certifired_img

Books and Documents

Books and Documents (03 Mar 2009 NewAgeIslam.Com)




TOTAL COMMENTS:-   210


  • "the prophets must have told people to use idols at an earlier stage"
    This completely goes against several well known verses in the Quran. It's basically saying that at a time in the past the Prophet's said to worship others beside Allah...if that doesn't make one raise an eyebrow then seek basic knowledge of Islam and read more of the Quran.

    By Isa Abdul - 7/29/2019 3:18:19 AM



  • So many doctors without a clear prescription of obedience to Imam e Mubeen since all are not aware of the Fatimid Khalifa and its theological foundation. I was not aware of this aware being born in a Sunni family pledged to Wilayat commemorating the martyrdom of Imam Hussain but not acknoweledging the Imam e Mubeen in verse 36:12.
    By Mukhtar Alam - 9/11/2015 2:32:30 AM



  • In this enlightened  forum I found few are very judgmental and showed intolerance to other point of views.
      It is mention in Quran ..." Clear message to mankind to understand and benefit from it "
     Nothing is mention to have a scholar next to u while reciting ...


    By Aj - 6/24/2015 6:15:49 PM



  • I usually don't read religious books, articles or journals, but it's first time ever I came across the above article and found very interesting and about 80%makes sense. Now really want to know more. Please guide me through if possible. Thank you in advance. Regards Syed
    By Syed Baquer Mohiuddin - 3/24/2012 11:12:04 AM



  • First words such as "respect" must be denifed. Obviously, like "peace,"the elimination of enemies rather than of conflict, "respect" has a different meaning for Muslims than it does for non-Muslims. In the West, respect is earned; it appears that for Islam, respect is demanded or dire consequences will ensure. In other words," respect" is the same thing as a threat.
    By Ong - 2/23/2012 2:09:08 PM



  • If one gives any consideration to the reasoning of Niyaz Fatehpuri who assigns the top position to Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), then the Quran followed by God, because Quran came to us from the mouth of Mohammad (PBUH) and we know about God from the Prophet, then this connotation puts us on a slippery slope. How then we regard those who compiled the Quran, that involved editing, rearranging the Surahs, burning of some passages, etc. For us, they are the source of the knowledge what came out of the Prophet mouth.  Do we put them at high, if not higher, pedestal for their judgment on what goes in and what is left out of the book when compiling it?


    By Syed Rizvi - 10/8/2011 1:15:21 PM



  • Hello Mr Shahin, Mr Fatehpuri seems to be a Mushrik and I think you are also going on same track. Remember for Mushrik Allah ST has prepared severe torment. I request you to rethink and abandon false practices and thoughts.

    Life here is too short and after that it is long lasting life. So think 100 times before putting a word. Hope, you will understand.


    By Shahid Munshi - 8/8/2011 5:28:22 AM



  • I would be much interested in what Ms Kaneez thinks about the need of four witnesses for a woman to prove that she has been raped.

    If she thinks that a skeptic is bothered about what Rama or Krishna or some X Y or Z said and did, she is is simply trying the "tu quoque" fallacy. When a non Muslim criticizes Mohammad, it is not the case that such a person is praising prophets of his own faith.

    In school we used to have a boy who was a fan of one particular actor. When we disagreed and pointed out the actors unconvincing acting in some scene, his retort was exactly as given by Ms Kaneez - "In any case he is much better than you".

    This response is not a valid response in logic, but it is also not the case that everyone ought to believe in logic.


    By car313 - 4/7/2011 10:39:53 PM



  • The Quran specifically says that the Nabi does not say anything on his own whim. This refers to the Divine Revelation (the AYAATS). Apart from this the Nabi had his own life as a human being and family man. That is why there is great difference between the words of the Wahi and his own words.

    Allah connects with us thru his Messenger and that's it. Fatehpuri or no Fatehpuri.The Quran has a very definite and simple message. Let us keep it simple and improve our lives.
    By Muhammad Rafi -



  • This was stated in this article:

    "Prophet Muhammad, according to him, was basically a reformer who was very concerned about the state of his society:­ its illiteracy, ignorance, social evils like polygamy, infanticide, drinking (etc.), its material culture and idol worship. After all, he sat meditating in a cave for weeks even before the advent of the revelation. Fateh{puri@ mused that he must have been thinking about ways to cleanse his society of its ills and it seems, Islam turned out to be a good way of doing so."

    This merely points to the fact that Mohammed was not a reformer; after all, Arabia was multi-religious and this applies to Christianity, Judaism, and Paganism.

    However, once Mohammed obtained power he spewed hatred towards his enemies and he went from stating "no compulsion" to "kill the apostates."

    Also, unlike Jesus who was pure; Mohammed married many women (more than 4 which is ironic, it means that God believed he should have more than everyone else) and had concubines.

    Jesus understood that the prostitute should not be killed, after all, who is without sin?

    Mohammed supported stoning the prostitute to death; however, he had many wives and concubines.

    Islam means dhimmitude for non-Muslims and of course, it is ironic, than even basic followers of Islam will be more pure than Mohammed who even married a child.

    Mohammed who somehow prayed towards Jerusalem at first but then prayed towards Mecca; again, confusion, and Paganism; after all, God is everywhere and it makes no difference whatsoever if you pray in any direction.

    Then look at the flaws; nobody can deny that Mecca did not belong to Paganism and you have no relationship with this place and Abraham at all.

    More important, just like Pagans, Muslims will walk around a stone many times and then stone the devil which again is ridiculous - is the devil really sitting down in order to be stoned?

    Islam is a myth and based on Paganism and Mohammed was unpure and the Hadiths tell us this.

    Lee Jay Walker 


    By Lee Jay Walker -



  • Mr. Sultan Shahin,

    It's a real tragedy for Ummah that there are people like you in our midst. If you want to leave the fold of Islam then leave quietly and fill the ranks of the likes of Salman Rushdie, Taslima Nasreen, Irshad Maji etc. But do not play a coward and use devious ways to mislead innocent people, hell bent on taking them with you to Jahannam. Tel me what is left of you as Muslim after insisting on taking out passage from Quran, as if Quran was worded and published with your permission. Tell me one thing, how many long years have you spent in your so called 'enlightened' Taalim just to get into an occupation and not yet specialist in any field of knowledge!! Yet you dare to interpret the manual (Quran) to guide humanity in their way of life, where lies the salvation for both this world and hereafter. When you become sick where do you go to? A 'specialist' in that branch of disease or any one claiming to be having knowledge of disease. How can you understand the 'Deen' when you have not studied any branch of Islamic learning?

    Your are already out of the fold of Islam. It does not matter if conveniently you retain your Muslim name.

    Fear Allah. Ask for His forgiveness. Alternately, please do not incite Muslims psych to rebel again Allah, taking the bulk of the blame on you. Remember, Jahannam is very wide which can accommodate the whole lot of rebels like you.

    Mohammed Shahed


    By Mohammed Shahed -



  • The views expressed by Mr. Niyaz Fathepuri are hundred percent correct, that all the religions of the world are created by intelligent and thinking men who wanted to reform and guide the human societies. Generally common people will obey and respect anything commanded by God. Hence it was told that Religion is created by God and one should follow it in word and deed. With this one can be assured of disciplined society and peaceful living i.e. Live and Let live.


    By Kummethi Abdul Shukur -



  • One who doubts whether the aayaath in the Quran are the WORDS OF ALLAH is a KAFIR. Among the seven things which a Momin must believe, the FIRST thing is to believe in ALLAH. When Allah Himself says that it is He who revealed the Quran to His Messenger, who is  this FATEHpuri ( as a matter of fact he is a SHIKISTHpuri) to say that the words did come out of  the mouth of Muhammad (s.a.w.s) but are Allah's words?

    MAY THE TRIBE OF NIYAZ FATHEPURI DECREASE !


    By S.M.PASHA -



  • Monism in Islam:

    Once the question of theism is settled, let us say in favour of monotheism, the next logical step is to examine the nature of God and His relationship with His Creation. It can take the shape of ‘monism’, which to my mind is not entirely un-permitted in Islam, unless it is advanced as a mischievous step to destroy or blur the concept of monotheism.  Monotheism is an established concept in Islam, and monism can easily flow from it because the love and praise and eulogy of God are very much desirable activities in Islamic tradition and practice. It is impossible for a person to contemplate on Godhood and not fall in love with God in the end – giving rise to Sufis, Mystics, and other enlightened beings. If we accept Hazrat Ali Razi- Allah-anhu as the philosopher of Islam, who was nurtured by no-one less than the Prophet himself (PBUH), then I think a somewhat qualified acceptance of monistic philosophy is there, which Hazrat Ali Razi- Allah-anhu has described in his inimitable words:

     “God is outside of things, but not in the sense of being alien to them, and He is inside of things, but not in the sense of being identical with them”.

    This middle path is what makes Islam wonderful and exceedingly successful philosophy. Monotheism keeps man straight and ordered; monism makes him living and kind. Personally I would accept monotheism as my public face and monism as my private face such that monotheism shall rule my head and monism shall rule my heart. What is wrong if I imagine myself, to be ensconced and floating in the garb of a vast (infinite) divine ocean surrounding me, and to be enjoying an incomparable state of bliss? And what if it might turn out to be true! Will heaven be better, than anything of this order? Yet it might not turn true, because of my own doings; by my failing to do the right kind of things, which I am required to do in this life, as laid down by the words of Allah. Thus monotheism with monism is meaningful, which is the true position of Islam, and monism without monotheism is meaningless, and may even be mischievous.

    Lastly, I stand to be corrected by a better argument.


    By Manzurul Haque -



  • The question of whether God has created man  or man has created God, has one connotation:

    What if Creator and Creation are one and the same entity?  We the "creation" may be lost because we see ourselves separate from the creator.  We cannot find him because He is too close.

    In the words of Alan Watts

    Just like the eye cannot see itself, the tongue cannot taste itself, and the tip of the finger cannot touch itself.  So we cannot find God over there but right within ourselves what he calls God Consciousness.  I believe Many Sufis, Mystics, and other enlightened being have hinted on this aspect. 


    By Syed Rizvi -



  • Religion is not a very clear connotation.  The correct word is religious order. Religion as the word of God runs through ages and over different religious orders. But religion as a religious order is time and space specific.  Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) (like  all other prophets) has laid down a religious order that the Muslims of the world practice as Islam, but Islam as a word of God has existed since eternity.  The question raised is already answered here, but…

    The actual debatable question is, whether man made the God, or God made the man? At the starting end of each of these questions, is a theist or an atheist respectively.  The problem with the theist is that he has the logic but he does not have the proof. However atheist is in a graver situation. He neither has the logic nor has the proof.

    Logic of the theist is this: the basic premise is the question itself: Either man made the God or God made the man. The evidence of making of the man is there, through evolution or whatever.  But the evidence of the making of God is not there for the simple reason that the evidence of the existence of God is also not there. So the question of who made who seems to settle in favor of God (if at all) made man (Creation leading to Creator). The atheist thus loses in the first round itself. But he does not stop to question the theist from outside the ring. The theist is required to answer a few things because he is still in the arena. It is here that the word of God comes into play. Persons like prophets, who have tried to commune with God, by a series of acts of piety, sacrifice and great meditation (all observed facts) uniformly  say,  that He is not only there,  but He is the law-giver for men.

    However it is true that God cannot be proved in a chemistry lab by fusing substances. This is the greatest failure of theists in the eyes of the atheists.

    Manzurul Haque


    By Manzurul Haque -



  • Mr. Siddique. 
    Please read and reflect on the following verses again:

     
    [69:40] This is the utterance of an honorable messenger.
    [69:41] Not the utterance of a poet; rarely do you believe.
    [69:42] Nor the utterance of a soothsayer; rarely do you take heed.
    [69:43] A revelation from the Lord of the universe.
    [69:44] Had he uttered any other teachings.
    [69:45] We would have punished him.
    [69:46] We would have stopped the revelations to him.
    [69:47] None of you could have helped him.
    [69:48] This is a reminder for the righteous."
     Focus more on 69:43 and 69:44 together:
     [69:43] A revelation from the Lord of the universe.
    [69:44] Had he uttered any other teachings.
     Now, tell me what is the revelation from the Lord of the universe?  Is it the Quran or something manufactured by Mr. Bukhari?!  What could be any other teaching beside the Quran?!  Aren't those hadiths and sunnahs manufactured by Mr. Bukhari or Mr. Muslim that you believe in?!
     [39:23] GOD has revealed herein the best Hadith; a book that is consistent, and points out both ways (to Heaven and Hell). The skins of those who reverence their Lord cringe therefrom, then their skins and their hearts soften up for GOD's message. Such is GOD's guidance; He bestows it upon whoever wills (to be guided). As for those sent astray by GOD, nothing can guide them. 
    God Almighty blessed the Prophet as evidenced from the Quran.  Why do you think Mohammad needs my blessing or your blessing beside God's blessing?!  Isn't God's blessing sufficient for him?! Where does God command us to send blessing upon Mohammad?!  
    [4:113] If it were not for GOD's grace towards you, and His mercy, some of them would have misled you. They only mislead themselves, and they can never harm you in the least. GOD has sent down to you the scripture and wisdom, and He has taught you what you never knew. Indeed, GOD's blessings upon you have been great
     Thank you and may God guide me,
     Muhammed Irtaza
      [33:62] God's Sunnah is unchangeable 
    [39:23] The Quran is the best Hadith
     http://www.masjidtucson.org/quran/


    By Muhamnad Irtaza -



  •  

    Mr Irtaza
    You wrote
     "The prophet Muhammad never even got the privilege of issuing any other religious teaching beside the Quran.

      [69:40] This is the utterance of an honorable messenger.

    [69:41] Not the utterance of a poet; rarely do you believe.

    [69:42] Nor the utterance of a soothsayer; rarely do you take heed.

    [69:43] A revelation from the Lord of the universe.

    [69:44] Had he uttered any other teachings.

    [69:45] We would have punished him.

    [69:46] We would have stopped the revelations to him.

    [69:47] None of you could have helped him.

    [69:48] This is a reminder for the righteous."

     

     69:44 is about inventing things and attributing them to Allah. The Qur'an is affirming that Muhammad, pbuh, never did any such thing.

    The references you have given from the Qur'an  do not say that Muhammad, pbuh, cannot issue any teachings outside the Qur'an. Where does it say that?

     Also, the Qur'an commands you to send blessings on Muhammad, pbuh, but you don't. See how Allah has revealed to us that you are a liar. You take the blessed named of Muhammad, pbuh, without blessing him, although Allah commanded you. 

    The Qur'an never says: Do not accept the Hadith of Muhammad, pbuh. Quite the contrary.

     Inshallah your lies will not work.


    By T Siddique -



  • Salamun Alykum.

     

    The Ismailees understand the Qur'an to have several layers of meaning, but generally divide those types of meanings into two: the apparent  meaning and the hidden meaning. While a believer can understand the hidden meaning to some extent, the ultimate interpretation lies in the office of the Imamate. The Imam's  teachings are binding upon the community. In this way, the Ismailees community can adapt to new times and new places. 

    After careful study of the Quran, we can easily determine that the above Ismaili faith does not coincide with the sacred teaching of the Quran.  

    God Almighty is the Author of the Quran.  

    [10:37] This Quran could not possibly be authored by other than GOD. It confirms all previous messages, and provides a fully detailed scripture. It is infallible, for it comes from the Lord of the universe.

     God Almighty  is also the teacher of the Quran.  The understanding of the Quran comes from God. 

      [55:1] The Most Gracious.

    [55:2] Teacher of the Quran.

    [55:3] Creator of the human beings.

    [55:4] He taught them how to distinguish.  

    Only the sincere understands the Quran. 

    [56:77] This is an honorable Quran.

    [56:78] In a protected book.

    [56:79] None can grasp it except the sincere.

    [56:80] A revelation from the Lord of the universe.  

    There is no such thing as several layers of meaning of the Quran.  Additionally, there is no such thing as the apparent meaning and the hidden meaning of the Quran.  The Quran clearly defines its verses into three categories. 

     [3:7] He sent down to you this scripture, containing straightforward verses - which constitute the essence of the scripture - as well as multiple-meaning or allegorical verses. Those who harbor doubts in their hearts will pursue the multiple-meaning verses to create confusion, and to extricate a certain meaning. None knows the true meaning thereof except GOD and those well founded in knowledge. They say, "We believe in this - all of it comes from our Lord." Only those who possess intelligence will take heed.

     The prophet Muhammad never got the privilege of interpreting the Quran.  His sole mission was to deliver the message of God.

     [75:16] Do not move your tongue to hasten it.

    [75:17] It is we who will collect it into Quran.

    [75:18] Once we recite it, you shall follow such a Quran.

    [75:19] Then it is we who will explain it.  

    The prophet Muhammad never even got the privilege of issuing any other religious teaching beside the Quran.

      [69:40] This is the utterance of an honorable messenger.

    [69:41] Not the utterance of a poet; rarely do you believe.

    [69:42] Nor the utterance of a soothsayer; rarely do you take heed.

    [69:43] A revelation from the Lord of the universe.

    [69:44] Had he uttered any other teachings.

    [69:45] We would have punished him.

    [69:46] We would have stopped the revelations to him.

    [69:47] None of you could have helped him.

    [69:48] This is a reminder for the righteous.  

    In essence, the Quran does not recognize any god beside God!  Such is Islam, the total submission to God Alone. 

    [2:112] Indeed, those who submit themselves absolutely to GOD alone, while leading a righteous life, will receive their recompense from their Lord; they have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve

     A word of caution from the Quran to those who are satisfied with the material  success at the cost of idolworship: 

    [39:65] It has been revealed to you, and to those before you that if you ever commit idol worship, all your works will be nullified, and you will be with the losers

     Thank you and may God guide us,

     Muhammed Irtaza


    By Muhammed Irtaza -



  • Imam Bukhari insulted the Prophet Muhammad To: irtaza1@yahoo.com Date: Sunday, September 27, 2009, 1:56 AM I wanted to look up this verse that you have quoted [31:6] Among the people, there are those who uphold baseless Hadith, and thus divert others from the path of GOD without knowledge, and take it in vain. These have incurred a shameful retribution.   According to USC Muslim Student Association’s Quran’s data base, This is what are the translation of that Ayat. I do not understand where did you get the world “Hadith”  in that translation. Please clarify. And here is the copy paste of that Ayat 31:6   031.006 YUSUFALI: But there are, among men, those who purchase idle tales, without knowledge (or meaning), to mislead (men) from the Path of Allah and throw ridicule (on the Path): for such there will be a Humiliating Penalty. PICKTHAL: And of mankind is he who payeth for mere pastime of discourse, that he may mislead from Allah's way without knowledge, and maketh it the butt of mockery. For such there is a shameful doom. SHAKIR: And of men is he who takes instead frivolous discourse to lead astray from Allah's path without knowledge, and to take it for a mockery; these shall have an abasing chastisement.   Wouldn’t you agree that changing “idle tales” to “hadith” gives different meaning?    [33:62] God's Sunnah is unchangeable  [39:23] The Quran is the best Hadith  http://www.masjidtucson.org/quran/  


    By Irtaza -



  • Hadith Funny thing is that Bukhari never claimed he had access to written records!!!   Even funnier thing is that some claim that the Exalted Messenger prohibted writing down his sayings (and so did the first four Calips) because they did not want the Qur'an to get mixed up with his (S) sayings!!   This is constantly trumpetted inspite of the fact tha Allah in The Qur'an gives assurance of it's preservation, collection and declares no falsehood can enter it!!   Now go figure!!   No wonder the Book proclaims in which Hadith after this (The Qu'ran) will people believe?   Mubashir


    By Mubashir -



  • Shamim: Moby's claim that hadith was orally transmitted. Here is the answer. [“H... Shamim Siddiqi,   The most common issue we have here is there is no archaeological proof of Hadith.   Not single hadith is found in any archaeological remains anywhere in the world. Islamic empire spread far during time of Muhammad (peace be upon him)  and Sahaba traveled into many places...  There was no isolated area of Muslims about which we can say that some how all the archaeological history was destroyed?   We have found verses on Quran written on stones, hides and even wood that dates back to time of Muhammad (peace be upon him).   But you won't find a single hadith written anywhere that could be dated back to same time... What we have is material that might be dated back to 250 years after life of Muhammad (peace be upon him)  even if that ...   There are no original sources of Hadith in any shape or form (books) preserved anywhere in the world.   So!   People can claim all they want... the proof is not there.   If you compare Quran... You have Huffaz...  you have Original Quran in museum and you have archaeological pieces of various verses of Quran.   All samples confirm each other.   NONE OF THE ABOVE ARE TRUE ABOUT HADITH.   So what would you say about that?   Atif


