mohammed yunus did this behind the scree. Sadaf day and night cried for ban. There may be many more I am not aware off.
    Is this, you learn from the Quran?
    Mr sultan Shahin asked these people including you how it can be done.
    Instead of accepting your foolishness or giving some input to Mr sultan Shahin you are shooting lies.
    I pity on such people. Hypocrites. Believe in something and act otherwise.
    Let me put the list in descending order of people who are hypocrites in my view and long experience:
    1. Mohammed yunus
    2. Ghulam M
    3. GRD
    4. Sultan shahin
    These people talk highly on honour of the prophet but are not able to say word for who wrote, recorded and peopagted insulting stories round the prophet.
    Mohammed yunus because he knows that ahadith are not fabrications of me yet pour venom on me.
    GM. Stands for the same reason .
    GRD because told a lie and called liar.
    Sultan Shahin as Mohammed yunus. But not equal to him. He knowingly the truth acted otherwise by suggesting psyco.
    You are at lowest step because I don't consider you a scholar. You are just a jehadi like those who created havoc in Paris, France.
    It will continue till they throw their venom on real culprits. 
    Whatever other have said are excused unconditionally.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 2/8/2015 12:28:57 AM



  • Mr Shahin says: “Before you, another very respected New Age Islam reader and commentator thought I had all the power in the world (not his words) and demanded that I disarm the Taliban, stop the USA from helping Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, etc.

     

    I never said that and I have responded to this nonsense before. What I have been asking is ‘why does not NAI highlight the real cause of the problem and the only solution that will work?’.

     

    I am glad that more and more commentators have veered around to the view that the causes of terrorism have more to do with the geopolitics in the region and less to do with the ideology. A particularly dangerous strain of the ideology is undoubtedly gaining strength on account of the geopolitics in the region but this is the effect and not the cause.

     

    Mr Shahin should explain why he refused to   publish the following article.

    Understanding the problem of so called “Islamic Terrorism”

    By Observer

     

    A solution to any problem is possible only when we understand what caused or causes the problem. The causes then need to be taken care of or eliminated to prevent further aggravation of the problem or its spread. We can then focus on those already affected.

    Outside the Palestine/Israel theatre, the so called “Islamic terrorist” activity began when the “Afghan Muhajideen” who were hailed as freedom fighters by the US and the rest of the World, morphed into Al Qaeda.

    Birth of the Afghan Mujahideen

    The US led the Soviet Union into the Afghan trap by aiding the Islamic fundamentalist Mujahideen six months before the Russians made their move, knowing that "this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention".

    Interview with Zbigniew Brzezinski, President Jimmy Carter's National Security Adviser, Le Nouvel Observateur, Paris, 15-21 January 1998 

     

    Question: The former director of the CIA, Robert Gates, stated in his memoirs ["From the Shadows"], that American intelligence services began to aid the Mujahadeen in Afghanistan 6 months before the Soviet intervention. In this period you were the national security adviser to President Carter. You therefore played a role in this affair. Is that correct?

    Brzezinski: Yes. According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan, 24 Dec 1979. But the reality, secretly guarded until now, is completely otherwise Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.

    Q: Despite this risk, you were an advocate of this covert action. But perhaps you yourself desired this Soviet entry into war and looked to provoke it?

    B: It isn't quite that. We didn't push the Russians to intervene, but we knowingly increased the probability that they would.

    Q: When the Soviets justified their intervention by asserting that they intended to fight against a secret involvement of the United States in Afghanistan, people didn't believe them. However, there was a basis of truth. You don't regret anything today?

    B: Regret what? That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter. We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war. Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war unsupportable by the government, a conflict that brought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.

    Q: And neither do you regret having supported the Islamic fundamentalism, having given arms and advice to future terrorists?

    B: What is most important to the history of the world? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some stirred-up Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?

    Q: Some stirred-up Moslems? But it has been said and repeated Islamic fundamentalism represents a world menace today.

    B: Nonsense! It is said that the West had a global policy in regard to Islam. That is stupid. There isn't a global Islam. Look at Islam in a rational manner and without demagoguery or emotion. It is the leading religion of the world with 1.5 billion followers. But what is there in common among Saudi Arabian fundamentalism, moderate Morocco, Pakistan militarism, Egyptian pro-Western or Central Asian secularism? Nothing more than what unites the Christian countries.

    It is conceivable that without the activism of the US, the Russians may never have occupied Afghanistan and there may never have been a war.

     

    The Problem inherent in a ‘Solution’ involving Civilian fighters

    Wars are fought by countries under the direction and control of their government. The “Mujahideen” who fought the war to drive out the Russians were drawn from 35 countries and numbered around three hundred thousand. There was no government (in Afghanistan or in exile) to manage and control them and therefore none to take care of them after the war. They were left to fend for themselves. The US and Pakistan simply washed their hands off the problem once the war was over.

     

    If the US were to disband their army in Afghanistan and leave the soldiers with their arms to fend for themselves, we can expect them to behave just like the Taliban or perhaps worse.

     

     

    Hillary Clinton (Secretary of State) understood the nature of the problem very well and said while answering a question during an interview with Fox News's Greta Van Susteren: “To be fair we had helped to create the problem we are now fighting. Because when the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, we had this brilliant idea, that we were gonna come to Pakistan and create a force of Mujahideen, equip them with stinger missiles and everything else to go after the Soviets inside Afghanistan…. and we were successful. The Soviets left Afghanistan and then we said great! good bye! and washed our hands off, leaving these trained people who were fanatical in Afghanistan and Pakistan, leaving them well-armed, creating a mess frankly, that at the time we really didn't recognize, we were just so happy to see the Soviet Union fall, and we thought ok fine, we're ok now, everything's going to be so much better. Now you look back, the people we're fighting today, we were supporting in the fight against the Soviets."