    By Atif -



  • Mohtram Kaukab Bhai,   ASA   Jazakallah for your defense of Ahadith of Rasulullah (S), giving accurate references from the collection of Ahadith by  Abdullah  bin Umru bin A'as (RA)     *His collection was known as Al-'S'aiyeqa and contained more than ten thousands Ahadith of Rasulullah (S). He compiled it with the expressed consent and approval of Rasulullah (S) who used to verify his collection frequently. Hence it was the most authenticated one.    *Besides this collection, Anas Bin Ma'lik (RA}  who knew reading and writing and remained in the attendance of Rasulullah (S) continuous for the last ten years of his (S) life and observed the life of Rasulullah both at home and outside in depth.. He collected thousands of Ahadith. He used to keep his collection in a box and used to refer frequently form it when teaching Ahadith to others.    *Abu Ra'fey (RA) came to Rasulullah (S) and took his (S) permission to write down Ahadith. Rasulullah (S) permitted him to do so. He prepared  his valuable collection with permission of Rasulullah (S)   *It must be noted at this point that Bukhari actually quoted just about 2000  Ahadith. whereas Abdullah bin Umru  bin A'as and Anas bin Malik (RA) collected more than ten thousands Ahadith during the life time of Rasulullah (S) which were later on narrated in "Sahai Sitta" and other collections from that direct original source   *Further, immediately after the departure  of Rasulullah (S), Sumrah bin Jundab (RA), Abdullah bin Maswood (RA), Saad bin Ebadah (RA) and many other beloved companions of Rasulullah (S) compiled their  respective  memoirs about Rasulullah (S), his (S) life history, and different events of his (S) life with the apprehension  that it may lost.   *About all these collections Ibne Hajar Asqalani writes that they contained  "fehey Ilme Kathir" [They contains the treasure of knowledge in abundance].  .   *Thus, those brothers and sisters who are talking that Ahadith were collected after 300 years of the departure of Rasulullah (S) are just totally wrong, ignorant, "Jahil" and has no other intention except to create disruption in Ummah   *Some time back I suggested them just to go through"Khutbat-e-Bhawalpur" by Dr. M. Hamidullah and they will get the  treasure of knowledge about the Qur'an and Ahadith of Rasulullah (S) and will help them to save their Akhirah form total ruination.   May Allah bless your efforts and guide these misguided brothers and sisters to come out of ignorance of modern Jahiliyah. Personally I feel sorry for them.    Shamim Siddiqi        In a message dated 9/17/2009 12:20:11 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time, butshikan@msn.com writes: Is It True That Hadith Was Not Written in the time of the Prophet, pbuh? Were Qur'an and Hadith transmitted by same people or different ones? Question from Sis. N. in Detroit [From a long letter]: I am originally from Iran, moving to real Islam, Qur'an and Hadith. I read a good book by Fazlur Rahman (Chicago University) but it confused me on some points. He writes, Hadith was written in third century after the Prophet. New Trend's web site says follow Qur'an and Hadith. I am confused please explain why Hadith was not written in time of the Prophet ? ANSWER by Kaukab Siddique: Dr. Fazlur Rahman was influenced by Christian missionaries and Jewish orientalists. He tried to confuse the Muslims of Pakistan, with the support of the military government, but was defeated and fled to America where he was immediately given a senior position at Chicago University to teach Islam. Both the Qur'an and the Hadith were written down in the time of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). The Qur'an is the word of Allah revealed to Muhammad (peace be on him). The Hadith is the commentary, explanation, implementation of the Qur'an by Muhammad (pbuh). Both are interlinked and essential to each other. No authentic Islamic scholar has ever tried to say that Hadith is not necessary or was written later. The people who wrote down the Qur'an, on bits and pieces of materials, were the SAHABA or companions of the Prophet (pbuh). Paper and printing were not available at that time. So, people could not go around with printed and bound copies of the Qur'an. Even the collation and putting together of the Qur'an was done by the SAHABA so that the Qur'an became a BOOK between two covers after the Prophet (pbuh) passed away. This great work was done under the supervision of Abu Bakr, Umar, Osman and Ali (may Allah be pleased with them all) who were the first four rightly guided Caliphs of Islam. The same SAHABA also wrote and transmitted the Hadith and made sure that nothing was falsely attributed to the Prophet (pbuh). The QUR'AN was also MEMORIZED by the Sahaba. In fact few of them had it in writing but many of them knew it from memory. The cross checking of memory with writing was carried out to make sure that the Qur'an as revealed to the Prophet, pbuh, was transmitted to future generations. The HADITH was also memorized by the SAHABA and transmitted to future generations. Any scholar of Hadith had to MEMORIZE the HADITH from the written collections of the Sahaba and then RECITE IT FROM MEMORY to his/her teacher. Thus an accurate record of the Prophet's, pbuh, life and teachings was enshrined in the scholarship of the Muslim world. In the era after the SAHABA various kinds of sects arose which tried to disseminate their own versions of the Qur'an. Some of them claimed that Hazrat Ali (r.a.) had received suras of the Qur'an from the Prophet, pbuh, which no one else had. The scholars of the line of Ali (r.a.) and Fatima (r.a.), such as Imam Jafar and Imam Baqir, were able to repudiate these claims because they had the Qur'an both by memory and in writing. Similarly attempts were made to invent "Hadith." This was a very serious effort by Kings and emperors who wanted religion to justify their tyranny and to creatre a "tame Islam." The problem was aggravated by the fact that various SAHABA had migrated to various cities, and after they passed away, various people could claim that they had heard Hadith from them. It was in that context that great scholars like Imam Bukhari stepped forward to ENSURE that fabrications did not enter the corpus of Hadith. I think that these scholars were a bit too strict and as a result they sometimes designated as "weak" even those Hadith which were authentic but which would not pass the test of extremely severe scrutiny. Imam Bukhari and other imams are the ones Dr. Fazlur Rahman was abusing when he claimed that Hadith was written in the third century after the Prophet. Fazlur Rahman really was quite ignorant of Hadith and hence recklessly fell into the trap set for him by Christian missionaries and Jewish orientalists. WAS HADITH WRITTEN in the TIME OF THE PROPHET (pbuh)? Yes, the evidence is overwhelming. Here is one sample from a prominent companion of the Prophet, pbuh, Abdullah ibn Umru ibn al-Aas. It is authenticated by two distinct and separate compilers of Hadith, Abu Dawud in his Sunan (chapter kitabut al-ilm) and Darimi in his Musnad (chapter on Rukhs fi kitabut al-ilm): "Whatever I heard from the messenger of Allah, peace be on him, I would write it down so as to be able to memorize it. Then some in the Quraish (tribe) said to me: You write down whatever you hear though the messenger of Allah is a human being and speaks both in anger and in joy. On hearing that I stopped writing and then I mentioned this to the messenger of Allah. He pointed with his finger to his mouth and said: Write on! By Him in whose Hand is my being, no word comes out of this mouth but the Truth." Abdullah ibn Umru (r.a.) collected the Hadith he had written in the presence of the Prophet (pbuh) in a book titled Al-Sadiqa. Abdullah said: "There are two things I love in life: Al-Sadiqa and al-Wahat." He explained: "Al-Sadiqa is that manuscript which I heard and wrote from the messenger of Allah and Wahat is that land which (my father) Umru ibn al-Aas donated to the cause of Allah and which I take care of." [Darimi's Sunan.] The compendium Tahzeeb al-Tahzeeb tells us that on the death of Abdullah, r.a, the manuscript of Al-Sadiqa was secured by his grandson Shuaib bin Muhammad and then transmitted to the next generation by his son also named Umru. THE HADITH WRITTEN BY Abdullah, r.a., DIRECTLY FROM THE PROPHET, pbuh, AND AT HIS COMMAND, are to be found in the collections of Hadith which we have under this chain of narration: "From Umru son of Shuaib from his father from his grandfather." As Hadith is a very strict discipline, some classical scholars wanted to classify the collection as Mursal because they thought the grandson should have SAT DOWN IN FRONT OF THE GRANDFATHER AND RECITED THE WHOLE COLLECTION TO HIM FROM MEMORY! However, some of the greatest scholars of Hadith, like Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal, accept the authenticity of Al-Sadiqa. What makes Al-Sadiqa's authenticity irrefutable is that it was also transmitted by OTHER STUDENTS of Abdullah (r.a.) who had nothing to do with his grandson. So, don't let anyone tell you that Hadith was not written in the time of the Prophet, pbuh. FINALLY, spend a couple of months in trying to understand this verse of the Qur'an. It will help you to understand why the Hadith is essential and ALWAYS goes with the Qur'an: "The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers. [33:6]   ---------------------------------


    By T Siddique -



  • These words of the Prophet (pbuh) were transmitted, both > orally and in writing, by the Sahaba to future generations. That’s > what we call Hadith today...." > > > Has anybody heard about a hadith book written down by the companions > of The Messenger? Did Bukhari and Co. quote from those books are is > somebody is full of it? Can anybody guess what happens to oral > transmissions over several generations? > > To learn the naked truth about Hadith, Please read Dr. Qamar's > "Haqeeqat e Hadith" here. > > A real eye opener which should be taught at the school level all > over the Muslim World: > > http://www.aastana.com/b_hadith.asp > > The simple rule for ahadith is that ones that match the Qur'an could > be true, but no one can say for sure.


    By minayet -



  • Dear Sir,

    I read this article on the research work of Dr. Fatehpuri. I feel this is a great work of research on Islam and its teachings. In fact there is a great difference between spiritual Islam and fundamental Islam. Unfortunately, fundamental Islam has taken over the spiritual Islam over a period of time. Prophet Mohammed was very clear in his message. He wanted to cleanse the society at that time from its evils as Fatehpuri has said in his book but human being because of its nature never wanted to change or improve and continued with its own ideas suited to him like any other society in the world. To reform the human societies most of the holy men have come with single message to purify the polluted souls. Therefore, spiritualism and fundamentalism are entirely two different concepts. I agree that religion is a creation of human mind and spiritualism leading to the worship of God and purification of soul is entirely different. If we look the teachings of Prophet Mohammed purely from spiritual point of view and follow the same then there will be no conflict and peace every where. There is a difference how Kings and Rajas see the society from there point of view and how a saint looks the society from his point of view. Saints always like to bring peace and harmony in the society whereas Kings will always devise rules, regulations and there ideologies to rule the subjects.

    With deep regards

    Dr. C. M. Seth

    Jammu and Kashmir, India


    By Dr.C.M.Seth -



  • This is just a try from your side to gain popularity just like Tasleema Nasrin and Salman Rushdie. You have written this just like an educated animal. Without going into the depth. How can you say that Muhammad sahab was very good in wordings and he is the one to give wordings of Quran.

    If Muhammad shahab was the one then his name would have appeared in Quran several times whereas Prophet's name is there only 5 times. Now a person like you will tell this a gimick.

    So useless to discuss these things.

    Just go to moon or trust Sumita Williams who has given you the proof of Mecca Madina and follow what Islam says else be ready for Qayamat.

    if u dont want to follow you dont follow but dont try to misguide people here.

     Regards

    Jawed Hassan (a person who never believed Quran but today because of evidences I do and am fan of Islam and proud to be born in a muslim family)

    9873145974


    By Jawed Hassan -



  • Reform in Islam:

     http://my.telegraph.co.uk/lutf/blog/2009/04/28/crucible_of_terrorism_dr_hargey_and_british_islam


    By khokhar976 -



  • Although Niyaz Fatehpuri has raised some bold questions about the divine aspects of Mohammed SahaB & Origin of Quran but he also escaped one important aspect i.e. Gabriel, who was claimed by Mohammed sahab as the Angel.

    Who was Gabriel ?

    Without focussing on Gabriel one can't really resolve the mystery of Origin of Islam.

     


    By viduur -



  • Dear Shahin Saheb,

    But of late, the site  is looking mundane. boring and dull.  Your choice of articles are extremely dull, presentation equally bad. I am also amazed that you now have no one to debate except Mr Amir Mughal whose posts are just tiring and unreadable.  You may have a liking for this man as is demonstrated in the site if his escessive presence but no sensible man can read his trash. The site should attract debate from cross section but you have made it a one man man show.  May be Mughal  is promoting your daughter book.  Anyway, I shall be happy if you please discontinue mailing me yournew age islam in my inbox as honestly I do no read it all these days. [Dr Mansoor Ilahi ]

    =======================

     

    Dear Dr Sahab,

     

    If you would go through my very early post on Niyaz Fatehpuri and Ms Juhi Shahin then you may find that I basically had differed with Ms. Juhi Shahin. By the way nobdoy is forcing you to read my posts. You can call me and my posts trash or you can use even worse terms for both but I am amazed that you have completely forgotten or overlooked a fact in your fervor to opposing me that my posts also carry Quranic Text and Text from Hadith. Pleaase explain this to all of us that how shall we take your comment below in view of my those posts which carry Quranic Text and Hadith Text as well. Particularly on this thread where I tried to refute Niyaz Fatehpuri through Quran and Hadith and you are calling my posts, mentioned as under

     

    "QUOTE"

     

     if his escessive presence but no sensible man can read his trash

     

    "UNQUOTE"

     

     


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Shahin Saheb,

    Thanks for updating with your website by regular posting.  I am indebted.  Initially I used to enjoy reading the site which was vibrant. bold and encouraged lots of debate.  I also took part in some of them. 

     But of late, the site  is looking mundane. boring and dull.  Your choice of articles are extremely dull, presentation equally bad. I am also amazed that you now have no one to debate except Mr Amir Mughal whose posts are just tiring and unreadable.  You may have a liking for this man as is demonstrated in the site if his escessive presence but no sensible man can read his trash.

    The site should attract debate from cross section but you have made it a one man man show.  May be Mughal  is promoting your daughter book.  Anyway, I shall be happy if you please discontinue mailing me yournew age islam in my inbox as honestly I do no read it all these days.

     Regards and wassalamm

     


    By Dr Mansoor Ilahi -



  •  

     

    Dear Sultan Shahin,

     

    My hearty congratulations to you for your outstanding work was finally recognised by no less a national daily than the accredited newspaper  "The Hindu" which chose to publish your photo and applauded your efforts to project Islam in its correct perspective, allowing a healthy debate on various issues etc.

     

    http://www.hindu.com/2009/03/24/stories/2009032450460900.htm

     

     I think with the exit of third rated commentators, albeit on my suggestion, the website is now a truly worthy website for all Muslims who believe in civility to participate in the debate on various subjects of importance relating to Islam and Muslim Ummah. Perhaps, with wider readership and more participants joining the debate, New Age Islam.com would grow further in the days to come.

     

    The true fight would begin now. We have to fight to free Muslims from the clutches of the radical elements and their Jamaats, who did more harm than good for the cause of Islam. We must also work hard to transform those living in 7th century AD to 21st Century and make them believe that Islam indeed is a religion for all ages which is simple, flexible, accommodative and above all a peaceful religion preaches peaceful co-existence with people of all faiths in a sprit as enshrined in Sura Al-Kafirun.

     

    An effort may be made to widen the scope of the subjects in the website dealing with socio-economic problems and possible solutions to eradicate poverty, illiteracy, and social backwardness among the Muslim masses. An effort may also be made to force the Govt of the day to implement all recommendations of Justice Sachar Committee Report which deals with the problems facing the Muslims in India.

     

    Muslims intelligentsia should also fight to secure all the rights including due representation to Muslims in Govt administration, legislatures, armed forces, police based on the population and fight to remove social discrimination against Muslims. We need to be united to fight the communal forces in the country and against extremism whether within Islam or outside, especially in the wake of the hate-speeches given by Varun Gandhi, a reflexion of a hidden agenda of the Saffron parties, a dangerous mindset beset in these elements.

     

    Muslim reaction to such hate-speeches was subdued, understandably as more secular parties have taken up the cause on our behalf. We must inculcate in the young minds that Muslims are as much Indians and committed to patriotism as anyone in the country. We have to live and die here in our land. All our energy should be channelized to promote unity of the country, by remaining within the mainstream of national life. We must banish the growth of radical jamaats that are responsible for spreading extremism through their radical views on Islam with all force at our command. Once this is done and liberal views take deep root in the psyche of the youth among Muslims, extremism would die on its own. Let us hope this happens some day. Sooner the better.

     

    With good wishes, all the best for future.

     

    Jamsheed Basha


    By Jamsheed Basha, Chennai -



  • Rushie is a dead man walking

    if i see him im gonn beat him black and blue but i wouldnt kill him

    he is a naughty man who wrote naughty things


    By heretohelp -



  • Kya mian sultan shahin

    Pataa chala hai ki aaj kal fitna fasaad nahi faila pa rahe ho?  Yahan tak ye naubat aa gayee  ki apni site pe khud hee message liktey ho? Bhai burey kaam ka buraa natija tumne itna zaher ghola apni site pe ki taleem yaafta log apna daman bachaa ke kinaare ho gaye aur tumhari dukandari thapp ho gayee abb halwai apni baasi mithainyan khud hee kha raha hai chalo shayed tum allah swt ki di huwi akal istemal karo aur fitna failane se gurez karo .

    (bhai mai janta hun tum ye message site pe nahi chapogey)

    Aslam Khan Barailvi  


    By Aslam Khan Barailvi -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

    ============================

    RELIGIOUS SCHOLAR PART 10:

    O you who believe! Obey Allâh and obey the Messenger (Muhammad SAW), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allâh and His Messenger (SAW), if you believe in Allâh and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination. [The Noble Qur'an 4:59]

    Linguistically, taqleed means: Placing something around the neck, which encircles the neck. Technically it means: Following he whose sayings is not a proof (hujjah).
    "QUOTE"
    Exlcuded from our saying, "following he whose saying is not a proof" is: following the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW).
    "Indeed the people of Truth and the Sunnah do not follow anyone [unconditionally] except the messenger of Allaah SAW, the one who does not speak from his desires - it is only revelation revealed to him." [by Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmoo'ah al-Fataawaa, vol 3, page 216, Daar Ibn Hazm Print, Trans: Aboo 'Abdis-Salaam]
    Abu Haneefah (d. 150H) (rahimahullaah) said: "Adhere to the athar (narration) and the tareeqah (way) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and beware of newly invented matters for all of it is innovation" [Reported by As-Suyootee in Sawn al Mantaq wal-Kalaam p.32]

    Ibn al-Qayyim said,
    " And it is as Abu Umar (ibn Abdul Barr) said: Indeed, the people do not differ about the fact that knowledge is the realisation attained from proof, but without proof, it is only taqleed."

    Ibn al-Qayyim said,
    "There are three sayings about the permissibility of giving fatwaa based upon taqleed:
    1) It is not permissible to give fatwaa based upon taqleed, because it is not knowledge; since issuing a fatwaa without knowledge is forbidden. This is the saying of most of the Hanbalee scholars and the majority of the Shaafi'iyyah.
    2) That it is permissible with regards to himself, but it is not permissible to give a fatwaa to others based upon taqleed.
    3) That it is permissible when there is a need for it, and there is no mujtahid scholar. And this is the most correct of the sayings and is what is acted upon."'
    Imam Ibn Katheer, rahimahullaah, said:
    "And what is apparent, and Allaah knows best, is that it is general for all those who are in authority (oolul-amr), from the rulers and the scholars."
    Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said:
    "This is why those who are in authority are of two groups: the scholars and the rulers. If they are upright, the people will be upright; if they are corrupt, the people will be corrupt."
    "It should be realised that the rulers are to be obeyed if they command what knowledge necessitates. So obedience to them follows on from obedience to the scholars. Indeed obedience is only in that which is good and that which is obligated by knowledge. So just as obedience to the scholars follows on from obedience to the Messenger, then obedience to the rulers follows on from obedience to the scholars." [Imaam Ibn al-Qayyim, r.a.]
    The Problem  "Blind" following refers to following a person (including self) when the instructions are clearly not in accordance with Qur'an and Sunnah. To do so is a form of shirk, because at its core is a denial of a part of the Revelation, and to deny a single ayat of Revelation is to deny it all.
    Many muslims treat the noble Imaams (Imaam Shafii, Imaam Malik, etc.) as though their words are protected from error. For some people, the words of an Imaam are taken as "gospel" and followed exclusively (as if it were revelation). Even if a verse from the Quraan or an authentic saying of the Messenger is brought as an argument against what their chosen Imaam said, their followers forsake what Allah or the Messenger, saaws, said and follow their Imaams. This dangerous position leads to blind taqleed (following) of humans at the expense of revelation.
    One such example of this is that Imaam Malik did not raise his hands during the takbeer because they had been crippled to where he could not raise them as should be done in the salah. Muslims who choose to blindly follow Imaam Malik will not raise their hands during the takbeer, even though their is clear proof to do so. There are examples too numerous to list here, examples of senseless adherence to the ways or teachings of men, teachings that are contradictory to the proof.
    Some muslims blindly follow modern leaders (such as W. Deen Mohammed, the Tableegh, or the highly deviating Imaam at the local masjid), even when the man calls the people to actions and beliefs that are clearly opposing Quran and Sunnah. Once again, this is an act of elevating a person's words over the Speech of Allah (i.e. the Quran), if at any time we reject the clear revelation and instead act upon or embrace the contrary teachings of a person.  Just like we are to obey our parents unless they call us to the haram (prohibited), we may follow the guidance of men unless they call us to error.
    This condition of ignorance and blind following was given by Revelation from Allah to the Messenger, Muhammed, saaws, who said:

    Verily, Allah does not take away knowledge by snatching it from the people, but (this is done) by causing (the death) of the scholars until none of them is left alive. People would then appoint ignorant leaders for themselves who would be consulted in matters of religion and they would give Fatawas without knowledge, falling into misguidance and misguiding others. [Muslim].
    Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, Rahimahullaah, said:
    "And the four Imaams, may Allaah be pleased with them, all forbade the people from blindly following them in all that they may say; and this was an obligation upon them [to do]."
    Abu Haneefah (Rahimahullaah) said:
    "When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab." [Ibn 'Aabideen in al-Haashiyah (1/63) and in his essay Rasm al-Mufti (1/4 from the Compilation of the Essays of Ibn 'Aabideen), Shaikh Saalih al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 62) and others. Ibn 'Aabideen quoted from Sharh al-Hidaayah by Ibn al-Shahnah al-Kabeer, the teacher of Ibn al-Humaam]

    "It is haram (prohibited) for someone who does not know my evidence to give fatwaa (verdicts) on the basis of my words." Another narration adds, "... for we are mortals: we say one thing one day, and take it back the next day." [Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Al-Intiqaa' fi Fadaa'il ath-Thalaathah al-A'immah al-Fuqahaa' (p. 145), Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam al-Mooqi'een (2/309), Ibn 'Aabideen in his Footnoes on Al-Bahr ar-Raa'iq (6/293) and in Rasm al-Mufti (pp. 29, 32) & Sha'raani in Al-Meezaan (1/55) with the second narration. Similar narrations exist on the authority of Abu Haneefah's companions Zafar, Abu Yoosuf and 'Aafiyah ibn Yazeed; cf. Eeqaaz (p. 52). Ibn al-Qayyim firmly certified its authenticity on the authority of Abu Yoosuf in I'laam al-Mooqi'een (2/344).]

    "When I say something contradicting the Book of Allah the Exalted or what is narrated from the Messenger (saaws), then ignore my saying." [Al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 50), tracing it to Imaam Muhammad and then saying, "This does not apply to the mujtahid, for he is not bound to their views anyway, but it applies to the muqallid."]
    Imaam Maalik ibn Anas (Rahimahullaah) said:
    "Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it." [Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), and similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72)]
    Imaam Shaafi'i (Rahimahullaah) said:
    "The sunnahs of the Messenger of Allah (saaws) reach, as well as escape from, every one of us. So whenever I voice my opinion, or formulate a principle, where something contrary to my view exists on the authority of the Messenger of Allah (saaws), then the correct view is what the Messenger of Allah (saaws) has said, and it is my view." [Related by Haakim with a continuous sanad up to Shaafi'i, as in Taareekh Dimashq of Ibn 'Asaakir (15/1/3), I'laam al-Mooqi'een (2/363, 364) & Eeqaaz (p. 100).]
    Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Rahimahullaah) said:
    "Do not follow my opinion; neither follow the opinion of Maalik, nor Shaafi'i, nor Awzaa'i, nor Thawri, but take from where they took." [Fulaani (p. 113) & Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam (2/302).]
    "Do not copy your Deen from anyone of these, but whatever comes from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions, take it; next are their Successors, where a man has a choice."
    "Following (ittibaa') means that a man follows what comes from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions; after the Successors, he has a choice." [Abu Daawood in Masaa'il of Imaam Ahmad (pp. 276-7)]
    "The opinion of Awzaa'i, the opinion of Maalik, the opinion of Abu Haneefah: all of it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is in the narrations (from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions)." [Ibn `Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/149).]
    "Whoever rejects a statement of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) is on the brink of destruction." [Ibn al-Jawzi (p. 182)2)]

    Muslims should be obedient to their Imam except when given evidence that is clearly contrary to the Imam's guidance on any particular matter. This evidence should be from the Qur'an and/or Sunnah, as explained by the righteous Islamic scholars of the first three generations of righteous muslims after the revelation of the Qur'an. Sharh Usool ul-I'tiqaad (1/9) - Imaam al-Laalikaa'ee (d. 418H) (rh) said:
    "That which is most obligatory upon a Muslim:
    And among the mightiest of statements and clearest of proofs and understandings is:
    1. The Book of Allaah, the Manifest Truth
    2. Then the saying of the Messenger of Allaah

    3. And of his Companions, the chosen, pious ones

    4. Then that which the Salaf us-Saalih were unanimously agreed upon

    5. The holding fast to all of that and remaining firm upon it till the Day of Judgement

    6. Then turning away from the innovations and from listening to them - from amongst those things the astray people have invented"  "UNQUOTE"
    By Aamir Mughal -



  • From      Aamir Mughal

    To           Sultan Shahin <Editor@NewAgeIslam.com>

    Date       15 march 2009 10:36

     

     

    subject:            EXCERPT FROM Juhi Shahin's Book on Niyaz Fatehpuri in Daily Dawn - Pakistan

     

    EXCERPT: An ode to DEBATE SUNDAY DAWN, 15 Mar, 2009 | 06:10 AM PST |

     

    BOOKS-AND-AUTHORS

    EXCERPT: An ode to debate

    Sunday, 15 Mar, 2009 | 06:10 AM PST |

     

     

    One of the most fascinating aspects of studying Fatehpuri is that he understood so well the predicament of Muslims in his time, and the crisis of faith that they will be facing in the future. He understood what is called the ‘challenge of modernity.’

    And interpreted Islam in such a way that it was not just a tradition that one followed, but what one wanted to believe in, simply because it made sense. Fatehpuri argued throughout his journalistic career that religion is not about saying prayers, it is about belief that comes from rational ideas and doing good. He had a simple, pragmatic and socially-responsible approach to life, which in his understanding was supremely religious.


    Niyaz Fatehpuri’s socio-religious views, were and remain controversial. Although he was a well-known name in South Asia, not just for his religious views but also for his literary criticism, people were not quite sure what to make of his religious ideas and his campaign against the ulema.


    On one hand his articles were extremely credible and well-argued; on the other, they were sometimes overly logical and strayed too far from popular belief. They should be read with caution like everything else, including the pronouncements of the ulama this was all he was arguing. Everything in Islam is meaningful, according to him, and should be thought about and not blindly accepted.


    Akhlaq was the most important religious teaching for Fatehpuri, as it was for his predecessors and contemporaries like Shah Wali Allah, Sayyid Ahmad, and Shibli Naumani. He, however, was the first to declare akhlaq to be the purpose of religion.


    Fatehpuri took pains to point out the fact that Islam, more than any other religion, has emphasised social relations, behaviour and law. He emphasized how important it was in Islamic context to have righteous conduct, a feeling of sharing and brotherhood, and a belief in progress of all people.


    There was no doubt, according to him, that prayer and fasting were important in themselves, but they should also teach people to become better human beings. Religion should not merely be ritualistic, but should actively teach humility, kindness and a feeling of brotherhood; only then would it be — a complete religion.


    Fatehpuri envisioned an Islam shorn of all its miraculous wonders, but filled with simple ideals. According to him, truth, ethical thinking and right actions were far more important than faith. Islam meant to him a positive action, a choice of doing good and a decision to move forward with the times.


    He strongly believed that Islam asked humankind to think, reason and increase our knowledge in all possible ways, and consequently, progress and develop. He had an Utopian idea of how the world would be if only everyone was rational and was working towards the greater good.


    Now see the way of reason, how clear and attractive it is, look at the widespaces, the earth in full bloom, every individual trying to lighten the load of another, and every mind thinking of ways to give the future generations comfort and happiness.


    Neither are there gallows, nor prisons, nor the fire of hell, nor the whips of angels. There are just the abundant resources of nature from which human beings are sharing equally; there is just the light of knowledge trying to envelope everyone equally.


    The bounds of humanity are broken; the stain of slavery has been removed from the forehead of humanity. Mental freedom has allowed many different kinds of gardens to bloom and every individual seems to be brotherly towards another.


    Fatehpuri wanted major changes in the attitudes and beliefs of people, so that their dependency on the ulama would be reduced. He thought all these changes were possible if the right understanding of Islam was developed.


    However, not many people would try to achieve the right understanding and practise it and be good people, just because Fatehpuri thought it was rational. He was showing what was wrong in the prevailing thinking and that the way out was to adopt akhlaq, i.e., to ‘really’ practice Islam in daily life.


    There is a fundamental difference between Sayyid Ahmad and Fatehpuri’s respective critiques of the ulema. Sayyid Ahmad had a reformist agenda separate from this critique which he was trying to promote.


    Fatehpuri, on the other hand, had no other reformist agenda. He was simply opposing the ulema since their worldview was irrational, according to him, and since fresh thinking on religious issues was essential for any progress of the Muslim community. Promoting reason and rethinking in itself was his movement.


    This was his strength as well as his weakness — strength since he had no ulterior motive, and weakness since he did not suggest any alternative.


    One might or might not agree with his rational interpretation and his real Islam, but this does not take away from his argument that Islam should be re-interpreted, as has been done time and again, throughout Islamic history. Why is it that on religious issues, no questions are encouraged anymore? This was a sign of decline for Fatehpuri.


    A progressive religion and people are always ready to adapt and move forward with the times. The inability of Muslims and Islam to do so in his day, he believed, was to their own disadvantage. Thinking rationally, employing one’s aql, was an inherent part of being Muslim for Fatehpuri.


    The fact that the ulema actively discouraged any new thinking made them his adversaries. He juxtaposed his own thinking with the belief of the ulema to explain how his own views were more rational than theirs. He was quite willing to hear their responses, but he claimed that he never received any reasonable answers.


    However, the ulema’s version of Islam persists in South Asia and Fatehpuri, despite his broader interpretation of Islam, had only a limited impact. An obvious factor in this was that the ulema were naturally more institutionalised; they constituted a whole class of people spread all across South Asia. This enabled the ulema to reach the farthest corners of South Asia, while Fatehpuri was speaking only to the educated people through the medium of a magazine.


     Fatehpuri was individualistic in many ways — one major instance of this can be seen in the fact that he was individually taking on a whole class of people very much entrenched in society.


    On the other hand, he was a believer in societal values, since he wanted to sustain the basic structure of society as it was while working for progress, and not completely westernise it. Quite modern in many ways, but as seen in case of women, he could be closer to traditional values as well. Fatehpuri refused to be bracketed and went wherever his logic and reason took him.


    This fact attests to his credibility as well, since he did not seem to be promoting a particular world view, except teaching Muslims to believe in progress and fresh thinking.


    Zaman argues that the scholars that are borne out of the impact of western modernity were themselves a disruption in the history of discursive practices. Since in responding to their perception of the challenges of modern age, they have tried to find ways to make Islam compatible with it and in the effort to do so, far-reaching changes have been proposed which do not come from within but will be superimposed because of certain people’s perception of what ought to be.


    While it is true that all the modernists were products of the same colonial age and were grappling with a similar onslaught of new ideas, they were not all lay-persons imposing what they thought was appropriate, like Zaman puts it. Many of them were ‘alims themselves and had arrived at their conclusions rationally. They were not part of the ulema as a class, which is probably why they were able to say things against it.


    Most modernists were either appropriating or reacting to western ideas and the model of modern society facing them. Some of them became reactionaries, totally rejecting anything western and campaigning for a return to Islamic roots. Yet others adopted a more pro-western attitude. Fatehpuri is special in this regard, since he judged each issue on its own merit and did not really belong to either of these streams.


    He discussed western philosophy, and appropriated progressive ideas that he found useful in an Indian Muslim context, but he never argued that what the West had achieved was progress.


    In fact, he argued that the West enjoyed only mechanical progress, that it did not have a responsible society and that its progress was devoid of any connection to religion and culture. Whatever new ideas he proposed were supported with careful argument and logic, keeping Indian Muslim society in mind.


    W.C. Smith said that Nigar provided leadership to those people who wanted to find the justification for modern concepts like naturalism, socialism and rationalism in Islam. Smith argued that Islam becomes secondary in the minds of scholars like Fatehpuri; Islam is acceptable because it is rational according to their interpretation. However, Smith insists that does not mean Fatehpuri was not a progressive, and was not looking for a religion of the future.

    Source: http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/Dawn%20Content%20Library/dawn/in-paper-magazine/books-and-authors/an+ode+to+debate


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

    ==========================

    RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS PART 9

    "QUOTE"

    From the message of Dr Shabbir Ahmed dated October 5, 2007 4:49 AM and Friday, October 5, 2007 9:28 AM http://www.ourbeacon.com/

    What is the Mullah? (By Fazil Deeniyat, Ghulam Jeelani Barq):

    Mullah is a specific mentality with some telltale signs:

    He is extremely closed-minded, has little tolerance for a follower of another religion. He hardly tolerates beardless Muslims, and belittles those who study the western sciences, or those who wear the western clothes. He is a staunch enemy of the Mullah in the neighborhood Masjid and takes pleasure in denouncing people as Kaafirs.

    He self-invites. To please his followers, brings easy recipes for achieving Paradise. He knows little about history and current events. The Mullah is extremely arrogant despite being thoroughly ignorant. He is totally disabled from engaging in rational discussion and takes delight in vain argumentation.

    He is a worshiper of the dead Ulama and "Imams" and reviles anyone critical of the dead Mullahs. The Mullah has very twisted, derogatory beliefs about women. His knowledge is good for neither this world, nor for the Next. And so on. That is why and how I hate the Mullah.

    DARS-E-NIZAMI (Devised by ‘Imam’ Ghazali) :

    Nizamul Mulk Toosi (1018-1092 CE) was the Prime Minister of the Suljuk King Malik Shah, and after him of King Alp Arsalan. Toosi was a Zoroastrian in Muslim disguise (Nihaayat-e-Tareekh-Abbasi, Sheikh al-Hafiz Yousuf Naishapuri). Toosi opened up the Great Nizamia University in 1067 CE in Baghdad. It was the foremost university of the Islamic world with satellites in Khurasan, Neshapur, Damascus, Bukhara etc. Smaller branches existed in Herat, Balkh, Merv, Tashkent and Isphahan in today's Afghanistan, Iran and the former Soviet states. The center in Baghdad had as its principal no less than the top criminal of Islam, 'Imam' Abu Hamid Ghazali who primarily laid down the mindless Nizami syllabus in collaboration with Toosi. Ghazali grossly insulted the exalted Messenger and his noble companions. For example, he wrote that Hazrat Umar used to break his fast not by eating or drinking but by having sex with three concubines. Soon you will see many shining
    stars like this.

    Since 1067 CE when the Nizamia University was founded, nearly a millennium has gone by. Until this day, the syllabus, Dars-e-Nizami, prescribed by these two Criminals of Islam (Toosi and Ghazali) is very much in force throughout the world in the so-called Islamic Madrasahs. It includes nothing but stupidities, and therefore, carries no room for understanding the Last Word of God, Al-Quran.

    Chanting to repel the invaders:

    To get a glimpse of the conspiracy of Nizamul Mulk Toosi, just one example should suffice. As the Prime Minister of the Suljuk Empire, he advised the two successive kings not to build any defenses for the Empire. He claimed that his students in the Madrasahs would work on rosary beads and do Wazifas (chanting of verses) and repel the enemy. Even today, the nonsensical sixteen ‘Uloom (sciences) prescribed by Nizamia consume eight years of the life of the Muslim youth rendering them useless for this world and the next. Ironically, ask any Mullah who has gone through these Madrasahs for eight years as to who the founder of Darse Nizami was, and there is a very good chance he won't have an answer!

    "UNQUOTE"

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    What I have learned through different sources that these Deobandis and Barelvis are basically the same with minor differences:

    Now read was to how Deobandi/Sufis and Barelvis are indulged in Blasphemy

    Some Famous Readings of exposition from GREAT MUJADDITH's OF Deoband [Extremely Thankful to Dr Shabbir Ahmed http://www.ourbeacon.com/ who compiled all this 'FILTH' mentioned below in English from Original Urdu, Persian and Arabic Books.

    1. Do not try to understand the Qur'ân ever. Else, you will go astray. Fifteen “Uloom” (sciences) are required to understand the Book. (“Maulana” Zakaria Kandhalwi, Fazael Amaal, p.2)

    2. Do not read the Qur'ân with understanding, you will go astray. (Fazaael Aamal, “Maulana” Ashraf Ali Thanwi, p. 216)

    It is mentioned in Aamaal-e-Qur'aani, p. 134 by Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi [published by Jasim Book Depot, Urdu Bazaar, Jama Masjid, Delhi] that if a woman has excessive menstrual bleeding, the verse (Surah Al-'Imran: 3:144) should be written on three different pieces of paper, one tied on her right and the other on her left and the third piece of paper with the Qur'ânic verse to be hung below the naval. This verse of the Qur'aan, "Muhammad (sallallahu alaihe wa-sallam) is no more than a Messenger, and indeed (many) Messengers have passed away before him. If he dies or is killed, will you then turn back on your heels (as disbelievers)? And he who turns back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to Allah, and Allah will give reward to those who are grateful." [Surah Al-'Imran: 3:144]

    3. Delaying prayer once will cause a person to burn in the hellfire for 20.88 million years, just because he or she failed to pray on exact time. (“Maulana” Zakaria Kandhalwi, Fazaael Namaz, p.317)

    4. Recite the whole Qur'ân in one raka’ah like saints did! [That will amount to more than 50 times of the whole Qur'ân in a single day!] (Fazaael Namaz p.64.)


    Saints recite 2,000 raka’ahs every day. They keep standing the full one month of Ramadhan reciting the Qur'ân twice a day! (Tableegh-I-Nisab Fazaael Aamal)

    5. “Maulana” Ashraf Ali Thanwi separated the way of Salat between men and women in his book “Bahishti Zever.” (Masjid Tauheed, Karachi. Muhammad Sultan)

    6. When Shah Waliullah was in his mother’s womb, she said a prayer. Two tiny hands (too) appeared for prayer. She was frightened. Her husband said, "You have Qutubul-Aqtab (Wali of Walis) in your womb (Hikayat-e-Awlia, p. 17 Ashraf Ali Thanwi) What a break-through!

    7. Junaid Baghdadi was sitting when a dog crossed by. He merely glanced at the dog. The dog reached such glory that all dogs of the town followed him. Then he sat down and all dogs sat around him in meditation. (Ashraf Ali Thanwi. Imdad-ul- Mushtaq)

    8. The holy messenger came to Shah Waliullah (in the 18 century!) and said, “Why do you worry? Your children are the same as mine.” (Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Hikayat-ul-Awlia)

    9. The prophet laid the foundation of Darul-Uloom, Deoband, India (in the 19th century) He comes to check accounts of the school. He has learnt the Urdu language.
    (Mubasshirat-e-Darul Uloom, and Deoband Number of the Darul-Uloom)

    10. Mulla Mohammad Qasim Nanotwi saw in his dream that he was sitting in the lap of Allaah. (Biography of Mulla Qasim by Mulla Mohammad Yaqoob Nanotwi)

    11. The advent of another Prophet is quite possible. (Mulla Abdul Hai Farangi Mahli and Mulla Qasim Nanotwi, Tahzeer-in-Nas, p.34, Athar Ibn Abbas, p.16)

    Why blame Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani only?

    12. Disrespect to a monk is more perilous than disrespect to Allaah. (Mulla Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Al-Ashraf, p.23, Nov. 1991)


    13. “ Islam or Maslak Parasti” says: According to the Qur'ân anything dedicated to other than Allaah in forbidden. It is our maulvi mind who declare virtuous such things as Koondas of Ja’afar Sadiq, halwa of Shabe barat in the name of Owais Qarni, haleem and sherbet of Imam Hussain and Niaz of the 11th in the name of Jeelani!


    14. Risala Tazkara of Darul-uloom Deoband of 1965 claims: Anyone suffering from malaria who took dust from the grave of “Maulana” Yaqoob Nanotwi and tied this dust to his body, found instant relief.

    15. Allaah cuts jokes with the Ulama of Deoband. One of them went to a well for “Wudu” (Ablution) He lowered the bucket in the well. It came back full of silver. The Holy man said to Allaah: Don’t kid around! I am getting late for prayers. He lowered the bucket in again and this time it came back full of gold. (Risala Tazkara of Darul-uloom Deoband of April 1965)


    16. In the night of Meraj (Ascension) Imam Ghazali rebuked Prophet Moses. Mohammed said, " Respect O' Ghazali!" (Malfoozat Haaji Imdaadullaah Muhaajir Makki, Imdad-ul- Mushtaq) by Ashraf Ali Thanwi.

    [Please note that Ghazali was born centuries after passing away of the holy prophet]

    17. Take the right arm of a goat after Friday prayers. Be completely naked. Write Sura Yasin and the name of the person you want, then put the meat in the cooking pot. That person will fall in love with you. (Monthly "Khalid" Deoband Darul Uloom)

    18. If you want to kill your enemy write A to T on a piece of bread. Recite Surah "RA'AD.” Break the bread into five pieces and feed them to five dogs. Say to dogs, 'Eat the flesh of my enemy'. By the will of Allaah your enemy will have huge boils on his body. (Darul uloom Deoband "Khalid")


    19. Say "Fazabooha" before you cut a melon, or any thing else (for that matter), you will find it sweet. (Aamale-Qurani, Ashraf Ali Thanwi)


    20. Recite the verse "When the heaven will split.” Write it (on a piece of paper) and tie to the left thigh of any woman in labor, child birth will become easy. Cut the hair of that woman and burn them between her thighs, childbirth will be easier still. (Aamal-e-Qurani, Ashraf Ali Thanwi)


    21. During labor pains let the woman hold Mawatta Imam Malik for instant delivery. (Aamal-e-Qurani, Ashraf Ali Thanwi)

    22. See what “Hakeemul Ummat” Thanwi says! Keep reciting "Al Mughni" during sex and the woman will love you. (same book, Ashraf Ali Thanwi)


    23.The prophet laid foundation of Darul-Uloom, Deoband, India (in the 19th century). He comes to check accounts of the school. He has learnt Urdu language. (Mubasshirat-e-Darul Uloom, and Deoband Number of the Darul-Uloom)


    24. When, "Maulana" Zakaria, the father of "Maulana" Yousuf Bannuri would fall sick, the prophet would come. He told the house servant, "Badshah Khan! I (the holy prophet), am also serving Zakaria. (Bayyanat 1975 Ashraf Ali Thanwi p. 7)

    25. The prophet said to sister-in-law of Haaji Imdaadullaah Muhajir Makki, "Get up! I will cook meals for guests of Imdaadullaah." (Bayyanat p. 8, Ashraf Ali Thanwi)


    26. “Maulana” Yousuf Ludhianwi taught a simple method to make interest (usury) Halal. Borrow from a non-Muslim. (Masaail-e-Jadeedah)


    27. The wife of Mullah Jalaaluddin Rumi thought that his sexual desire had vanished. The Mullah came to know of her suspicion in a special trance of revelation (KASHF). That night he went to the wife and drilled her 70 times. (Please excuse the language) So much so that she asked forgiveness. (Manaqib-il-Arifain, p.70, by Shamsuddin Akhlaqi)

    Now please witness how far these Mujaddith's of Deoband can go! See what garbage Mulla Ashraf Ali Thanwi is trying to unload. The same Thanwi whom other Mullahs call “Hakeem-ul-Ummat”!


    28. He writes on p.110 in “Imdaadul Mushtaq”: There was a true monotheist. People told him if delicious food is part of the person of Allaah and feces too is a part of Him, eat both. Well, the Sheikh first became a pig and ate feces. Then he became a human being and ate food! Isn’t that height of "wisdom" of our wise of the nation!”


    29. Here is another pearl of wisdom from him: There was a Pir Sadiq from Ashraf Ali Thanwi’s town. He taught his disciples “There is no God but Allah and Sadiq is His messenger.” {Astaghfirullaah} The wise of the nation Thanwi declared that teaching OK. (Imane Khalis, p.109, Hazrat Masood Uthmani)

    30. The holy messenger comes to Mulla Qasim Nanotwi and other big shots of Deoband, U.P to learn Urdu. He also checks accounts of the Madrasah. (Numerous references such as Haqaiq-o-Maarif, Deoband May 1975).


    31. "Maulana” Yousuf Bannuri writes: The Prophet told my father, Zakaria! When you fall sick I also fall sick. Hazrat Ali had come to conduct the marriage of my father and mother. (In the 19th century!) (Iman-e-Khalis, pp. 7 and 8, Hazrat Masooduddin Usmani, Fazil Uloom Deenia)


    Furthermore it is not a co-incidence that these beliefs are in the Fazaail Aamal, rather each one of the misguided views is a well-established belief of the Deobandis - the school of thought that the Tableeghi Jamaat originates from. This has been shown with ample proofs. please refer to the online book, "The JAMAAT TABLEEGH and the Deobandis -

    A Critical analysis of their Beliefs, Books and Dawah"

    This book is not a fazail-e-Aamaal Combat Kit, But is an Enlightening insight in to the Scholars and Founding Fathers of Deoband and their Sufistic Beliefs, As Deoband have been looked upon as the good Guys and the Barelwis as the Bad Guys, However after reading the writings of the revered scholars and Founder of Deoband one Realizes that the difference between the Barelwis and the Deobandis is Miniscule and they both Share the Same Sufistic Beliefs of PIRS, FAKIRS, MIRACULOUS POWERS OF SAINTS, APPROVAL OF GRAVE WORSHIP, ZIKR, MEDITATIONS, MOKSHA, TAWASSUL, LOOKING DOWN UPON JANNAH, DIRECT COMMUNICATIONS WITH ALLAAH and many other same beliefs. One is forced to conclude that this dangerous misinterpretation and twisting of Islaamic beliefs and practices has been deliberate, oft repeated and has been purposely concealed from the common man, This can in no way be attributed to ignorance on the part of the Deoband Leaders.

    Sufis (Mystics)

    Let us examine some quotations from the books of the Sufia:

    I am superior to the prophets (Mohiuddin Ibn-Arabi, Hadeeqa Sultania p.190).

    I have denounced Islam. I believe this is incumbent upon people. If Allah is God in the heavens, I am God on earth (statement of Hussain bin Mansoor Hallaj, Khateeb Baghdadi vol.8, Ibne Athir 11:140). Men of knowledge see Shias as swines (Mohiuddin Ibn-Arabi, Futuhat Makkia 2:8).

    Sheikh Imam Abul Hassan Noori was in the company of his disciples. The call to prayers came. The Sheikh said, “It is death.” Then a dog barked. The Sheikh replied, "Labbaik", meaning "Oh yes, my master" (Ibn-e-Jozi Talbees-e-Iblis p.383).

    My body has merged with the body of Rasulullah. Therefore, we are one (Shah Waliullah, Anfasul Arifain).

    I recite Sura Fatiha and walk across the river (Mulfoozat Moinuddin Chishti Ajmairi).

    In the assemblies of "URS" (communion of Sufi souls with God), spirits of the dead Sufis come to dance around (Mulla Abul Kalam Azad, Iman-e-Khalis p.63).

    Hazrat Dawood Jawarbi had seen Allah. When asked about Allah, he said, “Ask me not about His genitals and His beard. Ask about anything else (Al-Millil wal-Nahil, Imam Shehristani 1:96). Imam Shehristani should have reported the Hazrat Jawarbi to the government.

    Even better, the authorities should have painted Imam Shehristani a clown for conveying such rubbish. Allah is sitting in the heavens. I am the God on earth (Mansoor Hallaj, Ibne-Athir 2:140).

    The priest in the church is our Allah (Ibn-Arabi, Qasasul Ulema p.53).

    There is no one else worthy of worship. Come and worship me (Mulla Jalaluddin Rumi, Mathnawi 4:52).

    Time for a laugh: This morning Allah wrestled with me. He floored me because I am 2 years younger than He is (Abul Hassan Kharqani, Fawaid Faridiya p.78).

    Alas! The Muslim fails to understand that Allah can be found only in idol worship (Sufi Mahmood Shabistri, Sharah Gulshan-e-Raz p.294).

    Hanafis are people who are pacing toward hellfire. The death anniversary of Imam Hussain must be celebrated like the Festival of Eid (Abdul Qadir Jeelani, Ghania al-Talibain p.190).

    My foot is on the neck of every saint, so I placed my foot on Hazrat Ali's neck (Abdul Qadir Jeelani, Asrar ul Qadam p.191).

    I hate the God who does not appear as a dog or cat (Ibn-Arabi, Khazeena Imaniya p.168).

    Whenever Khwaja Maudood Chishti wanted to see the Ka’aba, angels airlifted it to the land of Chisht (Malfoozat Khwaja Qutubuddin Bukhtiar Kaki, Fariduddin Ganj Shakar). This Khwaja Maudood Chishti is reported to be the ancestor of the famous Mulla Maudoodi.

    One thousand years have gone and so has the time of Muhammad. Now it is my time, the time of Ahmad. The second millennium is mine (Ahmad Sarhindi, so-called “Mujaddid Alf-Sani” [Revivalist of the second millennium], Mubda-o-Muad).

    Books of the Tableeghi Nisab “Fazael Aamal” were presented to the Holy Prophet (in the twentieth century!) and he accepted them (Behjatul Quloob p.12).

    Khwaja Qutbuddin Maudood Chishti’s dead body flew in the air on its way to the graveyard. Khwaja Fareeduddin Ganj Shakar upon narrating this fell unconscious (Rahatil-Quloob, Ganj Shakar). He should have expired.

    Adam cried for 300 years. (So much so that) birds made nests on his face. His tears brought forth so much grass that it covered his (60 meters long) body (Rahatul Muhibbeen, Ameer Khusro, Khwaja Nizamuddin Awlia).

    A bird came and told us, "Tomorrow is Eid. Unlike humans we are free from lies.” Sheikh Faqirullah knew a crow that often learned monotheism from him (reference same).

    If Awlia (saints) wish, they can accept invitations from 10,000 towns (and be there) at the same time (Ahmed Raza Barelwi, Malfoozat part I p.127).