    The US army applies several filters in their recruitment process and a candidate who inclines to the religious right is not selected. Such people have been found to be the ones more likely to remain maladjusted after a war and indulge in senseless violence such as shooting sprees.

     

    In the case of the "mujahideen", normal boys were put through a process of indoctrination in religious extremism using experts from Palestine in specially set up madrassas!

     

    The US understood the risks very well based on their well-documented research which has become the basis of their selection policies, but didn't care and I doubt if Pakistan and Saudi Arabia anticipated the problems these fighters would create after the war.

     

    The Afghan Mujahideen heroes morph into “terrorists”

    The US fought a proxy war with the Soviet Union arming/training the Mujahideen. The war broke the might of the Soviet Union who suffered an ignominious defeat, leaving the US the only superpower. The US pre occupation with the communist world ended, allowing it to focus on the strategic oil rich Middle East.


    Saddam obliged by occupying Kuwait giving Bush the opportunity to enter the ME. When Saddam looked ready to withdraw from Kuwait, Bush unleashed a volley of abuses, making it impossible for Saddam to withdraw and save face, forcing a war. This was in 1991.

    The Afghan Mujahideen had offered to liberate Kuwait just as they had liberated Afghanistan from the Soviets but the Saudi monarch was afraid of the growing influence of Osama and felt insecure. He therefore invited the US to help liberate Kuwait. It would have been much cheaper and safer for the US to use the Mujahideen to drive out the Iraqis. This however did not meet their objectives for a larger role in the ME. This was the beginning of the rift between the US and the Afghan Mujahideen who now morphed into Al Qaeda.

    All the so called Islamic terrorist incidents are after the first Gulf war and the first of these incidents was on February 26, 1993 – World Trade Center bombing, in New York City. 6 killed.

     

    The Magnitude of the Problem

     

    While it should have been absolutely clear to all that it was a blunder to have used civilians to fight wars and thereafter leave them to fend for themselves, nothing has changed.

     

    ·         These “Mujahideens” or “terrorists” continue to be used by the US, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. They have been used in Libya to overthrow Gaddafi and they are being used in Syria to oust Bashar al- Assad.

    ·         Pakistan has used them against India in the past and is likely to use them again once the US leaves Afghanistan and the drone attacks stop. Right now the terrorists are incensed with the army and the government of Pakistan for allowing the drone attacks and are waging a war against their own army and government.

    ·         The approximately 1000 Madrasas set up in Pakistan to indoctrinate the “Mujahideen” to wage “Jihad” continue to function with local and foreign students ensuring a steady supply of fresh “jihadis”.

    ·         The Problem however is confined mostly for the Muslim countries alone or in the country where these people reside. These people make very little impact on the rest of the World.

    ·         The Individual “Jihadis” who can strike anywhere are a different people who are more likely to be University graduates and whose motives are purely political and directly correlated with specific incidents that aggravate the grievances. A Department of Defense study in 1997 concluded that: "Historical data show a strong correlation between US involvement in international situations and an increase in terrorist attacks against the United States." Former president Jimmy Carter, some years after he left the White House, was unambiguous in his agreement with this: “We sent Marines into Lebanon and you only have to go to Lebanon, to Syria or to Jordan to witness first-hand the intense hatred among many people for the United States because we bombed and shelled and unmercifully killed totally innocent villagers—women and children and farmers and housewives—in those villages around Beirut...As a result of that...we became kind of a Satan in the minds of those who are deeply resentful. That is what precipitated the taking of our hostages [in Iran] and that is what has precipitated some of the terrorist attacks.” However, attacks by individual “jihadis” are extremely rare and in terms of actual loss caused, they have caused little damage. In the 13 years since 9/11 only 33 deaths in the US are attributed to such people.

     

     

    The World gets a shock

     

    According to the Soufan group, a very small number of 3000 westerners from Europe and North America have joined the war in Syria/Iraq. The highest number is from France numbering around 700 followed by UK numbering around 400, Belgium and Australia 250 each, Germany 270, US 70 etc. These countries are worried about what these small numbers will do after they return and are planning several measures to deal with the problem.

     

    If such small numbers can cause so much worry requiring elaborate measures to deal with the situation, why do these countries not worry about the thousands from Muslim countries who got involved in Afghanistan and now in Syria? If they are worried about the small number of what their own nationals may do after the war, why is it so difficult for the world to understand what half a million of such people spread across 35 countries have been doing which goes in the name of “Islamic terrorism”? These people are doing what they have been taught to do in state sponsored and supported Madrasas and it is normal behavior for them. To expect anything else from them is insanity.

     

    Is it not hypocrisy that while the US, UK, etc. continue to back the foreign civilian fighters in Syria and elsewhere, they are worried about the very small numbers from their own country who have got involved?

     

    The Solution

     

    It is a huge problem that must be tackled. Blaming does not help. Understanding what the problem is and how it came about is necessary to prevent more of the same and to reverse the process.

     

    ·         The first step is to close down those 1000 madrasas which were set up specially for the purpose of churning out “jihadis”. Although the Russians have left, not a single madrassa has been shut down or changed into a normal madrassa. Yes, the US cannot be blamed for this but only Pakistan, except that the US is aware of what is going on but will not do anything to put an end to the nonsense. Pakistan obviously intends using these people against India.