    When Shah Waliullah was in his mother’s womb, she said a prayer. Two tiny hands appeared for prayer. She was frightened. Her husband said, "You have Qutubul Aqtab (Saint of Saints) in your womb (Mulla Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Hikayat-e-Awlia p.17). What a breakthrough!

    The Prophet laid the foundation of Darul Uloom, Deoband, India (in the 19th century!). He comes to check the accounts of the school. He has learnt Urdu from the Ulema of Deoband (Mubasshirat-e-Darul Uloom, and Deoband Number of the Darul Uloom). Was this tale made up to lend credence to the Deoband Mulla factory? You decide.

    Allah revealed Himself to me as an extremely beautiful woman, decorated with fine ornaments and garments. She suddenly embraced me and merged into my body (Shah Waliullah, Anfasul Arifain pp.94-95).

    One night I started flying from heaven to heaven until I reached the Prophet. He accepted my allegiance (reference same, pp.38-39).

    The sun cannot rise before greeting me. The new year, the new month, the new day, dawn not without greeting me and informing me of every single event (Malfoozat Ahmed Raza Barelwi about Ghaus Azam Jeelani).

    A wolf was brought before prophet Jacob. He said to the wolf, “Tell me about my son, Joseph.” The wolf said, "I am an animal, but I do no backbiting” (reference same).

    Prophet Job prayed, “O’ God! Give me 12,000 tongues so that I may recite your name.” God accepted his prayer and infested his body with 12,000 insects (reference same).

    The mosquito that killed Nimrod was lame (Malfoozat Chishti). A rather lame statement.

    Hazrat Uthman brought home a fish. All the firewood burnt off, but the fish remained fresh (uncooked). When the Prophet asked it the reason, the fish said, “I had sent my salutations to you once” (reference same).

    Shah Waliullah believed in the Unity of Existence. He believed that insects, animals, idols and human beings were all God (Syed Farooq Al-Qadri, Anfasul Arifain).

    Allah has only 99 virtuous names. I have more than 99, in fact 4000 (Shah Waliullah for his uncle, Anfasul Arifain p.210).

    Some people told Shah Abdur Raheem (Shah Waliullah’s father) that they were trying to find God. My father said, “I am He!” They stood up and shook hands (reference same, p.93). Why didn’t they prostrate?!

    God came to me in a cloak in the guise of an extremely beautiful woman. I became passionate and said, “Cast aside your cloak.” The response came, “The cloak is very thin. It reveals my beauty.” I insisted, upon which the cloak was lifted (quote of father and son: Shah Abdur Raheem & Shah Waliullah, Anfasul Arifain p.94).

    Ahmad Bin Hanbal got his undeserved fame when his ego caused him to suffer lashes for a vain argument from the Abbasi Caliph (Al-Tawassul Wal Waseela p.136).

    The great Pir (master saint) of the 19th century, Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi, has been quoted in his Malfoozat p.32 that "Prophets are alive in their graves like ever before . They eat, drink, pray and receive their wives in the grave and engage in sex with them."

    Now watch God’s retirement plan: Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jeelani claimed: Allah has made me eternal and has joined me with Him. He has given in my hand this world and the Hereafter and all Creation (Jeelani, Malfoozat Fuyuz Yazdani, Fath-e-Rabb-ani, Majlis 51).

    Dear Reader, it is noteworthy here, that the governor of Baghdad, Ubaidullah Yunus, leveled the home of Jeelani, threw out his sons, exhumed his grave, burnt his remains, and plunged them in the river Tigris! (Nooruddin Shams, a disciple of the Pir Jeelani, Najoom-uz-Zahrani 6:142).

    Even then, millions of Muslims continue to call Jeelani Dastgeer (holder of hands). Prophet David and Prophet Mohammad both sinned because they saw the beauty of unclothed women. Then Uria’s wife and Zaid’s wife became haram (forbidden) for their husbands (Ali Hajweri, alias “Daata Ganj Baksh,” Kalamil Marghoob p.349).

    Junaid Baghdadi said that Prophet Solomon was the illegitimate son of David from Uria’s wife. Sheik Seerin wrote that Surah Ahzab of the Qur'an means to say that Muhammad the Exalted was hiding the carnal love of Zainab (the wife of Zaid), in his heart (Malfoozal Al-Aasl p.219).

    A wife of the Holy Prophet saw a male sparrow mounting the female sparrow. She challenged the Prophet. When the night set in, the Prophet mounted her in a most furious manner 90 times and said, “See! There is no deficiency here” (Shamsuddin Akhlaqi, Manaqib-il-Arifain pp.70-71). We wonder whether these are sacred writings or pornography!

    These dogs and swines are our God (Fusoosul Hukm, Mohiuddin Ibne Arabi).

    Ba-Yazeed Bistami, supposedly the head of all saints, is quoted in his Malfoozat (book of quotes):

    I am Glorious, the Ultimate, the Pure. My glory is beyond description.

    My kingdom is greater than the Kingdom of God.

    Allah is in my pocket.

    My flag flies higher than the flag of Mohammad.

    I dove into the sea of true knowledge while the prophets watched by the shore.

    Ali Hajweri, “Daata Ganj Bakhsh,” in his Kashfil Mahjoob, pp.255-256 supports Ba-Yazeed's claim that he was Allah in human form.

    Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti Ajmeri taught his disciples a different Kalema (creed) “There is no god but Allah and Chishti is His messenger” (Khwaja Fareed-ud-Din Ganj Shakar, Fawaed-us-Salikeen pp.126-127).

    Now what message is Sheikh Afeef-ud-Din Talmisani trying to convey when he says:

    The Qur'an is loaded with shirk (polytheism). True monotheism is that everything in the universe is God (Malfoozat Talmisani p.205).

    It was OK for the Pharaoh to say, “I am God”. He, of course, was a part of the Essence of God (reference same).

    Ibraheem Adham reached the Ka’aba in 14 years because he prayed two nawafil at every step. But the Ka’aba was not found! "It has gone to visit Rabia Basri," came a voice from the heavens (Malfoozat Khwaja Uthman Harooni, Aneesul Arwah p.17).

    Doesn’t it make us think why the Ka’aba could not go to meet the Holy Prophet in Hudaibiah?

    According to Sheikh Afifuddin Talmisani’s Malfoozat page 177, Rabia Basri was in romance first with Hasan Basri and then with Ibrahim Adham.

    In Cordova, I fell in love with Fatima. In Makkah I fell in love with the beautiful Ain-ush-Shams. The spiritual windows opened upon me hence. (Sheikh Mohiuddin Ibne Arabi, Fusoosul Hukm)

    Ba-Yazid Bistami could take the soul of any person whenever he wanted. My uncle Abu Raza Mohammad, upon hearing this became angry and said, “Ba-Yazid could not return the soul (and restore life). I can take a soul and return it, as I want.” Then my uncle took the soul of Rahmatullah and brought him back to life (Shah Waliullah, Anfasul Afrifain p.95).

    Junaid Baghdadi was sitting when a dog crossed by. He merely glanced at the dog. The dog reached such glory that all dogs of the town followed him. Then he sat down and all dogs sat around him in meditation (Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Imdadul Mushtaq).”

    The Holy Messenger came to Shah Waliullah (in the 18 century!) and said “Why do you worry, my son? Your children are the same as mine” (Ashraf Ali Thanwi, Hikayat-e-Awlia).

    It is obligatory upon a Mu’min (believer) that he quits eating and drinking. He must get weak to the point where he becomes unable to pray (Sahl bin Abdullah Tastari, Malfoozat Arabi p.289).


    Hazrat Sha’arani was the Sheikh of miracles. He resided in a meadow. He used to visit the town riding a wolf. He walked on water. His urine was drinkable like pure milk (Allama Tareshi’s excerpts, Misra Tasawwuf p.194). Did Tareshi try it?

    Jalaluddin Rumi never prayed. When the time for prayers came he used to vanish. At last it was detected that he went to pray in Ka’aba (2000 miles away from Qunia five times a day) (Khwaja Nizamuddin Awlia, Rahat-il-Quloob).

    My uncle saw me create and destroy the universe (Shah Waliullah, Afasul Arifain p.210).

    Once there was a Sheikh who used to grab a dog every day and put him on the prayer rug and said, “O dog, you are in the hands of God!” Those dogs then started walking on water and healed people by giving them ta’aweez (amulets) (Qutubuddin Bakhtiar Kaki, Malfoozat).

    Here is a funny one: The dead body of a dervish was lying in a jungle laughing. I asked him, “You are dead, how can you laugh?” The dead body replied, “This is what happens in the love of Allah” (Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, Malfoozat).

    The Universe lies within the Mount Caucasus. This mountain is 40 times bigger than the earth. A cow is holding it on its head (Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti, Dalilul Arifain).

    Isn’t it tragic that people of such miniscule minds are considered the saints of Islam! This mythology is obviously borrowed from Hinduism, which holds that the entire earth is perched on one horn of a cow and when it shifts the load to the other horn, earthquakes occur!

    The people of Multan refused to provide fire to Shah Shams Tabrez for roasting meat. He became enraged and brought the sun down (and roasted the meat). People became restless with heat. They came to the saint and asked his forgiveness and then he ordered the sun to go back. Since that day the town became known for its hot summers (Ali Quli Baghdadi, Karamat Shah Tabrez p.233).

    A great saint Hazrat Abdul Wahab went to visit the grave of Pir Syedi Ahmad Kabir. Abdul Wahab saw a beautiful bondwoman. Syedi Kabir called from his grave, “Hey, do you like her?” The owner of the bondwoman instantly dedicated her to the grave. The dead Pir spoke again, "O’ Abdul Wahab! Take her to the room in front and satisfy your desire" (Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi, allegedly “the greatest master of Islamic law and reviver of the 19th century,” Malfoozat part 3 p.28).

    Ibraheem Adham was Governor of Balakh. While hunting, a deer turned back and scolded him. Since that day Adham quit his rule (and became a saint) (“Daata” Ganj Bakhsh, Kalamil Marghoob p.229).

    When the companions went with the Prophet for ghazwat (Jihad) some of their wives had relations with other men (Mulla Jalaluddin Rumi, Feeh-ma-Feeh, Saleem Chishti, Islami Tasawwuf p.66). According to the narrator, the Holy Prophet used to advise them not to go home before dawn.

    Women are the source of all tribulation in the world, religious or otherwise (Hajwairi, “Daata Ganj Bakhsh” in Malfoozat Barelwi).

    There was a 140-year old worshipper. He had a foot that was amputated. When asked he said, “I was in eitekaf (seclusion for worship in a masjid). I stepped one foot out. An angel warned me and I immediately cut off my foot with a knife” (Moinuddin Chishti Ajmeri in Malfoozat Uthman Harooni).

    Moinuddin Chishti Ajmeri writes in the same book that the moon and the sun eclipse because of the sins of people! The Holy Prophet had explained that eclipses occur according to the Divine Laws.

    A man stole shrouds from graves for 40 years, but he went to the highest degree in Paradise. Why? Because he held on to the prayer rug (he was steadfast in prayers) (Malfoozat Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti Ajmeri, by Khwaja Qutub Alam, Daleel Arifain).

    Now, Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti Ajmeri decides to display his prowess in the English language: Where the Qur'an says Fawelullil musalleen” it means there is a “well” for Musalleen…(reference same).

    Watch for another wisdom from Chishti in the same book: The hellfire is placed in the mouth of a snake deep in the seventh level of the earth, otherwise the whole Universe would burn. Khwaja Qutubuddin Bakhtiar Kaki knew half the Qur'an by heart when he was born (Fawaid-as-Salikeen, Khwaja Fareed-ud-Din “Ganj Shakar”).

    What titanic forces prevented him from completing it?! Fareed-ud-Din “Ganj Shakar” (which means: the treasure of sugar) turned bushels of sugar into salt and again into sugar (The Beloved of God, “Mehboob-e-Elahi” Khwaja Nizam-ud-din Awlia, Rahatul Quloob).

    Now watch arrogance at its height: The Prophet attended the funeral of Barakat Ahmed. And I led the prayer, (i.e. the Prophet was his follower in prayer) (Ahmad Raza Khan Barelwi, Malfoozat).

    Khwaja Moinuddin Chishti says, “What do you ask of the Mount Caucasus? This mountain is resting on the head of a cow. The greatness and size of this cow equals 30,000 years of travel. Her head is in the East and her tail is in the West. She has been standing since eternity praising the Lord.” Sheikh Uthman Harooni reports that after narrating this (insult to human intelligence), Sheikh Maudood Chishti and a companion sank into deep meditation. Both disappeared leaving their gowns behind. They had gone to take a stroll up the Mount Caucasus (Malfoozat Khwaja Chishti Ajmeri by Khwaja Bakhtiar Kaki, Daleelul Arifain pp.85-86). They should have disappeared from the planet.

    By God! I know 99 out of 100 thoughts that come in the heart of an ant living in the lowest stratum of the earth. Allah knows all one hundred (Shah Waliullah, Anfasul Arifain p.205).

    “Maulana” Ashraf Ali Thanwi separated the way of Salat between men and women in his book “Bahishti Zever” (Muhammad Sultan, Masjid Tauheed, Karachi).

    Do not try to understand the Qur'an ever. Else, you will go astray. Fifteen “Uloom” (sciences) are required to understand the Book (“Maulana” Zakaria Kandhalwi, Fazael Aamal p.2). The Qur’an claims that it is an easy book to understand (41:3).
    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

    ===============================

    RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS PART 8:

    For your kind perusal,

    Khomeini's Teachings on sex with infants and animals

    http://www.homa.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=104&Itemid=58

    Islamic Teachings on sex with infants:

    "A man can have sexual pleasure from a child as young as a baby. However, he should not penetrate. If he penetrates and the child is harmed then he should be responsible for her subsistence all her life. This girl, however would not count as one of his four permanent wives. The man will not be eligible to marry the girl's sister."

    The complete Persian text of this saying can be found in "Ayatollah Khomeini in Tahrirolvasyleh, Fourth Edition, Darol Elm, Qom"

    Islamic Teachings on sex with animals:

    "The meat of horses, mules, or donkeys is not recommended. It is strictly forbidden if the animal was sodomized while alive by a man. In that case, the animal must be taken outside the city and sold."

    Editor's notes: I wonder if it is OK to sodomize a dead animal? What happens if the buyer brings the poor animal back into the city?

    "If one commits an act of sodomy with a cow, a ewe, or a camel, their urine and their excrements become impure, and even their milk may no longer be consumed. The animal must then be killed as quickly as possible and burned, and the price of it paid to its owner by him who sodomized it."

    Editor's note: The poor animal first is sodomized and then killed and burned. What an Islamic justice towards animals? Where are the animal rights group?

    "It is forbidden to consume the excrement of animals or their nasal secretions. But if such are mixed in minute proportions into other foods their consumption is not forbidden."

    "If a man (God protect him from it!) fornicates with an animal and ejaculates, ablution is necessary."

    Copy of Original Persian Text - 1 [Khomeini's teachings on Adultery - original Farsi text Khomeini on Adultery (original text)]


    Copy of Original Persian Text - 2 [Farsi quotation from Khomeini's book "Tahrir-ol-Masael" Ayatollah Khomeini's Religious Teaching - Original Farsi Text]


    Editor's note: It does not say who should have ablution: the animal or the man?

    Dear Mohsin Sahab,

    If the above is true then what was the need of these Islamic Rantings below:

    "I inform the proud Muslim people of the world that the author of the Satanic Verses book which is against Islam, the Prophet and the Koran, and all involved in its publication who were aware of its content, are sentenced to death."Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini FATWA issued February, 1989 against Salman Rushdie

    Quotes from just after the Islamic Revolution in 1979:

    "The mullahs are going to rule now. We are going to have ten thousand years of the Islamic republic. The Marxists are going to go on with their Lenin. We are going to go on in the way of Khomeini."Ayatollah Khalkhali

    "What he [Stalin] did in Russia we have to do in Iran. We, too, have to do a lot of killing. A lot." Behzad, Iranian interpreter for Western journalist V.S. Naipaul

    "There is no room for play in Islam... It is deadly serious about everything." Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini Speech at Qum, reported in Timemagazine January 7, 1980

    "Khomeini has offered us the opportunity to regain our frail religion... faith in the power of words."

    Norman Mailer, at a meeting of authors ragarding the fatwa, New York City, February 1989

    What was the need of this Fatwa?


    Ayatollah revives the death fatwa on Salman Rushdie By Philip Webster, Ben Hoyle and Ramita Navai From The Times January 20, 2005

    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article414681.ece


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

    ==================

    DRUNKEN TALAQ: HOW SOME FATWAS DISTORT ISLAM AND OPPRESS WOMEN BY A. FAIZUR RAHMAN MUSLIM PERSONAL LAW BOARD BETRAYS WORD, SPIRIT OF QURAN  BY ARIF MOHAMMED KHAN The Darul Uloom Deoband and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board are in the news again for the wrong reasons — the former for issuing another misogynist fatwa, and the latter for supporting the former’s obscurantism. [New Age Islam]

    ================================

     

    RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS PART 7

     

    "QUOTE"

     

    Talaq-i-Bid'ah 1 

    Talaq-i-Bid'ah means innovated (or sinful) form of Divorce. It is defined as a divorce which is pronounced thrice in one sitting when the wife is in the state of purity (tuhr), i.e., when man says: "I divorce you, I divorce you, I divorce you."  The Hanafis believe that though this form of divorce is sinful and innovative, it is nevertheless valid and divorce will take place.  According to the Hanafis when triple divorce is pronounced, the wife will become totally alienated from the husband and he cannot remarry her.  She becomes haram (totally prohibited) for him.  Neither can he take her back nor can he go for fresh nikah with her. He can go for nikah with her only after she marries another person and that person divorces her on account of marital conflict or she becomes a widow. 

    According to Maulana 'Umar Ahmad 'Usmani this is the position of not only Abu Hanifa but also of Imam Malik and Shafi'i. Imam Shafi'i says this form of divorce is perfectly valid.  It is not innovation (bid'ah).  It is quite proper on the part of the husband to pronounce such a divorce.  No husband can be prevented from adopting a valid course.  Even Imam Ahmad Hanbal's position is the same as that of Imam Hanifa and Imam Malik.  Thus it 'seems that all major founders of four schools of jurisprudence accept the validity of triple divorce.' 

    But Imam Taymiyyah has proved that Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal had retracted from his earlier position of accepting the validity of triple divorce and in a later period he used to say that when I reflected on the Qur'anic position  I came to the conclusion that it permits only raj'i  Talaq, i.e., divorce in which the wife can be taken back.  He then took the position that even if someone pronounces triple divorce it should be treated as one only. The husband thus will have the right to take his wife back within the 'iddah period or go for nikah if the 'iddah period has expired.  Imam Ahmad's companions and disciples also adopted this position.  Many companions of the Noble Prophet like Ibn Abbas, Hazrat Ali, etc. also were of this opinion. Some have quoted companions like Abdullah bin Mas'ud, Abdur Rahman bin'Auf and Zuber bin al-Awwam also adopting this position. Ahl-e-Hadith also are of this opinion, i.e., that triple divorce is not valid. The Ithna 'Asharis (i.e., twelve Shi'as) and Imamiyas believe that if three divorces are pronounced together, even one divorce does not take place, let alone three.  Even some Hanafi jurists like Hajjaj bin Artat and Muhammad Ibn Muqatil believe that if one pronounces three divorces, no divorce will take place. 

    Maulana 'Usmani tells us that according to Muhammad Muqatil one of the two opinions of Imam Hanifa was that only one divorce will take place if three divorces are pronounced.  Similarly according to Imam Tilmisani Imam Malik also held the opinion that only one divorce takes place if three divorces are pronounced.  Usmani also quotes from Hafiz Ibn Hajar's Fath al-Bari to the effect that many eminent jurists held that if one pronounces three divorces, only one take place. 

    From among the 'ulama of later period, Sheikh Shaltut, who was Sheikh al-Azhar, writes in his Fatwa that if one gives three divorces, only one divorce Talaq-i-raj'i will take place and the husband will have the right to take his wife back by saying so or by having sexual contact with her.   Another prominent 'Alim 'Allama Rashid Rida' in his Tafsir al-Manar (Vol. IX, p. 683) has expressed a similar opinion. Another contemporary eminent, Arab 'Alim Shaikh Jamal al-Din al-Qasim has discussed this problem at great length in his book al-Istinas and has concluded that triple divorce has no validity and it should be treated as one divorce only.  Quoting all these authorities Maulana 'Usmani says that triple divorce is not in keeping with the rulings of the Qur'an. 

    After quoting all these authorities Maulana 'Usmani discusses the whole issue in the light of the Noble Qur'an.  He refers to the Qur'anic verse 2: 229-30, which begins with Al-talaqu marratan, i.e., divorce may be pronounced twice.  He says the word marratan implies a gap between two pronouncements (all Hanafi jurists accept this), which means there should be a large enough time-gap between the two pronouncements of divorce.  Marratan (twice) itself carries this sense.  When we say "I went to your house twice but you were not there" cannot mean one went to his house twice in one go but after some reasonable gap of time.  Once he went, he was not there, then again he went, he was not there.  Thus the act of going had to be accomplished in two different periods of time.  'Usmani then quotes other verses of the Qur'an where the word marratan occurs and explains that everywhere it implies a gap of time in between. 

    The question is despite triple divorce being sinful, innovative and against the Qur'an will it occur if someone pronounces triple divorce? The second question is did anyone make such mistake (of pronouncing triple divorce) in Prophet's (pbuh) time and did he accept it as triple divorce? Or did he take it to be one divorce only? Lastly, when would the practice of triple divorce start again? 

    In the Qur'an, nikah is described as misaqan ghaliza, i.e., strong bond and has explained how and with whom one can enter into this strong bond and this strong bond cannot be dissolved without proper reason and method.  It certainly cannot be dissolved whimsically.  A man has to pass through different stages to bring about reconciliation either by persuading his wife to behave properly, or by appointing arbitrators as per Qur'anic injunctions (4:35).  If all this fail only then recourse can be taken to divorce.  Thus, according to the Qur'an, divorce is not an arbitrary and whimsical thing.  The method prescribed by the Qur'an for divorce is that one can give divorce twice only, i.e., on two different occasions and then either he has to keep the woman with kindness or leave her with benevolence.  In pre-Islamic Arab society they used to pronounce divorce even one thousand times and keep the sword of divorce hanging on her head.  The Qur'an disallowed it and permitted pronouncement of divorce only twice.  The Maulana says that even giving divorce in three periods of purity (pronouncing divorce once in every period of purity thrice is also not proved by the Qur'an and is thus prohibited.  Once talaq is pronounced once, it takes place and woman goes out of marital bond at once and is now free to marry other man after completing the period of 'iddah.  Why then pronounce talaq more than once?  For what reason? Repeating the word more than once is just absurd, says the Maulana.  Talaq should not be pronounced more than once in any case. 

    He then takes up the second question-whether anyone had divorced thrice in the Prophet's period?  And did he accept it?  He then quotes from Sahih Muslim, Imam Abu Da'ud, etc., to show that during the Noble Prophet's time, during Hazrat Abu Bakr's time and for two years during Hazrat 'Umar's time three divorces given at a time were taken as one divorce only.   But after two years of his Khilafat period Hazrat 'Umar again enforced it (i.e., triple divorce) as people were misusing it and there were several complaints.   

    Maulana 'Usmani quotes from Musnad Ahmad Ibn Hanbal that once Rukanah pronounced three divorces against his wife but later he was very sorry for it.  When the Prophet (pbuh) asked him, How did you divorce your wife? Rukanah replied that he had pronounced three divorces. The Prophet asked, Did you pronounce it in  one sitting? When he said, Yes, the Noble Prophet said, Treat it as one divorce only and if you want you can take your wife back.  And Rukanah took his wife back. 

    This hadith of the Prophet narrated by Ibn Abbas is found in Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu Da'ud and other authentic collections of Hadith literature.  No one has questioned its authenticity pertaining to marriage, divorce, inheritance or custody of children.  In certain respects his views on the treatment of women differs radically from other traditional jurists.  Also he bases his views entirely on the Qur'an and hadith, nothing else and comes to entirely different conclusions from many other noted traditional jurists.  The Maulana has written his magnum opus Fiqh al-Qur'an in eight volumes.  The book which is written in Urdu is a veritable treasure of Islamic jurisprudence though it is written in a traditional style and full of repetitions. 

    Maulana 'Usmani points out that Hazrat 'Umar had enforced triple divorce as triple divorce and it had become law. It is within the power of the caliph of the time to enforce certain ordinances in view of the prevailing situation, or to meet some crisis situation and no one can question it.   It is, therefore, possible that Ibn Abbas might have given a fatwa accepting triple divorce after Hazrat 'Umar enforced the ordinance.  The original hadith, accepting  three divorces as one, therefore, is not affected, maintains 'Umar Ahmad 'Usmani.  Thus it is proved by this hadith that during the time of the Noble Prophet triple divorce, if pronounced by someone, was accepted as one divorce only.

    Then the Maulana takes up the third question- when did the triple divorce begin to be accepted as three divorces?  It is well know that Hazrat 'Umar, after the initial two years of his Khilafat, had enforced  triple divorce as triple divorce and no one will be permitted  to take his wife back after pronouncing three divorces in one go.  To substantiate his point the Maulana refers to the noted Egyptian historian Muhammad Husain Haykal's book 'Umar al-Farouq in which the author says that 'Umar made such an ijtihad (interpretation) in what is well established Qur'anic injunction in 2: 229-30 (Divorce is twice … which we have discussed in detail above) that until today we are opposing him in this matter.  The Qur'an requires all attempts for reconciliation before a divorce (4:35) 

    Then Maulana 'Umar Ahmad further quotes from Haykal's book to show why Hazrat 'Umar was constrained to enforce triple divorce despite the Qur'anic injunction contrary to it.  Muhammad Haykal says that when the Arabs conquered Iraq, Syria, Egypt, etc., the women prisoners from these regions were brought to Mecca and Medina.  These women were very attractive and charming and the Arabs were captivated by their charm and wanted to marry them.  But these women insisted on the men giving irreconcilable divorce to their former wives.  To satisfy them they would pronounce triple divorce and pretend to having divorced their wives for good. 

    REFERENCES:

    1.     Maulana 'Umar Ahmad 'Usmani and Women's Rights in The Qur'an, Women and Modern Society, Asghar Ali Engineer, Select Books, India, 1999

    Courtesy: Ibrahim B. Syed, Ph. D. President Islamic Research Foundation International, Inc. 7102 W. Shefford Lane Louisville, KY 40242-6462, U.S.A.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

    ==================

    DRUNKEN TALAQ: HOW SOME FATWAS DISTORT ISLAM AND OPPRESS WOMEN BY A. FAIZUR RAHMAN MUSLIM PERSONAL LAW BOARD BETRAYS WORD, SPIRIT OF QURAN  BY ARIF MOHAMMED KHAN The Darul Uloom Deoband and the All India Muslim Personal Law Board are in the news again for the wrong reasons — the former for issuing another misogynist fatwa, and the latter for supporting the former’s obscurantism. [New Age Islam]

    =====================================

     

    RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS PART 6

     

    Brouhaha over a fatwa Yoginder Sikand July 21, 2005

    http://www.rediff.com/news/2005/jul/21guest.htm

    Triple talaq: counter–perspective BY YOGINDER SIKAND  July  2004 

    http://www.sabrang.com/cc/archive/2004/july04/cover10.html

     

    Courtesy: Shaykh Muhammad Saalih al-Munajjid

     

    If a man divorces his wife three times with one word, such as saying, “You are thrice divorced”, the majority of scholars are of the view that the woman is indeed thrice divorced and becomes forbidden for her husband until she has been married to another man in a serious marriage in which the new husband has intercourse with her and they only separate as a result of death or divorce, not a tahleel marriage (i.e., a marriage of convenience aimed at making it permissible for her to remarry her former husband). 

     

    They quoted as evidence for that the fact that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab (may Allaah be pleased with him) counted such a divorce as being three and judged among people accordingly. 

     

    Other scholars were of the view that this is to be regarded as a single divorce, and the husband may take her back so long as the ‘iddah has not yet ended. If the ‘iddah has ended then she may marry him with a new marriage contract. They quoted as evidence for that the report narrated in Saheeh Muslim from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) who said:  “At the time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), the time of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) and the first two years of the caliphate of ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him), a threefold divorce was counted as one. ‘Umar said: “People are being hasty with regard to a matter in which they should not rush. Let us count it as three and judge between people accordingly .” According to another report narrated by Muslim: Abu’l-Sahba’ said to Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with them): “Was not three counted as one at the time of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and the time of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him) and the first three years of the time of  ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him)?” He said: “Yes,” 

     

    They also quote as evidence the report narrated by Imam Ahmad in al-Musnad with a jayyid isnaad from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him), that Abu Rakaanah divorced his wife by saying “I divorce you thrice”, then he regretted it, so the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) returned her to him with one word and said, “This is only one (divorce).” This hadeeth and the one before it are to be understood as referring to divorcing by saying “I divorce you thrice”, in order to reconcile these two hadeeths and the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning): 

     

    “The divorce is twice” [al-Baqarah 2:229] 

     

    “And if he has divorced her (the third time), then she is not lawful unto him thereafter until she has married another husband. Then, if the other husband divorces her, it is no sin on both of them that they reunite, provided they feel that they can keep the limits ordained by Allaah. These are the limits of Allaah, which He makes plain for the people who have knowledge” [al-Baqarah 2:230] 

     

    This was the view of Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) according to a saheeh report narrated from him; according to the other report narrated from him he shared the view of the majority. The view that they should be regarded as one divorce was narrated from ‘Ali, ‘Abd al-Rahmaan ibn ‘Awf and al-Zubayr ibn al-‘Awwaam (may Allaah be pleased with them). 

     

    This was also the view of a number of the Taabi’een, Muhammad ibn Ishaaq the author of al-Seerah, and a number of the earlier and later scholars. It was also the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah and his student Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on them). This is also my view, because that is following all of the texts, and because it is also more merciful and kind to the Muslims. Fataawa Islamiyyah, 3/281, 282. 

     

    It seems that the qaadi was also of this view, which is that the threefold divorce counts as one divorce. Based on this there is nothing wrong with taking her back. 

     

    But after the ‘iddah is over you cannot take her back, rather you have to make a new marriage contract with her. 

     

    With regard to taking her back after the ‘iddah is over – i.e., after three menstrual cycles – this is not valid, because once a woman’s ‘iddah is completed she becomes a “stranger” for her husband and she is not permissible for him except with a new marriage contract. Fataawa Islamiyyah, 3/293 

     

    Shaykh Ibn Baaz was asked about a man whose wife treats him badly and insults him, so he divorced her at a moment of anger. He replied: 

     

    If you uttered the words of divorce at a moment of intense anger and without realizing it, and you could not control yourself, because of her bad words and insults etc., and you did that at a moment of intense anger and without realizing it, and she acknowledges that, or you have a witness of good character, then divorce has not taken place, because the shar’i evidence indicates that divorce does not take place if the words are spoken at a moment of intense anger – and if it is accompanied by not realizing what is happening then the ruling applies even more so. 

    For example, Ahmad, Abu Dawood and Ibn Maajah narrated from ‘Aa’ishah (may Allaah be pleased with her) that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “There is no divorce and no manumission in the event of ighlaaq.” The majority of scholars said that ighlaaq means compulsion or anger, i.e., intense anger. For his anger made him unaware of what he was saying, so he is like one who is unconscious, insane or drunk, because of the intensity of his anger. So divorce does not take place in this instance. If he does not realize what he is doing and cannot control his words or actions because of the intensity of his anger, then divorce does not take place. 

     

    Anger may be of three types: 

     

    1 – When a person is angry and is no longer aware of what he is doing. This is likened to the insane, so divorce does not take place according to all scholars. 

     

    2 – Where a person is very angry but is still aware of what is going on, but his anger is so intense that it makes him say the words of divorce. In this case too, divorce does not take place according to the correct scholarly opinion. 

     

    3 – The ordinary type of anger which is not very intense. In this case, divorce takes place, according to all the scholars. 

     

    From Fataawa al-Talaaq, pp. 19-21, compiled by Dr. ‘Abd-Allaah al-Tayyaar and Muhammad al-Moosa. 

     

    What the Shaykh mentioned about the second type of anger is also the view favoured by Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah and his student Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on them both). Ibn al-Qayyim wrote an essay on that entitled Ighaathat al-Lahfaan fi Hukm Talaaq al-Ghadbaan, in which he said the following: 

     

    Anger is of three types: 

     

    1 – That which is not so intense as to affect a person’s mind or rational thinking; he knows what he is saying and what he means. There is no dispute that in this case divorce, manumission and contracts are valid. 

     

    2 – Where his anger reaches such a limit that he no longer knows what he is doing or saying. There is no dispute that in this situation divorce does not take place. If his anger is so intense that he does not know what he is saying, there is no doubt that none of his words should be implemented in this case. The words of the mukallif (adult of sound mind) are only to be implemented if he knows what he is saying and what it means, and if the speaker really means that. 

     

    3 – The kind of anger that falls between the two categories mentioned above, where the anger goes beyond the ordinary level but not so far as to make him behave like a madman. This is an area of scholarly differences of opinion. The shar’i evidence indicates that divorce, manumission and contracts in such cases are not valid, and this is a kind of ighlaaq as the imams explained. 

    From Mataalib Ooli al-Nuha, 5/323; see also Zaad al-Ma’aad, 5/215.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]============================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    RELIGIOUS SCHOLARS PART 5:

    "Quote"

    Ijtihaad and Taqleed by Shaykh Muhammad ibn Salih al-'Uthaymin  (d. 1421 AH) says in his 'Al-Usool min 'Ilimil Usool' (pp97-104),

     

    'Definition of Ijtihaad:

     

    linguistically ijtihaad means: to expend efforts in order to reach some difficult matter. Technically it means: expending efforts to arrive at a Sharee'ah ruling. And the Mujtahid is the one who expends efforts for this purpose.

     

    Conditions for Ijtihaad:

     

    Being a mujtahid has conditions, from them:-

     

    That he knows the Sharee'ah proofs which he needs in his ijtihaad - such as the verses and ahaadeeth pertaining to rulings.

     

    That he knows what relates to the authenticty or weakness of a hadeeth, such as having knowledge of the isnaad and it's narrators and other than this.

     

    That he knows the abrogated and the abrogating, and the places where there is ijmaa - such that he does not give a ruling according to something that has been abrogated, nor give a ruling that opposes the (authentically related) ijmaa.

     

    That he knows from the proofs that which causes the rulings to vary, such as takhsees (particularisation), or taqyeed (restriction), or it's like. So he does not give a judgement which is contrary to this.

     

    That he knows the Arabic language and usul al-fiqh, and what relates to the meanings and indications of particular wordings - such as the general, the particular, the absolute and unrestricted, the restricted, the unclarified, and the clarified, and it's like - in order that he gives rulings in accordance with what this demands.

     

    That he has the ability to extract rulings from the evidences.

     

    And ijtihaad may be split up, such that it may be undertaken in one particular branch of knowledge, or in one particular issue.

     

    What is essential for the Mujtahid:

     

    It is essential that the Mujtahid strives in expending his efforts to arrive at knowledge of the truth, and to give rulings in accordance to what is apparent to him. If he is correct, then he has two rewards: one for his ijtihaad, and the other for arriving at the truth - since arriving at the truth means that it is manifested and acted upon. If, however, he is mistaken, then he has a single reward, and his error is forgiven him, as he (SAW) said, "when a judge judges and strives and is correct, then he has two rewards. If he judges and strives and errs, then he has a single reward." If the ruling is not clear to him, then he must withold - and in such a case, taqleed is permissible for him, due to necessity.

     

    Taqleed - it's definition:

     

    Linguistically, taqleed means: Placing something around the neck, which encircles the neck. Technically it means: Following he whose sayings is not a proof (hujjah).

     

    Exlcuded from our saying, "following he whose saying is not a proof" is: following the Prophet (SAW), following the ijmaa and also following the saying of the sahaabee - for those who consider the saying of a single sahaabee to be a proof. So following any of these is not called taqleed, since there is a proof for doing so. However this type of following is sometimes referred to as taqleed in a very metaphorical and loose sense.

     

    The Place of Taqleed:

     

    Taqleed is done in two cases:

     

    1) when the muqallid is an 'aamee (a common person) who does not have the ability to aquire knowledge of the sharee'ah ruling by himself. So taqleed is obligatory upon him, due to the saying of Allaah - The Most High, "ask the people of knowledge if you do not know." So he does taqleed of one whom he considers to be a person of knowledge and piety. If there are two such people who are equal in his view, then he chooses any one of them.

     

    2) The mujtahid when he encounters a new situation, for which an immediate solution is required, but it is not possible for him to research into this matter. So in this case he is permitted to perform taqleed.

     

    Some stipulate as a condition for the permissibility of taqleed, that the matter is not from the fundamentals of the deen - those matters which must be held as aqueedah - since matters of aqueedah require certainty, whereas taqleed only amounts to dhann (knowledge which is not certain).

     

    However the correct saying in this matter is that this is not a condition, due to the generality of his - the Most High's - saying, "ask the people of knowledge if you do not know." And this verse is in the context of affirming the Messengership - which is from the fundamentals of the deen. And also because the common person cannot acquire knowledge of the sharee'ah rulings with it's proofs by himself. So if he is unable to arrive at the truth by himself, then nothing remains for him except taqleed, due to the saying of Allaah - the most High, "fear Allaah as much as you can"

     

    Types of Taqleed:

     

    Taqleed is of two types: general and specific.

     

    1) The general type: that a person sticks to a particular madhhab (school of thought), accepting it's concessions and non-concessions, in all matters of the deen.

     

    The scholars have differed about such a state. So some amongst the late-comers have reported that this is obligatory upon him, due to his inability to perform ijtihaad. Others report it as being forbidden for him, due to its being a case of necessitating unrestricted following of other than the Prophet (SAW).

     

    Shaykh al-Islaam ibn Taymiyyah said,

     

    "The saying that it is obligatory, causes obedience to other than the Prophet (SAW) in every matter of command and pohibition, and this is in opposition to the ijmaa'. And the allowance of it contains what it contains."

     

    He also said,

     

    "He who sticks to a particular madhhab, and then acts in opposition to it - without making taqleed of another scholar who has given him a ruling, nor does he use an evidence as a proof which necessitates acting in opposition to his madhhab, nor does he have an acceptable Sharee'ah excuse which allows him to do what he has done - then such a person is a follower of his desires, doing what is haraam - without a Sharee'ah excuse - and this is evil and sinful.

     

    However, if there becomes clear to him, something which necessitates preference to one saying to another - either due to detailed proofs if he knows and understands them, or because he holds one of two people to be more knowledgeable about this matter and having more piety with regards to what he says - and so he leaves the saying of that one for the saying of the other one, then this is permissible, rather, it is obligatory. And there is a text from Imaam Ahmad about this."

     

    2) The particular type of taqleed is that he accepts a saying about a particular matter. This is permissible if such a person is unable to arrive at knowledge of the by ijtihaad - whether he is unable to in reality, or he is able, but with great difficulty.

     

    Fatwaa of a Muqallid:

     

    Allaah - the Most High - said, "Ask the people of knowledge if you do not know." And the Ahludh Dhikr are the Ahlul Ilm (the people of knowledge), whereas the muqallid is not a person of knowledge who is followed - rather he himself is a follower of someone else.

     

    Ibn Abdul Barr (d.463) and others have said,

     

    "the people are united in ijmaa that the muqallid is not counted as being from the Ahlul Ilm, and that knowledge is the realisation of guidance along with it's proof."

     

    Ibn al-Qayyim said,

     

    " And it is as Abu Umar (ibn Abdul Barr) said: Indeed, the people do not differ about the fact that knowledge is the realisation attained from proof, but without proof, it is only taqleed."

     

    Ibn al-Qayyim then quotes,

     

    "There are three sayings about the permissibility of giving fatwaa based upon taqleed:

     

    1) It is not permissible to give fatwaa based upon taqleed, because it is not knowledge; since issuing a fatwaa without knowledge is forbidden. This is the saying of most of the Hanbalee scholars and the majority of the Shaafi'iyyah.

     

    2) That it is permissible with regards to himself, but it is not permissible to give a fatwaa to others based upon taqleed.

     

    3) That it is permissible when there is a need for it, and there is no mujtahid scholar. And this is the most correct of the sayings and is what is acted upon."'

     

    Shaykh al-Albaanee says in his, 'The Hadeeth is a Proof in itself' after mentioning the statements of the Imaams on Taqleed as found in the introduction to 'The Prophets Prayer Described' brings a chapter heading, "Taqleed for whoever cannot search for proofs by himself"

     

    '"Some may ask: "Not everyone has the ability to be a Person of Knowledge, as explained before?" We say: yes indeed. No one disputes this fact. Allaah said, "So ask the People of Knowledge if you do not know." (16:43) and, "ask the knowledgeable about it" (25:59). The Prophet (SAW), for those who issued fatwa without knowledge: "Could not they have asked if they did know? The cure for the confused one is to ask." However, we did not mention all of the above evidence to show who can and who cannot be a scholar. Our research is with regards to those few who are considered to be People of Knowledge....Taqleed is upon the common person and the ignorant one. The scholars, who can search for the evidence, are excluded from this group. They are the ones whose responsibility is not to do Taqleed. Rather, their responsibility is to perform Ijtihaad. The following saying by ibn Abdul Barr explains this matter further, "All these rules are for the common folk, they are the ones who have to perform Taqleed of their scholars when needed. They are not capable of understanding or comprehending evidence or knowledge. Knowledge has grades, one cannot attain the topmost grade unless he goes via the base...Scholars do not differ with regards to the common folk having to follow their scholars..." However, I believe that to generalise about the common folk by saying that they all must perform taqleed is invalid. Taqleed is to follow others without evidence. Many intelligent people can clearly understand evidence if it is presented to them. Who can deny that a common person can understand the evidence contained in the hadeeth, "Tayammum is one strike (of the hands on the dust) for the face and hands"? Even people lacking intelligence can understand this hadeeth. Therefore, the truth is that we must say that Taqleed is allowed for whosoever cannot search for or understand the evidence, ibn al-Qayyim also was of this opinion. Even scholars are forced to do Taqleed sometimes, when a scholar cannot find a text from Allaah or His Messenger, but only sayings of more knowledgeable scholars."

     

    Footnotes

     

    1. He is Abu Abdullaah Muhammad ibn Saalih ibn Muhammad ibn Uthaymeen al-Wuhaibee at-Tameemee, born 27th Ramadaan 1347 in 'Unayzah, Saudia Arabia. He memorised the Qur'aan during early life and then studied under two of the students of Shaykh Abd ar-Rahmaan as-Sa'dee, later on going to study under the Shaykh himself. He studied Tawheed, tafseer, hadeeth, fiqh, usul al-fiqh, al-faraa'id (inheritance), nahw (grammar) and sarf (morphology). Then he studied under the scholar Abd al-Azeez bin Baaz. He is one of the foremost shaykhs of Ahlus Sunnah today, and has written around 40 books.

     

    2. 'Jaami Bayaan al-Ilm' (2/119). And Allaamah al-Fulaanee says in his, 'Eeqaadh Hamam Oolil Absaar' (pg. 25), "....ilm refers only to what is in Allaah's Book, and the Sunnah of Allaah's Messenger (SAW) and the ijmaa and what is gained by qiyaas upon these sources....It does not refer to what the muqallids and the people of party spirit regard as ilm - in thei restricting ilm to refer to that which is written in the books of the opinions of the madhaahib - even though some of that clashes with the Prophetic ahaadeeth.."


    ash-Shaatibee says in 'al-Muwaafiqaat' (4/293), "the muqallid is not an aalim." And it occurs in the books of the Hanafees that the ignorant one is not allowed to take the post of Qadee (judge). And ibn al-Hammaan explains the ignorant one to be the Muqallid in 'Fath al-Qadeer' (5/456) and likewise ibn Wazeer in 'Rawdah al-Baasim' (1/36).

     

    3. 'I'laam al-Muwaqqi'een' (1/7)

     

    4. Imaaam ash-Shafi'ee said in his 'Risalah' (pg.39): "It is not permissible for anyone to ever to say about anything that it is halaal or haraam except upon knowledge. And this knowledge is what is related in the Book, or the Sunnah or Ijmaa or Qiyaas."

     

    5. pp's 83+ of the English translation by The Daar of Islamic Heritage. This whole section is important and should be read thoroughly as it clears up many misconceptions and doubts.

     

    "UNQUOTE"

     


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

    =====================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    As they say in Chaste Urdu "Sunta Jaa Sharmata Ja"

    Religious Scholar Part 4

    ISLAM IN 'ISLAMIC REPUBLIC OF PAKISTAN'!

    In 2004 the Secretary of the Council of Islamic Ideology, Dr Ghulam Murtaza Azad, had opined that mosques constructed on encroached land were illegal. The Council of Islamic Ideology was established as "Advisory Council of Islamic Ideology" on Aug 1, 1962 under Article 199 of the Constitution of 1962. It was re-designated as the "Council of Islamic Ideology" in the Constitution of 1973. Articles 228, 229, 230 and 231 of the Constitution deal with the composition of the council, its reference by parliament, its functions and rules of procedure, respectively. "According to government estimates, there are 3,000 mosques and imambargahs in Karachi alone. Over half of them have been constructed on encroached land. [1]

    The chairman of the Council of Islamic Ideology has reiterated the CII’s opinion that mosques built on encroached land were considered illegal in Islam and prayers offered there were not acceptable under the shariah. This was also stated earlier, though not exactly in the same words, by the Imam-i-Kaaba, who visited Islamabad a fortnight ago. Hence how can the management of a mosque justify the illegal occupation of land that does not belong to it? What is intriguing is that with such clear-cut injunctions on the matter, the government has been hesitant to act firmly
    vis-à-vis the clerics of Lal Masjid and Jamia Hafsa in Islamabad who have resorted to blackmail to defend their encroachment —Lal Masjid was allotted 250 square yards but now spreads over an area of 7,850 square yards. Although they have no religious or moral sanction for encroachment, 82 mosques in the federal capital have managed to resist moves to get them to vacate their occupation. [2]

    To hell with Council of Islamic Ideology’s advice and those Mullahs who have themselves become Islam when there is a clear decree of Quran and Hadith against Land Grabbing and Land Encroachments what to talk of Constructing Mosques or Imam Bargahs on it. All the available land belongs to State (means public property and in Pakistan most of the people are Muslim, now read the Quranic Text and Text of Hadith in the light of the actions take by the Monks of Jamiah Hafsah and Lal Mosque and decide!) [Even the Islamic State what to talk of Secular] and nobody has the right to illegally encroach upon land for any purpose let alone erecting Mosque upon it.

    I won’t be quoting Mullahs and their Deviant Fatwa [Religious edict]. I will restrain myself to the extent of Quran and Hadith. When you have these two you won’t need anyone but a clear heart and mind and pure intentions. The mosque is not only a place of worship, but it is also a place of seeking knowledge for both men and women, helping the needy Muslims and for so many other lawful matters. Usurpation in its literal sense means forcibly taking a thing from another. Usurpation is unlawful. Any person knowingly and willfully usurping the property of another is held to be a criminal and a sinner, and therefore, he becomes liable for compensation. Forcible possession is oppression in an extreme form of which there is a strong condemnation both in the Holy Quraan and Hadith. Why do we [MUSLIMS] forget the Famous Mosque of Zarrar which was demolished by Holy Prophet Mohammad [Upon him be peace]

    Usurpation in its literal sense means forcibly taking a thing from another. Usurpation is unlawful. Any person knowingly and willfully usurping the property of another is held to be a criminal and a sinner, and therefore, he becomes liable for compensation. Forcible possession is oppression in an extreme form of which there is a strong condemnation both in the Holy Quraan and Hadith.

    Islamic history records that the Holy Prophet (pbuh) intended extension of his mosque at Medina, but as the required land was property of two orphaned children, he did not undertake it till a Muslim purchased the land and dedicated it (Wakf) for the mosque. Al Seera-tul-Halbiyya by Allama All bin Burhanuddin Al-HaIbi, translated by M. Aslam Qasimi of Deoband (Darul Ashaat, Karachi), Vol.2, Part I, p. 173,174

    Lo! those who purchase a small gain at the cost of Allah’s covenant and their oaths, they have no portion in the Hereafter. Allah will neither speak to them nor look upon them on the Day of Resurrection, nor will He make them grow. Theirs will be a pain doom. [The Family of ‘Imran – Chapter 3 – Verse 77 – Soorah Aal-e-Imran]

    O Ye who believe! Lo! Many of the Rabbis and Monks devour the wealth of mankind wantonly and debar (MEN) from the way of Allah. They who hoard up gold and silver and spend it not in the way Allah, unto them give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom. {Repentence - IX (Sorra Al-Tauba) Verse 34}.

    “Never stand (to pray) there. A place of worship which was founded on piety from the first day is more worthy that thou shouldst stand (to pray) therein wherein are men who love to purify themselves. Allah loveth the purifiers.” [Repentance Chapter 9 Verse 108 – Soorah Al-Tauba]

    “Is he then who founded his building upon piety and His good pleasure better, or he who founded his building on the brink of a crumbling, overhanging precipice so that it toppled with him into the fire of hell? Allah guideth not wrongdoing folk.” [Repentance Chapter 9 Verse 109 – Soorah Al-Tauba]

    Narrated Abu Wail:

    'Abdullah bin Masud said, "Allah's Apostle said, 'Whoever takes an oath when asked to do so, in which he may deprive a Muslim of his property unlawfully, will meet Allah Who will be angry with him.' So Allah revealed in confirmation of this statement:-- "Verily! Those who Purchase a small gain at the cost of Allah's Covenant and oaths, they shall have no portion in the Hereafter... " (3.77) Then entered Al-Ash'ath bin Qais and said, "What is Abu 'Abdur-Rahman narrating to you?" We replied, 'So-and-so." Al-Ash'ath said, "This Verse was revealed in my connection. I had a well in the land of my cousin (and he denied my, possessing it). On that the Prophet said to me, 'Either you bring forward a proof or he (i.e. your cousin) takes an oath (to confirm his claim)' I said, 'I am sure he would take a (false) oath, O Allah's Apostle.' He said, 'If somebody takes an oath when asked to do so through which he may deprive a Muslim of his property (unlawfully) and he is a liar in his oath, he will meet Allah Who will be angry with him.'[Sahih Bukhari]

    Sayyiduna Salem (radi Allahu anhu) from his father reported: “Whoso extorts any portion of land unjustly will be sunk down unto seven earths on the Resurrection Day”. (Bukhari)

    Sayyiduna Yah’li Bin Murrah (radi Allahu anhu) reported: “I heard Rasoolullah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) saying, ‘Whoso encroaches upon a land without title therein will be put to near the burden of its earth on the Congregation Day.’” (Ahmad)

    Same reported: “I heard the Messenger of Allah (sallal laahu alaihi wasallam) saying, ‘Whoso takes a span of land by oppression, the Glorious and Almighty Allah will give him the trouble of digging it till he reaches the last of the seven earths, and then he will be thrown down till the Resurrection Day till he will be brought for judgment among men.’” (Musnad Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal)

    In Bukhari Salem from his father reported:

    “Whoso extorts any portion of land unjustly will be sunk down unto seven earths on the Resurrection Day.”

    In Baihaqi Darqutni Abu Hurrah al-Raqqashi from his uncle reported that the Messenger of Allah said:

    “Behold! oppress not. Behold! the property of a man is not lawful except with his voluntary consent.”

    In Ahmad Ya’la-b-Murrah reported that I heard the Messenger of Allah say:-

    “Whoso encroaches upon a land without title therein will be put to bear the burden of its earth on the Congregation day.”

    Same reported: I heard the Messenger of Allah say:

    “Whoso takes a span of land by oppression the Glorious and Almighty Allah will give him the trouble of digging it till he reaches the last of the seven earths, and then he will be thrown down up to the Resurrection Day till he will be brought for judgment among men” -Musnad Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal.

    In Bukhari and Muslim it is said:

    “Whoever unlawfully seized land belonging to another to the extent of one span of hand, on the day of Judgment all the seven earths will be hung round his neck with their full weight.”

    In Al-Hadis, an English translation of Mishkat-al Masabih, Part II, Chapter XIV by Alhaj Maulana Fazlul Karim, the usurpation is explained as:

    “Gasb in its literal sense means forcibly taking a thing from another without the consent of the owner in such a manner as to destroy the owner’s possession of it”. “Usurpation is unlawful. Any person knowingly and willfully usurping the property of another is held to be a criminal and a sinner, and therefore he becomes liable for compensation. The object of Islam is peace. By encroachment of the rights of another, peace is disturbed and therefore a sin is committed. Forcible possession is oppression in an extreme form of which there is a strong condemnation both in the Holy Quran and Hadis. A usurper will be hurled down unto seven earth on the Resurrection Day and he shall be made to bear the burden of earth that he usurped. A marauder is not a follower of the Prophet, and Islam enjoins no compulsion in any action. Riot and loot are strictly unlawful. Prophet even instructed not to take a staff of his brother out of joke.”

    It is reported in Fatawa-i-Alamgirl, Vol.1:

    “If somebody built a mosque on his own share of the land which was a joint property and subsequently it was revealed that a part of it belonged to another shareholder, it would no longer remain a mosque owing to the proprietary nature of the land under it.”

    Refer to Majmuatual Fatawa by Maulana Abdul Hayee, Vol. I where it is stated:

    “It is not proper to offer prayers in a mosque built on the outer wall of a mosque for the reason that the latter belongs to the public and does not vest exclusively in God, the Almighty. It is just like offering prayers in a Mosque built on a property unlawfully seized from its owner.”

    In connection with the conditions and qualifications of a valid Waqf it is mentioned in Fatawa-i-Alamgiri, Vol. I:-

    “One of such conditions is that at time of dedication of the property the creator of the trust should be its absolute owner. If at the time of the creation of Waqf he forcibly seized the land belonging to somebody else and then dedicated it for the purpose of Waqf, the Waqf would not be validated even if subsequently he has paid the price of the land to the owner and has arrived at some settlement with him in lieu of some money.”

    In Fatawa-i-Alamgiri [A book which is allegedly followed by the Sunni Mullahs of India and Pakistan, it is stated

    “If somebody took forcible possession of land belonging to another and planted trees in it or constructed a house thereon, he will be told to demolish the construction, remove the trees and return the land to its owner. If the demolition of the structure or removal of trees result in damage to the land, its owner will be entitled to retain them on payment of their price.”

    ETIQUETTES OF MOSQUES:

    Outdoor loudspeakers should not be used for the prayer, whether that is for taraaweeh, tahajjud or any other prayers such as Fajr, Maghrib and ‘Isha’, because that leads to many negative consequences and causes disturbance to the neighbours of the mosque.

    In recent times it has become very common for the imams of mosques to use outdoor loudspeakers, which are usually placed in the minaret and the volume is set very high. By doing this, some mosques disturb one another in the prayers in which Qur’aan is recited out loud, by using these loudspeakers for the recitation. What is the ruling on using loudspeakers for the prayers in which Qur’aan is recited out loud when the sound from the minaret will disturb other mosques?

    Using loudspeakers on the minaret for the prayers in which Qur’aan is recited out loud is something that is not allowed, because it causes a lot of disturbance for the people in houses and other mosques nearby. Imam Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him) narrated in al-Muwatta’ (178), from Sharh al-Zarqaani in Baab al-‘Aml fi’l-Qiraa’ah (How Qur’aan is to be recited) from al-Bayaadi Farwah ibn ‘Amr – may Allaah be pleased with him – that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) went out to the people when they were praying, and their voices were loud in recitation, and he said: “ A worshipper is conversing with his Lord, so let him think about the One with Whom he is conversing. Do not raise your voices above one another when reciting Qur’aan.”

    Abu Dawood (1332) narrated, under the heading, “Raising the voice when reciting Qur’aan in night prayers” that Abu Sa’eed al-Khudri – may Allaah be pleased with him – said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) observed i’tikaaf in the mosque and he heard them raising their voices in reciting Qur’aan. He drew back the curtain and said: “Each of you is conversing with his Lord, so do not disturb one another, and do not raise your voices above one another in reciting Qur’aan – or in prayer.” Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said: The hadeeths of al-Bayaadi and Abu Sa’eed are both sound and saheeh.

    These two hadeeths show that it is forbidden to raise one's voice in reciting Qur’aan in prayer to such an extent that it disturbs others, and that this is a nuisance and is forbidden.

    The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade people to raise their voices above one another in reciting Qur’aan, and explained that this causes annoyance. It is well known that the believer has no option and cannot ignore the ruling of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):

    “It is not for a believer, man or woman, when Allaah and His Messenger have decreed a matter that they should have any option in their decision. And whoever disobeys Allaah and His Messenger, he has indeed strayed into a plain error” [al-Ahzaab 33:36]

    It is also well known that a believer should not put himself in a position where he causes disturbance or annoyance to his brothers.

    2 – The excuses that they give, even if they have some grounds, nevertheless are outweighed by the forbidden things that happen as a result of raising the voice, such as the following:

    (i) Doing something that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade, namely worshippers raising their voices above one another

    (ii) Annoying other worshippers who can hear one, as well as others such as people who are studying or trying to memorize Qur’aan

    (iii) Distracting members of congregations in neighbouring mosques from listening to the recitation of their own imam, which they are commanded to listen to.

    (iv) Some of the worshippers in neighbouring mosques may end up following the imam who is raising his voice in rukoo’ and sujood, especially if they are in a big mosque with a large congregation which they could be confused by the voice of an imam that drowns out the voice of their own imam. We have heard of many such incidents.

    (v) It may lead to some people becoming negligent about hastening to attend the mosque, because they can hear the prayer of the imam rak’ah by rak’ah, step by step, so they dawdle, thinking that the imam is at the beginning of the prayer, until they miss most or all of the prayer.

    (vi) It may cause the people who are coming to the mosque to rush when they heard the end of the imam’s recitation, as we see happening. Thus they do something that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) forbade, i.e., rushing, because they hear this amplified voice.

    (vii) There may be people in the houses who hear this recitation when they are engaged in some idle pursuits or idles talk, as if they are careless about the reciter. This is the opposite of what those who support raising the volume suggest, which is that many of the women in the houses will hear the recitation and benefit from it. This benefit may be achieved through listening to tapes with recordings of the recitation of skilled reciters.

    With regard to the comment by those who support raising the volume that it may influence some people and make them come and pray, especially if the voice of the reciter is beautiful, this may be true, but it is a rare benefit that is outweighed by the harmful effects mentioned above.

    The basic principle on which there is consensus is that if there is a conflict between pros and cons, we must look and see which outweighs the other and judge accordingly. If they are equal, then warding off harm takes priority over bringing benefits.

    Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him): “Do not raise your voices above one another in reciting Qur’aan,” and his words, “Do not disturb one another, do not raise your voices above one another in reciting Qur’aan.” There is no secret that the heart finds spiritual joy and contentment in obeying the commands of Allaah and His Messenger.

    He also said:

    There is no reason not to make an exception in the case of the Mosques in Makkah and Madeenah and the jaami’ mosques in which Friday prayers are held, because some of the worshippers may be outside the mosque and need to hear the voice of the imam. This is subject to the condition that the jaami’ mosques are not so close to one another that they would disturb one another. If that is the case then the loudspeakers on the walls of the mosques should be set up so that the khutbah and prayer can be heard, and the loudspeakers on the minarets should be turned off at that time, so that benefits may be achieved without disturbing others.

    Many Ahadeeth have mentioned the reward for walking, sitting in the mosque and waiting for the prayer:

    "Whoever goes back and forth to the mosque (to attend the prayers), Allah will prepare for him a feast in paradise as often as he goes back and forth" [Agreed Upon].

    "When one of you continues sitting in the place where he performed his prayer, after the prayer is over, and remains with ablution, the angels beseech Allah for his blessings upon him, and pray, "Allah! grant him salvation; Allah have mercy on him" [Bukhari].

    The Salutation of the Masjids

    Abu Qataadah (ra) reported that the Messenger of Allah (saws) said: "When one of you goes to the mosque, he should pray two rak'ats before he sits" [Agreed Upon]

    These two rak'ats can be performed at any time of the day or the night. Moreover, if someone enters the mosque on Friday while the Imam is giving the Khutba, he should pray two light rak'ats before he sits.

    Jabir (ra) reports that a man came to the mosque on Friday while the Prophet (saws) was delivering the Khutba. The Prophet asked him: "Did you offer the Salah?" The man replied: "No!" He told him: "Pray two rak'at" [Bukhari & Muslim].

    In another hadeeth the Prophet (saws) said: "If one of you comes to the mosque on the day of Friday and the imam is delivering the khutba, he should pray two rak'ats and make them quick" [Muslim].

    Decoration of Masjids

    Building mosques should only be to help people worship Allah (swt), it is enough that they protect them from the heat of the sun and the coldness of the wind. Competing in their construction is not allowed for the Messenger of Allah (saws) said: "I have not been ordered to build high and lofty mosques" [Abu Dawvd].

    'Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra), when ordering mosques to be built, would say: "Protect people from the rain. Beware of red and yellow decorations for they distract people (When offering their prayers)" [Bukhari].

    Calmness in the Masjids

    It is forbidden to raise voices while being inside a mosque in such a way that it disturbs others' prayers, even if it is done while reciting the Quran. 'Abdullah ibn Umar related that the Messenger of Allah (saws) entered upon people while they were praying and they were raising their voices in the Quranic recital. The Prophet (saws) said: "One who is praying is in a private conversation with his Lord so he should be mindful of whom he is conversing with_ And you should riot raise your voices against each other while reciting the Qur'an" [Ahmed].

    Abu Sa'id Al-Khudri (ra) reported that the Prophet (saws) was making seclusion (i'tikaf) in the mosque and he heard the people reciting (Qur'an] aloud. He removed the covering and said: "Verily, each of you is in a private conversation with his Lord so you should not disturb each other. And you are not to raise your voices against each other in the recitation" [Abu Dawud & an-Nasai].

    Maintaining, the Masjids

    There are big virtues in cleaning and caring for the mosques. As someone would take care of his own house, Islam has greatly encouraged its followers to take care of the houses of Allah (swt), and to clean them from any sort of dirt or bad smells. Such duty is not only incumbent upon the caretaker or the committee running that mosque, but is also the duty of every Muslim. It is the house of Allah (swt) and we should all take care of His houses. The following hadeeth is a good example on how someone might be successful by taking care of a mosque. Abu-Hurairah (ra) related that: 'ii dark-skinned woman used to take care of the mosque. One day the Prophet (saws) did not see her serving the mosque, and enquired about her. He was informed that she had died Whereupon he said: "Why didn't you inform me of this!. The companions had not though the matter of any importance. Thereafter he asked them to show him her grave. On being shown the grave, he performed Janaza prayer and said: "Their graves are full of darkness for their inmates, and Allah illuminates them for their occupants as a result of my Salah (Du'a) for them" [Bukhari & Muslim]



    Notes and References:

    Many mosques, imambargahs built illegally By Bahzad Alam Khan [1]

    http://www.dawn.com/2004/08/05/local10.htm


    Mosques on encroached land [2]

    http://www.dawn.com/2007/06/16/ed.htm#2

     


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]==============================

    Religious Scholars Part - 3

    1 - Saudi Government supported Afghan Jihad [also backed by USA-UK-and other Western Countries - It was US CIA, ISI and Saudi Arabia who launched Osama Bin Ladin for Afghan Jihad] - No Fatwa.

    2 - Saudi Arabia [with USA and Great Britain] helped Saddam against Iran - No Fatwa.

    3 - Saddam invaded Kuwait - [Immediately a Fatwa was issued - "During the Iran-Iraq war, Saudi Arabia bankrolled the Saddam Hussein regime with the express approval of Washington DC which at that time saw Saddam Hussein as a bulwark against Shia fundamentalism. It came as a terrific shock to the Saudi Royals when Saddam Hussein turned his attention to Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. Again, the Royal family turned to the Ulema and obtained (with difficulty) a Fatwa, permitting the use of non-Muslim foreign troops on Saudi soil to defend Saudi Arabia against a foreign invader - one the Ulema regarded as a secular apostate. Thus the Saudi Royal family invited the USA to send it its troops for Operation Desert Storm- the operation to defend Saudi Arabia and liberate Kuwait - largely at Saudi expense." As per 9/11 Commission Report “In August 1990, Iraq invaded Kuwait. Bin Ladin, whose efforts in Afghanistan had earned him celebrity and respect, proposed to the Saudi monarchy that he summon mujahideen for a jihad to retake Kuwait. He was rebuffed, [Saudi Fatwa issued in 90s against Osama Bin Ladin - http://abdurrahman.org/jihad/binlaadin.pdf Usama Ibn Ladin Al-Kharijee (our position toward him and his likes) - By Abdul Aziz Ibn Abdullaah Ibn Baz [PDF] - Taken from www.troid.org] and the Saudis joined the U.S.-led coalition. After the Saudis agreed to allow U.S. armed forces to be based in the Kingdom, Bin Ladin and a number of Islamic clerics began to publicly denounce the arrangement. The Saudi government exiled the clerics and undertook to silence Bin Ladin by, among other things, taking away his passport. With help from a dissident member of the royal family, he managed to get out of the country under the pretext of attending an Islamic gathering in Pakistan in April 1991.”

    Yet Muslims have the audacity to complain!

    Corruption doth appear on land and sea because of (the evil) which men's hands have done, that He may make them taste a part of that which they have done, in order that they may return. [AL-ROOM (THE ROMANS, THE BYZANTINES) Chapter 30 - Verse 41]

    Muslims should not complain and should do this for a qucik recovery:

    Allah hath promised such of you as believe and do good work that He will surely make them to succeed (the present rulers) in the earth even as He caused those who were before them to succeed (others); and that He will surely establish for them their religion which He hath approved for them, and will give them in exchange safety after their fear. They serve Me. They ascribe no thing as partner unto Me. Those who disbelieve henceforth, they are the miscreants. [AL-NOOR (THE LIGHT) Chapter 24 - Verse 55]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

    =========================

    Religious Scholars - Part 2:

    For your kind perusal. The signs of those who are not genuine Scholars are as:

    O ye who believe! Lo! many of the rabbis and the monks devour the wealth of mankind wantonly and debar (men) from the way of Allah. They who hoard up gold and silver and spend it not in the way of Allah, unto them give tidings (O Muhammad) of a painful doom,[Repentence - IX (Sorra Al-Tauba) Verse 34].

    Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] through many Companions has said: What I am afraid of after me is an astrayed Scholar, Hypocrites who debate in Quran without knowledge and astrayed Imaams {Yaani Mein Tum par sab say ziyada jis cheese say darta hun woh Alim ki thokar hai, Quran ko lay kar Munafiq ka Jadal Hai aur Gumrah Peshwah hain} [Sunan Al Darimi and Jamiul Ilm Ibn-e-Barr]

    Crux of several Authentic Traditions [Hadiths] in Bukhari, Muslim, Mauta Imam Malik, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawood, Nisa'i and Ibn-e-Maja on False Scholars:

    "The very first group who would be thrown in hell in the life hereafter would be scholars"

    "There will be a time amongst you when people will choose imam amongst ignorants and there will be no genuine Scholar in those days and Knowledge will be taken back so people will look towards these Ignorant {in literal "JAHIL"} Scholar who would astray people from the right path by issuing Fatwas without any proper knowledge of Islam"

    Near the establishment of the Hour there will be days during which (religious) knowledge will be taken away (vanish) and general ignorance will spread... (Bukhari)

    There will come a time for my people when there will remain nothing of the Qur'an except its outward form and nothing of Islam except its name and they will call themselves by this name even though they are the people furthest from it. (Agreed upon)

    There will come a time upon the Ummat when people will recite the Qur’an, but it will not go further than their throats, (into their hearts). (Bukhari)

    A time will come when a man will not care about how he gets things, whether lawful or unlawful. (Bukhari)

    Wolves will give readings in the End Times. Let those who come to see those times seek shelter from their evil in Allah. They will be very corrupt people. Hypocrisy will prevail, and nobody will be ashamed of it and its manifestations. (Tirmidhi, Nawadir al-'usul)

    There will appear in latter times a people who will gain this world with the help of religion. (Tirmidhi)  

    Allah's Messenger (saas) said, “In the End Times men will come forth who will fraudulently use religion for worldly ends and wear sheepskins in public to display meekness. Their tongues will be sweeter than sugar, but their hearts will be the hearts of wolves.” (Tirmidhi)

    In the End Times of the community of the faithful, people, those who adorn the mosques but leave their own hearts in ruins, who fail to look after their religion as much as they do their clothes, who forsake their religious obligations for the sake of their activities in this world, will increase in number. (Agreed upon).

    The Hour will come when voices are raised in the mosques. (Tirmidhi).

    The Hour will come when leaders are oppressors. (Al-Haythami, Kitab al-Fitan).

    There will come a time for my people when… the mosques will be full of people but they will be empty of right guidance. (Agreed upon).

    A time will come when the hypocrites will live secretly among you, and the faithful will try to live their religion in secret among others. (Agreed upon).

    Let him who reads the Qur’an ask (his reward) from Allah. Because in the final times there will be many people who read the Qur’an and seek their reward from other people. (Tirmidhi)

    When the Qur’an is read as if singing a song, and when a person is esteemed for reading in that way, even though he is not knowledged …(Al-Tabarani, Al-Kabir) .

    At that time, people will sell their religion for a small amount of worldly goods. (Ahmad).

    The Last Hour will not come before there come forth thirty Dajjals (imposters), each presenting himself as an apostle of Allah. (Abu Dawood).

    During the days of Pious Companions [RA] of Holy Prophet Mohammad [PBUH], and even after the times of his [PBUH] people used to come to the Scholars for Fatwa but Scholars in those days strictly avoided Fatwa, even the Companions used to refer the problem to Quran and Hadith or they prefer silence but nowadays its no matter at all Mullah issue Fatwa at the drop of hat, failing to see that they are actually opposing the very religion which they follow by issuing wrong Fatwa [contrary to what is ordered in Quran and Hadith] as happened in the cases of Deobandi Fatwa on Imrana Rape Case and Pakistani Fatwa on Terrorism. 

    The Salaf used to exercise great caution in matters of Fatwa. Imaam Hanbal [R.A.] used to frequently say : "I don't know". Imaam Malik is reported to have said that the Mufti must be conscious of accountability to Allah before responding to any question. According to Ibn Masud and Ibn Abbas, a person who answers every question is mad. Unfortunately there are many persons who claim the mantle of issuing Fatwa without proper training and without having acquired the necessary expertise, thereby causing confusion and misunderstanding amongst the lay public.

    Imam Malik was famous for his piety and integrity, and courageously stood up prepared to suffer for his conviction. For example, in 135 A.H., When the governor of Madina demanded and forced people to take the oath of allegiance in favour of Khalifa Al-Mansoor, the Imam issued a Fatwa that such an oath was not binding because it was given under duress.  

    Since this fatwa was not in the interest of the ruler, the governor arrested the Imam and had him publicly flogged for the "crime".  

    Al-Mansoor, learning of this outrage, apologized to the Imam and dismissed the errant governor.

    Imam Malik, was offered 3,000 gold coins (dinars) by Mansoor, as travelling expenses to Baghdad and subsequent residence in the Capital, but the Imam politely refused the offer saying that he prefered to live in Madina near Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]'s Mosque.

    Imam Malik never intended the formation of a school of thought bearing his name. It was his disciples & followers who later developed a Fiqah School based on Imam Malik's rulings.

    Imam An-Nawawi said, “This Hadith explains what raising up the knowledge means in the  previous Hadiths, that is, not by erasing it from people’s hearts, but by the death of the scholars who carry such knowledge. Then, people will seek some ignorant persons who will rule with their ignorance, thus becoming misguided themselves and will also misguide others.” Issuing Fatwas without knowledge is indeed a major sin and Bid’ah. Allah said, what translated means, Say (O Mohammad), “(But) the things that my Lord has forbidden are great evil sins whether committed openly or secretly, sins of all kinds, unrighteous oppression, joining partners in worship with Allah for which He has given no authority, and saying things about Allah of which you have no knowledge.” [7:33].

    Imam ibn Al-Qayyim said, “The origin of Kufr and Shirk comes from saying about Allah without knowledge, which is one of the most prohibited acts in the Sight of Allah. It produces the most harmful effects, because it entails lying with regards to Allah and describing Him with what is not appropriate. This also entails changing and altering Allah’s religion, denying what He has approved while approving what He has denied, implementing what He has rejected while rejecting what He has commanded to be carried out, hating those who are His loyalists while taking His enemies as loyal friends, detesting what He loves while loving what He hates, and describing Him with what is not appropriate with regards to His Attributes, Speech and Actions.”

    "Truly, Allah does not remove Sacred Knowedge by taking it out of servants, but rather by taking back the souls of Islamic scholars [in death], until, when He has not left a single scholar, the people take the ignorant as leaders, who are asked for and who give Islamic legal opinion without knowledge, misguided and misguiding" (Bukhari).

    “ Holy Prophet Mohammad {PBUH} said: In the last days there would be people amongst you who will gain the knowledge of Islam just for seeking the world. They will be wearing sheep’s hide to impress people, they will be speaking very softly as if their tongues are made of sugar but their hearts will be worse than Wolves. Allah will say, are you trying to cross me then Allah will swear upon Himself and will say I will put those people in such an anarchy and confusion that even the brightest among them will be flabbergasted” . {Tirmidhi}.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat  in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

    ==================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    PART - 1

    Religious Scholars - Ulama-i-Karam - Mullah - Mufti - Qazi - Muttawwa - Ayatullah - Mujtahids:

    Excerpt from "The Evil Of Craving For Wealth And Status" by Ibn Rajab Hanbali

    Know that craving after status and position inevitably causes great harm before its attainment due to the striving necessary to attain it, and also afterwards due to the person's strong desire to hold onto it which produces injustice, haughtiness and other evils.

    Aboo Bakr al-Aajurree, who was one of the wise scholars and teachers at the start of the fourth century, wrote a treatise about the manners and the sentiments of the scholars and it is one of the best works on this topic. One who studies it will know from it the way of the scholars of the Salaf, and will know the innovated ways contrary to their way. So he describes the evil scholar at length, from this description is that: 'He has become infatuated with love of this world, and with praise, honour and position with the people of this world. He uses knowledge as an adornment just as a beautiful woman adorns herself with jewelry for this world, but he does not adorn his knowledge with action upon it." He then mentions a lengthy speech and then says, "So these characteristics and their like predominate in the heart of one who does not benefit from knowledge, so whilst he carries these attributes his soul will come to have love of status and position - so that he loves to sit with kings and the sons of this world.

     

    Then he loves to share in their opulent lifestyle, sharing their lavish attire, their comfortable transport, servants, fine clothing, delicate bedding and delicious food. He will love that people throng to his door, that his saying is listened to, and that he is obeyed - and he can only attain the latter by becoming a judge (qaadee) - so he seeks to become one. Then he is unable to attain it except at the expense of his Religion, so he debases himself to the rulers and their helpers, serving them himself and giving them his wealth as a tribute. He remains silent when he sees their evil actions after entering their palaces and homes. Then on top of this he may praise their evil actions and declare them good due to some false interpretation in order to raise his position with them. So when he has accustomed himself to doing this over a long period of time and falsehood has taken root in him - then they appoint him to the position of judge (qaadee) and in so doing slaughter him without a knife." [Alluding to the saying of the Prophet, sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam, "He who is appointed as a judge has been killed without a knife" Reported by Ahmad, Aboo Daawood (transl. 3/1013/ no.3564) and at-Tirmidhee who declared it hasan. I say: its isnaad is saheeh.]

    Then they have bestowed such a favour upon him that he is obliged and has to show his gratitude to them – so he takes great pains to make sure that he does not anger them and cause them to remove him from his position. But he has no concern about whether he angers his Lord, the Most High, so he misappropriates the wealth of orphans, widows, the poor and the needy, and wealth bequested as waqf (religious endowment) for those fighting Jihaad and the nobles of Makkah and al-Madeenah, and wealth which is supposed to be of benefit to all the Muslims - but instead he uses it to satisfy his clerk, chamberlain and servant. So he eats that which is haraam and feeds with that which is haraam and increases that which is a proof against him. So woe to the one whose knowledge causes him to have these characteristics. Indeed this is the knowledge which the Prophet, sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam, sought refuge from and ordered us to seek refuge from. This is the knowledge which the Prophet, sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam, mentioned, saying, "Those amongst the people receiving the severest punishment on the Day of Resurrection is the scholar who is not given benefit through his knowledge by Allaah." [Reported by Ibn 'Abdul-Barr in Jaami' Bayaanil-`Ilm (1/162) and al-Aajurree (pp.93-94) and at-Tabaraanee in as-Sagheer (1/1831) and others and its chain of narration is very weak since it contains 'Uthmaan ibn Miqsarn al-Burree who was accused of lying and fabrication. It is however reported as being the saying of Abud-Dardaa only, with an authentic chain of narration. It is reported by ad-Daarimee (1/82) and others.]

    He, sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam, used to say, Allaahumma innee a`oodhubika minal arba`i, min `ilmin laa yanfa`u, wa min qalbin laa yakhsha`u, wa min nafsin laa tashba`u, wa min du`aain laa yusma`u  

    "O Allaah, I seek Your refuge from knowledge which does not benefit; from a heart which does not fear; from a soul which is never satisfied; and from a supplication which is not heard." [Reported by Ahmad, Aboo Daawood (transl. vol. 1/p.401/no. 1543) and others, all with the wording, "O Allaah I seek Your refuge from four: from knowledge which does not benefit…" The hadeeth was declared saheeh by al-Haakim and adh-Dhahabee agreed, and it has supports from a number of the Companions.]

    And he, sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam, used to say, Allahumma innee as'aluka `ilman naafi`an, wa
    a`oodhubika min `ilmin laa yanfa`u  

    "O Allaah, I ask you for beneficial knowledge, and I seek Your refuge from knowledge which does not benefit." [Reported with this wording by Al-Aajurree (p.134) and Ibn Hibbaan (no.2426). It is also reported by Ibn Maajah (no.3483) and Ibn `Abdul-Barr (1/162) with the wording, "Ask Allaah for beneficial knowledge and seek Allaah's refuge from knowledge which does not benefit." Its chain of narration is hasan (good) and there is a similar narration from Umm Salamah reported by Ibn Maajah and others.]

    That was said by Imaam Aboo Bakr Al-Aajurree, Rahimahullaah ta`aala, who lived at the end of the fourth century (he died, in the year 360H) and corruption increased and multiplied greatly since his time - and there is no might and no strength except by Allaah's will.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  Abdul Wahid Osman Belal

    To:  Sultan Shahin Editor@newageislam.com

    Subject Whither Pakistan: Towards Theocracy?, www.NewAgeIslam.Com

    One is reminded and must read "Ideology of Pakistan" by Mr. Justice Hamoodur Rahman, Chief Justice of Pakistan (Retd.) that appeared in PLD 1976 Supreme Court Journal Pages 215 to 226 which will remove many doubts and misunderstanding as far as Pakistan is concerned.

    =============================

    Dear Belal Sahab,

    Pakistan Ideology [The Real One] was this:

    Three months before the partition of the subcontinent, in an interview with Doon Campbell of Reuters, Jinnah firmly stated: "The new state will be a modern democratic state with sovereignty resting in the people and the members of the new nation having equal rights of citizenship regardless of religion, caste or creed." He repeated this on August 11, 1947, whilst addressing the members of his Constituent Assembly, making it doubly clear to them that religion is not the business of the state. He told them: "You are free, free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed that has nothing to do with the business of the State."

    On August 11, 1947, before the flag of Pakistan had even been unfurled, Jinnah told his people and their future legislators:

    "You are free, free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other places of worship in this state of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed - that has nothing to do with the business of the State.

    Jinnah addressed his Constituent Assembly at Karachi. He told the future legislators :

    ". . . . . . . you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the state.

    "Well, gentlemen, I do not wish to take up any more of your time and thank you again for the honour you have done to me. I shall always be guided by the principles of justice and fair play without any, as is put in political language, prejudice or ill-will, in other words, partiality or favouritism. My guiding principle will be justice and complete impartiality, and I am sure that with your support and cooperation I can look forward to Pakistan becoming one of the greatest
    nations of the world."

    Indian Congresswoman and poet, Mrs Sarojini Naidu, after meeting Jinnah for the first time at the 1906 annual session of Congress held at Calcutta.

    Now to what Mohammed Ali Jinnah had to say on the future constitution of Pakistan in his broadcast to the American people in February 1948: "The constitution of Pakistan has yet to be framed by the Pakistan Constituent Assembly. I do not know what the ultimate shape of this constitution is going to be, but I am sure that it will be of a democratic type, embodying the essential principles of Islam.

    "Today, they are as applicable in actual life as they were 1,300 years ago. Islam and its idealism have taught us democracy. Islam has taught the equality of men, justice and fairplay to everybody. We are the inheritors of these glorious traditions and are fully alive to our responsibilities and obligations as framers of the future constitution of Pakistan. In any case, Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission. We have many non-Muslims - Hindus, Christians and Parsis – but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan. "

    Jinnah's views against mixing religion with politics

    "Jinnah left the Home Rule League and the Congress after Gandhi took them over because he (Jinnah) strongly disapproved of the introduction of religion into politics by Gandhi, and because he disapproved equally strongly of unconstitutional means to secure swaraj." H.M. Seervai -- Legend and Reality, p.169

    "Jinnah had told him that he (Gandhi) had ruined politics in India by dragging up a lot of unwholesome elements in Indian life and giving them political prominence, that it was a crime to mix up politics and religion the way he (Gandhi) had done." Transfer of Power Documents, Vol.VI, p. 617

    "Jinnah, however, warned Gandhiji not to encourage the fanaticism of Muslim religious leaders and their followers. Indeed, he was not the only person who foresaw danger in the Khilafat Movement." K.M. Munshi, Pilgrimage to Freedom -- p. 22

    "Jinnah made it clear, however, that he had no intention of playing the role of an Islamic Khalifah. As Pakistan's Governor-General, he intended to see to it that all its citizens, irrespective of religious or cultural orientation, were, politically and before the law, similar and equal." The Pakistan in the Twentieth Century -- A Political History by Lawrence Ziring - pp. 66, 67

    "Jinnah's insistence on balance and fairness to all, irrespective of religious persuasion or cultural
    identity, projected a secular approach that was now obscured in the Muslim League's struggle to achieve parity with the Congress." Ibid, p. 39

    "Jinnah, the 'ambassador of Hindu-Muslim unity', had worked hard to get the Congress and the League to co-operate and deplored the opportunistic alliance between the Mahatma and the Khilafat Muslims." The Sole Spokesman -- Jinnah, the Muslim League, and the Demand for Pakistan by Ayesha Jalal -- pp. 8, 9

    Quaid-e-Azam never referred to Pakistan as "Islamic Republic" but as the "State of Pakistan," "Sovereign State of Pakistan," "Dominion of Pakistan" or "Federal Republic of Pakistan".

    Pakistan not to be a theocratic state

    "Will Pakistan be a secular or theocratic state? You are asking me a question that is absurd. I do not know what a theocratic state means." Jinnah's press conference in New Delhi on July 14, 1947, Jinnah -- Speeches and Statements 1947-1949, Oxford University Press, p.15

    "But make no mistake: Pakistan is not a theocracy or anything like it..." Jinnah's address to the people of Australia on Feb. 19,1948 -- Ibid, p.118

    "In any case, Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic State--to be ruled by priests with a divine mission." Jinnah's address to the people of the United States of America in February 1948, Ibid, p.125

    Equal status, and rights, and protection to minorities

    "Minorities, to whichever community they may belong, will be safeguarded. Their religion or faith or belief will be secure. There will be no interference of any kind with their freedom of worship. They will have their protection with regard to their religion, faith, their life, their culture. They will be, in all respects, the citizens of Pakistan without any distinction of caste or creed". Jinnah's press conference in New Delhi on 14th July 1947, Ibid, p. 13

    "You are free; you are free to go to your temples, you are free to go to your mosques or to any other place of worship in this State of Pakistan. You may belong to any religion or caste or creed--that has nothing to do with the business of the State". Jinnah's presidential address to the Constituent Assembly on Aug.11, 1947.

    "Now, I think we should keep that in front of us as our ideal and you will find that in course of time Hindus would cease to be Hindus and Muslims would cease to be Muslims, not in the religious sense, because that is the personal faith of each individual, but in the political sense as citizens of the State." Ibid.

    "We have many non-Muslims- Hindus, Christians, and Parsis--but they are all Pakistanis. They will enjoy the same rights and privileges as any other citizens and will play their rightful part in the affairs of Pakistan." Jinnah's address to the people of the United States on February 1948, p.125

    Almost all authors of the books on the Quaid-e-Azam, including Stanley Wolpert, Lawrence Ziring, Ayesha Jalal, H.M. Seervai and K.M. Munshi, substantiate and support the view that the Quaid was himself secular and always wanted Pakistan to be a secular state.

    The Hollow Edifice of the so-called Islamic Ideology is as under:

    In my opinion Pakistan can only be run peacefully if it is to be run et all then it must be run through an Strictly Secular Constitutional System otherwise be prepare for another Yugoslavia of 90s, Lebanon of 70s and 80s or latest Iraq. Those who claim that Jinnah wanted an Islamic State should know about Jinnah that he was an Ismaili [in his early life as per the record of Bombay High Court] and then converted to Shiaism [as per Sindh High Court Record more references are given at the end with excerpts from a books].

    Just assume that Pakistan is going to be an Islamic State [in a literal and real sense] then what School of thought will govern the country [just imagine the mess Deobandis hates Barelvis, Shia and Wahaabis, Wahaabis hate Deobandis, Barelvis, and Shias. Barelvis hates Deobandis, Wahaabis and  above all if Jamat-e-Islami is allowed to run then all those mentioned above hate Jamat-e-Islami to extreme].

    Read my comment in the thread below:

    North Indian Muslim superiority complex is not justified

    http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=1233


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Niaz Fatehpuri was considered atheist for his writings which were opposed to orthodox Islamic views? ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL - United Kingdom

    =================================

    Dear Mr Belal,

    Another aspect of the Alleged Orthodox Islam is that Muslims have been ordered/advised for not cursing the dead and in your case above it is more severe when the dead person is a Muslim. If you have difference of opinion with the ideology of Niaz Fatehpuri then refute his ideology through reasons. 

    Those are a people who have passed away; theirs is that which they earned and yours that which ye earn. And ye will not be asked of what they used to do. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 141]

    The Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] forbade us when he said; “Do not curse the dead; they will get it for what they had done (in this life)” and the Prophet Mohammad even (PBUH) ordered us in another hadith to, "Mention the good things about the dead.” [Mishkat]

    Lets suppose that Allama was Atheist [as you alleged but he wasn't] then Quran says:

    That no laden one shall bear another's load, And that man hath only that for which he maketh effort, And that his effort will be seen. And afterward he will be repaid for it with fullest payment; [Quran AN-NAJM (THE STAR) Chapter 53: Verse 38 to 41]

    Say: Shall I seek another than Allah for Lord, when He is Lord of all things? Each soul earneth only on its own account, nor doth any laden bear another's load. Then unto your Lord is your return and He will tell you that wherein ye differed. [Quran AL-ANAAM (CATTLE, LIVESTOCK) Chapter 6: Verse 164]

    Penalty for Cursing is more severe when the dead person is a Muslim:

    Late Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri [May Allah have mercy on his soul] used to go together to the Mosque with his Brother-in-Law for offerring Friday Prayers and Eid Prayers [when Allama used to live in Nazimabad - Karachi - Sindh].

    Whoever offers prayers as we do and turns his face to our Qiblah and eats the animal slaughtered by us, he is a Muslim for whom is the covenant of Allah and the covenant of the Messenger of Allah; so do not violate Allah's covenant." [Sahih Bukhari]

    ``Ibn Umar related that the Holy Prophet said: If a Muslim calls another kafir, then if he is a kafir let it be so; otherwise, he [the caller] is himself a kafir.''(Sunnan Abu Dawood)

    ``Abu Zarr reported that the Holy Prophet said: No man accuses another man of being a sinner, or of being a kafir, but it reflects back on him if the other is not as he called him.''(Bukhari)

    ``Withhold [your tongues] from those who say `There is no god but Allah' --- do not call them kafir. Whoever calls a reciter of `There is no god but Allah' as a kafir, is nearer to being a kafir himself.'' (Tabarani, reported from Abdullah Ibn Omar)

    If the above Hadiths do not satisfy then read this!

    Usaamah bin Zaid reported,

    “Allaah’s Messenger sent us towards Al-Huruqa, and in the morning we attacked them and defeated them. I and an Ansari man followed a man from among them and when we overwhelmed him, he said, “La ilaha illal-Lah.” On hearing that, the Ansari man stopped, but I killed him by stabbing him with my spear. When we returned, the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) came to know about that and he said:

    "O Usaamah! Did you kill him after he had said “La ilaha ilal-Lah?” I said, “But he said so only to save himself.” He kept on repeating that so often that I wished I had not embraced Islaam before that day. [Agreed upon, and this is the wording of Bukhari]

    and in another version in Sahih Muslim about the same incident:

    ``Did you tear open his heart to see what was in it?'' [Muslim]

    ================================

    Sarfaraz K. Niazi s/o Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri

    Welcome to the Writings of Sarfaraz K. Niazi, Ph.D.

    http://niazi.com/

    Essays by Sarfaraz K. Niazi, Ph.D.

    http://niazi.com/Neurons/frames19.htm

     

     


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Niaz Fatehpuri was considered atheist for his writings which were opposed to orthodox Islamic views? ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL United Kingdom

    =======================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    The alleged Orthodox Islamic View also forbids to Curse the Dead and it is even more severe when the dead person is a Muslim [Niaz Fatehpuri] and above all nobody would be held responsible on the Day of Judgement for whatever Belief and Faith Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri had..

    Those are a people who have passed away; theirs is that which they earned and yours that which ye earn. And ye will not be asked of what they used to do. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 141]

    That no laden one shall bear another's load, And that man hath only that for which he maketh effort, And that his effort will be seen. And afterward he will be repaid for it with fullest payment;
    [Quran AN-NAJM (THE STAR) Chapter 53: Verse 38 to 41]

    Say: Shall I seek another than Allah for Lord, when He is Lord of all things? Each soul earneth only on its own account, nor doth any laden bear another's load. Then unto your Lord is your return and He will tell you that wherein ye differed. [Quran AL-ANAAM (CATTLE, LIVESTOCK) Chapter 6: Verse 164]

    The Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) forbade us when he says, "Do not curse the dead; they went to what they had done (in this life)" [Muslim] and the

    The Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) ordered us in another hadith, "Mention the good things about your dead." [Muslim]

    ====

    Niaz Fatehpuri was considered atheist for his writings which were opposed to orthodox Islamic views? ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL United Kingdom

    Late Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri [May Allah have mercy on his soul] used to go together with his brother in law to the Mosque for offerring Friday Prayers and Eid Prayers as well [when Allama used to live in Nazimabad - Karachi - Sindh].

    Whoever offers prayers as we do and turns his face to our Qiblah and eats the animal slaughtered by us, he is a Muslim for whom is the covenant of Allah and the covenant of the Messenger of Allah; so do not violate Allah's covenant." [Sahih Bukhari]

    ``Ibn Umar related that the Holy Prophet said: If a Muslim calls another kafir, then if he is a kafir let it be so; otherwise, he [the caller] is himself a kafir.''(Sunnan Abu Dawood)

    ``Abu Zarr reported that the Holy Prophet said: No man accuses another man of being a sinner, or of being a kafir, but it reflects back on him if the other is not as he called him.''(Bukhari)

    ``Withhold [your tongues] from those who say `There is no god but Allah' --- do not call them kafir. Whoever calls a reciter of `There is no god but Allah' as a kafir, is nearer to being a kafir himself.'' (Tabarani, reported from Abdullah Ibn Omar)

    If the above Hadiths do not satisfy then read this!

    Usaamah bin Zaid reported,

    “Allaah’s Messenger sent us towards Al-Huruqa, and in the morning we attacked them and defeated them. I and an Ansari man followed a man from among them and when we overwhelmed him, he said, “La ilaha illal-Lah.” On hearing that, the Ansari man stopped, but I killed him by stabbing him with my spear. When we returned, the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) came to know about that and he said:

    "O Usaamah! Did you kill him after he had said “La ilaha ilal-Lah?” I said, “But he said so only to save himself.” He kept on repeating that so often that I wished I had not embraced Islaam before that day. [Agreed upon, and this is the wording of Bukhari]

    and in another version in Sahih Muslim about the same incident:

    ``Did you tear open his heart to see what was in it?'' [Muslim]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Niaz Fatehpuri was considered atheist for his writings which were opposed to orthodox Islamic views? ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL United Kingdom

    =======================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    The alleged Orthodox Islamic View also forbids to Curse the Dead and it is even more severe when the dead person is a Muslim [Niaz Fatehpuri] and above all nobody would be held responsible on the Day of Judgement for whatever Belief and Faith Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri had..

    Those are a people who have passed away; theirs is that which they earned and yours that which ye earn. And ye will not be asked of what they used to do. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 141]

    That no laden one shall bear another's load, And that man hath only that for which he maketh effort, And that his effort will be seen. And afterward he will be repaid for it with fullest payment;
    [Quran AN-NAJM (THE STAR) Chapter 53: Verse 38 to 41]

    Say: Shall I seek another than Allah for Lord, when He is Lord of all things? Each soul earneth only on its own account, nor doth any laden bear another's load. Then unto your Lord is your return and He will tell you that wherein ye differed. [Quran AL-ANAAM (CATTLE, LIVESTOCK) Chapter 6: Verse 164]

    The Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) forbade us when he says, "Do not curse the dead; they went to what they had done (in this life)" [Muslim] and the

    The Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) ordered us in another hadith, "Mention the good things about your dead." [Muslim]

    ====

    Niaz Fatehpuri was considered atheist for his writings which were opposed to orthodox Islamic views? ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL United Kingdom

    Late Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri [May Allah have mercy on his soul] used to go together with his brother in law to the Mosque for offerring Friday Prayers and Eid Prayers as well [when Allama used to live in Nazimabad - Karachi - Sindh].

    Whoever offers prayers as we do and turns his face to our Qiblah and eats the animal slaughtered by us, he is a Muslim for whom is the covenant of Allah and the covenant of the Messenger of Allah; so do not violate Allah's covenant." [Sahih Bukhari]

    ``Ibn Umar related that the Holy Prophet said: If a Muslim calls another kafir, then if he is a kafir let it be so; otherwise, he [the caller] is himself a kafir.''(Sunnan Abu Dawood)

    ``Abu Zarr reported that the Holy Prophet said: No man accuses another man of being a sinner, or of being a kafir, but it reflects back on him if the other is not as he called him.''(Bukhari)

    ``Withhold [your tongues] from those who say `There is no god but Allah' --- do not call them kafir. Whoever calls a reciter of `There is no god but Allah' as a kafir, is nearer to being a kafir himself.'' (Tabarani, reported from Abdullah Ibn Omar)

    If the above Hadiths do not satisfy then read this!

    Usaamah bin Zaid reported,

    “Allaah’s Messenger sent us towards Al-Huruqa, and in the morning we attacked them and defeated them. I and an Ansari man followed a man from among them and when we overwhelmed him, he said, “La ilaha illal-Lah.” On hearing that, the Ansari man stopped, but I killed him by stabbing him with my spear. When we returned, the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) came to know about that and he said:

    "O Usaamah! Did you kill him after he had said “La ilaha ilal-Lah?” I said, “But he said so only to save himself.” He kept on repeating that so often that I wished I had not embraced Islaam before that day. [Agreed upon, and this is the wording of Bukhari]

    and in another version in Sahih Muslim about the same incident:

    ``Did you tear open his heart to see what was in it?'' [Muslim]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Abdul Wahid Osman Belal

    Perhaps Hoodbhoy is a Agha Khani whose hero is not Abdul Qadeer Khan who gave nuclear capabilty to Pakistan but a non-Muslim qadiani (who call themselves Ahmadi) and who is not tired of eulogising Abdus Salam and canvassing the approach of India Israel USA, and Britain that Pakistan's Nuclear assets are not safe and a danger to the region not realising that recently an Indian General said that had it not been for that India would have attacked Pakistan.  Niaz Fatehpuri was considered atheist for his writings which were opposed to orthodox Islamic views? ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL - United Kingdom

    ===================================

    Dear Abdul Wahid,

    You have condemned a Muslim i.e. Allama Niaz Fatehpuri without winessing his Kufr [Disbelief] and you have talked about Orthodox Islamic View [define the Orthodox Islamic View]. Let me ask you a question since you are a Muslim and probably a Pakistani [like me] and since you have mentioned that you are living in UK so let me quote Peral of Wisdom from Orthodox Islamic point view for which you have condemned Niaz Fatehpuri. Fatehpuri was far better than [keeping in view your myopic and tunnel Interpretation of Orthodox Islam] you because he died in a Muslim Country [no matter how bad Pakistan but it is still a Muslim Country] but you are living in a country [UK] whose Forces are bombing innocent people in Iraq, Afghanistan and Northern Areas of Pakistan. I wonder if you are tax paying citizen of UK because its your Tax Money through which they Finance Wars. If you beleive in Orthodox Islamic View [for not believing you have condemned Niaz] and living in Daarul Harab [Orthodox Islamic View] - UK then you are committing a Haram [Unlawful] Act.

    The Post may please be read in the context of the Deviant Ideologies of Political Islamists Type of Muslims living in Anglo Saxon Based Secular Democratic Countrres of the West:

     

    Democracy: meaning rule by the people for the people not as per Islam through Quran and Sunnah.

     

    Undoubtedly the democratic system is one of the modern forms of shirk, in terms of obedience and following, or legislation, as it denies the sovereignty of the Creator and His absolute right to issue laws, and ascribes that right to human beings. Allaah says: 

     

    Those whom ye worship beside Him are but names which ye have named, ye and your fathers. Allah hath revealed no sanction for them. The decision rests with Allah only, Who hath commanded you that ye worship none save Him. This is the right religion, but most men know not. [YUSUF (JOSEPH) Chapter 12 - Verse 40]

     

    The decision is for Allah only. [AL-ANAAM (CATTLE, LIVESTOCK) Chapter 6 Verse 57]

     

    So judge between them by that which Allah hath revealed, and follow not their desires, but beware of them lest they seduce thee from some part of that which Allah hath revealed unto thee. And if they turn away, then know that Allah's Will is to smite them for some sin of theirs. Lo! many of mankind are evil-livers. Is it a judgment of the time of (pagan) ignorance that they are seeking? Who is better than Allah for judgment to a people who have certainty (in their belief)? [AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD) Chapter 5 - Verse 49 and 50]

     

    In one of his post in another thread of New Age Islam, one Mr Bashir Syed has declared that he is a Mohajir in America [Immigrant in USA]. If he is so concerned about Muslims and Islam then he should follow Quran and Hadith and return back to Pakistan. Please review your stance as per Quran and Hadith [which all Muslim claim to follow and exploit] regarding Living in a Non Muslim Country. Those who want to observe Islam, Veil and Islamic Culture should come back and live in Afghanistan and Northern Areas of Pakistan.

     

    Lo! as for those whom the angels take (in death) while they wrong themselves, (the angels) will ask: In what were ye engaged? They will say: We were oppressed in the land. (The angels) will say: Was not Allah's earth spacious that ye could have migrated therein? As for such, their habitation will be hell, an evil journey's end; [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 Verse 97]

     

    Prophet Mohammad (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “I disown every Muslim who settles among the mushrikeen [Polytheists].” [Sunnan Abu Dawood]

     

    It is obligatory to migrate from the kaafir lands to the Muslim lands for those who are able to do that, if they are unable to practise their religion openly.

     

    Ibn al-‘Arabi al-Maaliki said: Hijrah (migration) means leaving dar al-harb [non-Muslim lands] and going to dar al-islam [Muslim lands]. This was obligatory at the time of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and remains so after his time for those who fear for their lives. From Nayl al-Awtaar, 8/33, by al-Shawkaani.

     

    Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar  said concerning the hadeeth, “I disown every Muslim who settles among the mushrikeen”:

     

    This is to be understood as referring to those who are not safe to practise their religion there. Fath al-Baari

     

    For example:

     

    If you want to live in the West then follow their Law and don't complain about Prohibition of Veil, dont raise hue and cry when someone amongst them use 'Freedom of Expression' to practice Homosexuality and Lesbianism openly [what do you think when an underage or even adult Muslim male or female watch these acts of Hedonism? Wont this effect him or her? Forbidden as per Quran to even go near to those things which lead to Adultery].

     

    And come not near unto adultery. Lo! it is an abomination and an evil way.[AL-ISRA (ISRA', THE NIGHT JOURNEY, CHILDREN OF ISRAEL) Chapter 17 Verse 32]

     

    Even watching these things gives you wrong ideas?

     

    What about your Tax Money through which USA and other NATO Countries financing War On Terror and bombing Innocent Muslims? Forbidden in Quran to help Combatant Non-Muslims in any way. What do you think your Tax Money does? Undoubtedly the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) did not compromise in matters of his religion. When he was in Makkah, before the Hijrah, he used to pray openly, whilst they were looking on. After the Muslims became a distinct community, a specific style of dress was ordained for them, and they commanded to forsake anything else that was a symbol of kufr and was distinctive to the kuffaar, because this is imitation, and whoever imitates a people is one of them.

     

    How can the believer be content to live in the land of the Non Muslims  where the rituals of kufr [Disbelief] are proclaimed openly and rule belongs to someone other than Allaah and His Messenger, seeing that with his own eyes, hearing that with his own ears and approving of it, and even starting to feel that he belongs there and living there with his wife and children, and feeling as comfortable there as he does in the Muslim lands, even though he and his wife and children are in such great danger and their religious commitment and morals are in such peril? 

     

    AS PER PURE ISLAMIC LAW [FOR WHICH THIS UMMAH IS ITCHING] and since theses don't exist in the West and that is why those who condemn Secular-Anglo-Saxon Western Democarcies should come back to 'Islamic Countires'. Following are the salient feature of the Secular Democracies through which Islamic Political Activists Type of Muslims e.g. Mr Bashir Syed and those who belonged to Jamat-e-Islami and Ikwan but settled in the West, reap all the benefits and then shamelessly raise finger against the same system.

    ====

     

    Regarding Hoodbhoy is a Agha Khani [ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL - United Kingdom]

     

    Jinnah was a Shia and Deobandi Mullahs/Jamat-e-Islami Mullahs of Pakistan were dead against him and many considered Jinnah - A Kaafi - and here goes your so-called Islamic Republic of Pakistan in drain...

     

    The self-proclaimed and as per Jamat-e-Islami the General Ziaul Haq was the Commander of the Faithful and a binding force for Muslim Ummah lets see how General Zia used to say about Ismailis,

     

    SPEECH OF PRESIDENT GEN. MUHAMMAD ZIA-UL-HAQ at the Inauguration of The Aga Khan University's Faculty of Health Sciences and of The Aga Khan University Hospital Karachi. November 11, 1985

     

    ““Your Highness Prince Karim Aga Khan; Your Highness Begum Aga Khan; Lieutenant-General Jahan Dad Khan, Governor, Sind; Mr. Justice Ghous Ali Shah, Chief Minister of Sind; Mr. Shams Lakha; Honourable Ministers; Members of the Senate, National Assembly & Provincial Assemblies; Excellencies; Distinguished Guests; Ladies and Gentlemen:

    Assalam-o-Alaikum

    It is a matter of great pleasure and honour for me to welcome your Highness to Pakistan, once again, and particularly to the city of Karachi - which apart from many other reasons of attracting your attention, is also the birthplace of your illustrious grandfather. Your last visit, Your Highness, in 1983, coincided with the presentation of the Charter of the Aga Khan University. Today, by the grace of Allah, the buildings of the Hospital, the Faculty of Health Sciences, and the Hostel of the University are complete; providing testimony in brick and mortar, to your pre-eminent quality of philanthropy. Pakistan is, indeed, fortunate in having been blessed with a University of such a high calibre. On behalf of the Government and the people of Pakistan, and on my own behalf, I would like to express our profound gratitude to your Highness.

    ...I have been here a number of times and I was really thinking of what my true feelings are at this time and mind you, I am not being modest, I am being very frank, my contribution is very little, it is only the magnanimity of His Highness that has exploded my contribution to such an extent. But being a witness to the growth of this complex, I was just wondering as to what my true feelings are today. Many of us sitting here today are fathers and mothers and many of us have seen our children grow but very few really think that the man who stands before you today as perhaps a doctor, an engineer, a banker once was a little child incapable of walking, incapable of thinking for himself and then when you look back many years you find that it is the effort and the love and affection that reared up that child to grow where he is today. I am talking about a life span of man. Here is a life span of a complex. I came here a few years ago and I saw a deserted piece of ground. I came the next time I saw a bit of life, I came the next time and we gave the Charter to the University. It is only in a matter of two years we see here, not a child but a child that is certainly mine, no doubt, but is the child of His Highness, which has been reared upon the last few years with such love and affection by himself, the Begum who accompanied him all the time, by His Highness Amyn Aga Khan and by a team of such dedicated workers as Mr. Merchant who is sitting very quietly down below, Mr. Shamsh Lakha, Mr. Ashiqueali and many others who will perhaps continue to remain the back stage workers without whose efforts this complex would not have come up, and just taking a lead from Mr. Shamsh Lakha's words, the torch has been lit and we are all to witness the light that will emerge from this great institution of learning, I hope, Inshallah.

    These magnificent buildings of the Aga Khan University Complex also bear testimony to your Highness's outstanding contribution towards the enhancement of Islamic Architecture, by blending contemporary technology with the grace and beauty of conventional style. Such excellence, if I may add, can only be achieved by a team that is privileged to work under the guidance and inspiration of your Highness. Judged by any standards, however exacting, the Aga Khan University is an exemplary institution. The criterion adopted for admission to this University offers the guarantee that the principle of equity will be safeguarded without sacrificing excellence. The provision in the University Charter for attracting scholars, particularly Pakistani scholars from abroad, is something that needs to be extended by the Pakistani authorities to other universities in the country as well. Here, I would like to make a reference to another exemplary feature of the Aga Khan University; and this is the positive and constructive attitude that is inculcated among its students. As a result, the atmosphere of the University is entirely academic and free from incidence of in discipline and political manipulation which has been the main cause of deterioration of academic standards in many of our educational institutions in Pakistan today. The sanctity of the academic environment in the Aga Khan University has, no doubt, been maintained through the single minded commitment to the cause of education and education alone. The establishment of the Aga Khan University complex, with facilities for research and medical education and treatment, is indeed in accord with the spirit of Islam. As we all know, Islam gives top priority to the acquisition of knowledge, and regards the care of the sick as one of the foremost duties of man. Your Highness has thus demonstrated how to keep one's covenant with Islamic teachings, and I am sure Allah will, doubtless, bless you for it Inshallah.

    Pakistan owes an immense debt of gratitude to your Highness for your generous assistance in supplementing the efforts of the Government, through the Aga Khan Foundation in improving the quality of life of our people, particularly in the health sector. Your Highness, we perceive in the various on-going projects, launched by your Highness in Pakistan, a continuation of the noble mission initiated by your forefathers. Aga Khan University is one of such projects and I am confident that it will play a vital role in its own right. Here I would also like to express my personal gratitude once again for such a fine institution. We are living in a material world and if we just look at the amount of investment $400 million worth of a project devoted purely for the sake of education and care for the sick. Where in the metropolis of Karachi is a gift that can be befitting to any nation, to any city, to any people? Permit me your Highness to express my personal gratitude to your Highness for the creation of endowments in the name of Begum Shafiqa Zia. These endowments will be used to provide Scholarships for students in the Faculty of Health Sciences in the Aga Khan University, and for the creation of a fund to support the cost of medical care of the needy and the deserving patients at the Aga Khan University Hospital. I pray to Allah that both these institutions, the Aga Khan University and the Aga Khan University Hospital may achieve greatness in the fullness of time; and may Allah in his benevolence bestow his grace on the generation of students to complete their training with distinction and use their knowledge in the service of mankind; and also provide courage, strength and wisdom to the hospital staff to enable them to face the challenges that lie ahead; and thereby justify the confidence that your Highness and the Government of Pakistan have reposed in these two great institutions.

    My statement will not be complete if I did not reciprocate. This entire gift of $400 million is from His Highness, the Government of Pakistan's contribution is whatever it is, my own personal interest is what I have stated a little while ago. In the same spirit I would like to offer to the Aga Khan Medical College, two Scholarships a year for those graduates who qualify at the top positions at the Aga Khan Medical University and who complete their preliminary specialisation in Pakistan. This will be done through a scholarship and your Highness, I have not asked your permission but I am sure you will be kind enough that this scholarship will be called Salima Aga Khan scholarship. We have been talking about the Universities of Cambridge, Oxford, McGill, Osborne, Munich and the like. I pray to Allah that the Aga Khan University not only be remembered in line with some of those modern and the most talented and the most reputed educational institutions but it will also be headed by the Aga Khan University. I, once again, thank your Highness for your love and care for Pakistan, and for your devotion to the cause of improving the quality of life of its people. May Allah endow you with long life, health and happiness. Ameen! With these words, I have great pleasure in inaugurating the new building of the Aga Khan University Hospital.

    ========

     

    Regarding Hoodbhoy is a Agha Khani [ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL - United Kingdom]

     

    Dear Belal,

     

    The Aga Khan Foundation and so-called Afghan Jihad:

     

    Sadruddin Aga Khan: mujahideen coordinator by Scott Thompson and Joseph Brewda

    http://www.larouchepub.com/other/1995/2241_aga_khan.html

    Prince Sadruddin Aga Khan, the second son of the hereditary Imam of the Ismaili sect of Shi'ism, is a specialist in running intelligence operations under humanitarian cover. A career U.N. bureaucrat, and the former coordinator of U.N. Humanitarian and Economic Assistance Programs relating to Afghanistan, Prince Sadruddin was deeply involved in providing safe haven for the Afghan mujahideen, and facilitating their dispersal throughout the world. Because of this role, Prince Sadruddin was the British government's preferred candidate for U.N. secretary general in 1991, even ahead of Boutros Boutros-Ghali, the third-generation British agent who landed the job.

    The Ismaili line of Imams traces its lineage directly back to the Prophet Mohammed. The family's most notorious ancestors, the "Assassins," built up a powerful cult presence in Iran, where the family resided until the 1840s, when they were driven into India. There, they became a military arm of the British raj, including in operations in Afghanistan. Prince Sadruddin's grandfather, Aga Khan II, was a founder of the Muslim League, sponsored by the British in the wake of the Sepoy Rebellion of 1858; its activities ultimately led to the vivisection of India in 1947. His father, who was the 48th Imam, Sir Sultan Mohammed Shah Aga Khan III, was very close to the British royal family during his 72-year reign, and held the post of chairman of the League of Nation's General Assembly for a year. The 49th Imam, Prince Agha Khan IV, was given the British title "His Highness" by Queen Elizabeth II in 1957 at the death of his grandfather. Prince Sadruddin's title is likewise recognized by the British royal family.

    Prince Sadruddin Aga Khan's career began in the 1950s, when he became publisher of the Paris Review, one of the more important Anglo-American intelligence operations of its day, peddling the degenerate "Children of the Sun," who were precursors of the rock-drug-sex counterculture. The managing editor of the publication, John Train, had been Prince Sadruddin's roommate at Harvard. Train went on to become a top Wall Street financial adviser, while continuing to play a key behind-the-scenes role in diverse intelligence operations, including in Afghanistan (see article, p. 18). Train and Prince Sadruddin continue to form a team.

    In the mid-1950s, Prince Sadruddin became a career U.N. civil servant. By 1962, he was U.N. deputy high commissioner for refugees, and he served as high commissioner for refugees during 1967-77. Since that time, he has been brought back to handle special crises dealing with the mass relocation of impoverished people, especially in war zones. Thus, he was made coordinator of the U.N. Humanitarian and Economic Assistance Programs relating to Afghanistan, working closely with John Train, in what was code-named Operation Salam.

    Operation Salam was officially intended to organize the repatriation of Afghan refugees after the Soviet withdrawal. But under this pretext, it also oversaw the dispersal of Afghan war veterans and refugees throughout the world, and even before the fighting had stopped. Prince Sadruddin's program also reportedly was involved in the military training and covert military supply of the Afghan mujahideen, who often operated out of U.N. refugee camps that he administered on the Pakistan-Afghanistan border.

    Even earlier, Prince Sadruddin was asked by his longtime tennis partner, Vice President George Bush, to undertake secret negotiations with the Iranian government, on behalf of freeing the U.S. hostages. During the same period, some of the arms flowing into Pakistan for use by the Afghan mujahideen were being diverted to Iran on behalf of the "Iran-Contra" deals.

    Great Games and the WWF

    Prince Sadruddin has also been a key figure in Prince Philip's World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), the British royal family's most important intelligence agency. Since its creation in 1961, he has been one of is primary funders, as has his nephew, the current leader of the sect. Through his London-based Aga Khan Foundation and the associated Geneva-based Bellerive Foundation, Prince Sadruddin has emerged as a top environmentalist. Here too, we find John Train, an activist in WWF Africa causes especially. Train's cousin Russell Train was president of the U.S. chapter of the WWF from its inception until his recent retirement.

    In 1983, the WWF successfully persuaded the Pakistani government to create two national parks directly on the Afghan border in the northern region of Chitral. The remote region is not particularly reknowned either for its abundance of animal life or the existence of endangered species, and presumably the flow of eco-tourists into the region diminished during the Afghan War. Chitral is, however, reknowned for the quality and abundance of its opium poppy, which was assiduously cultivated by the mujahideen. It was also a primary staging area for smuggling arms into Afghanistan.

    Around the same time that the WWF established its Pakistan parks, followers of the Aga Khan began pouring into Chitral, and the nearby regions of Gilgit and Hunza, also adjacent to Indian Kashmir. There, they have formed alliances with the British-steered Kashmiri independence movement, and are reportedly working on establishing an independent Ismaili State carved out of Pakistan.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Abdul Wahid Osman Belal

    To:  Sultan Shahin Editor@newageislam.com

    Subject Whither Pakistan: Towards Theocracy?, www.NewAgeIslam.Com

    One is reminded and must read "Ideology of Pakistan" by Mr. Justice Hamoodur Rahman, Chief Justice of Pakistan (Retd.) that appeared in PLD 1976 Supreme Court Journal Pages 215 to 226 which will remove many doubts and misunderstanding as far as Pakistan is concerned.

     Dr. Zakir Naik is said to be the student of Sheikh Ahmed Deedat and is rendering service

    to Islam and enemies of Islam andpeople are simply jealous on account of his knowledge and understanding of comparative religions particularly Islam, Quran and Hadith.

     Perhaps Hoodbhoy is a Agha Khani whose hero is not Abdul Qadeer Khan who gave nuclear capabilty to Pakistan but a non-Muslim qadiani (who call themselves Ahmadi) and who is not tired of eulogising Abdus Salam and canvassing the approach of India Israel USA, and Britain that Pakistan's Nuclear assets are not safe and a danger to the region not realising that recently an Indian General said that had it not been for that India would have attacked Pakistan. 

     Niaz Fatehpuri was considered atheist for his writings which were opposed to orthodox Islamic views?

    ABDUL WAHID OSMAN BELAL

    United Kingdom


    By Abdul Wahid Osman Belal -



  • Fatehpuri quoted Shibli at length to define Prophethood:

     

    As God has granted different qualities to humankind, so that some people do not possess them and some do in large degrees, in the same way there is a spiritual quality called prophethood, which is related to purity of soul and akhlaq. The person who has this quality is perfect (kamil) in akhlaq and by his influence, other people become perfect. This person is not educated or brought up in such a way as to achieve this quality; rather, this quality is inborn.

     

    Hadith

     

    Fatehpuri believed that the changes in Islam were brought about by the medium of the hadith (plural – ahadith, sayings of the Prophet). He claimed that many of the ahadith were simply fabricated to suit the ruler of the day.

    =====================================

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

     

    One one hand Late. Fatehpuri criticized Hadith and declared that Hadiths were fabricated to suite Rulers whereas in his first statement he talked about the need of Good Manners [Akhlaq] and Purity of Soul.

     

     

    I wonder if Late. Allama was even aware of these Hadith? I also wonder which Islamic Ruler ordered to 'Fabricate' these Hadiths?

     

    Narrated Abu Hurairah: Allah’s Messenger said, “Richness is not in plenty of provisions; the (real) richness is the richness of the soul.” (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

     

    Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin Al-‘As: A man asked Allah’s Messenger, “Which act in Islam is the best?” He replied, “To feed (the poor and the needy) and to salute everyone, whether you are acquainted with them or not.” ( Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

     

    Narrated Asma’ bint Abu Bakr: Allah Messenger said to me, “Do not hold back; otherwise Allah will withhold from you.” (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

     

    Narrated Abud-Darda: Allah’s Messenger said, “The heaviest thing to be placed in the balance of a believing slave on the Day of Judgement will be good behaviour.” (At-Tirmidhi)

     

    Narrated Harithah bin Wahab: Allah’s Messenger said, “Shall I not inform you about the inmates of Hell? It is every violent, impertinent and proud person.” (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

     

    There is nothing heavier in the scales than good character. (Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal)

     

    The most perfect believer in respect of faith is he who is best of them in manners.  (Sunan Abu Dawud)

     

    Narrated Abu Hurairah: Allah’s Messenger said, “Allah the Exalted says, ‘Spend, O son of Adam, you will also be spent upon.” (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

     

    I was sent to perfect good character. (Malik's Muwatta)

     

    Narrated Abu Hurairah: Allah’s Messenger said, “Wealth is not diminished by giving (in charity). Allah augments the honour of one who forgives; and one who displays humility towards another seeking the Pleasure of Allah, Allah exalts him in ranks.” (Muslim)

     

    You possess two qualities that Allah loves. These are clemency and tolerance. (Muslim)

     

    Every act of kindness is a charity. (Bukhari)

     

    Abdullah bin Umar narrated that Allah's Messenger (saas) said, "Do not wish to be like anybody except in two cases: The case of a man whom Allah has given wealth and he spends it in the right way; and that of a man whom Allah has given religious wisdom ?i.e., the Qur'an and Sunnah? and he gives his verdicts according to it, and teaches it to others." (Bukhari)

     

    A person asked Allah’s Messenger (saas): “What is faith?” He said: “When a good deed becomes a source of pleasure for you and an evil deed becomes a source of disgust for you, then you are a believer.” He again said to Allah’s Messenger (saas): “What is a sin?” Whereupon he said: “When something pricks your conscience, give it up.” (Tirmidhi)

     

    A wise person is one who keeps a watch over his bodily desires and passions, and checks himself from that which is harmful and strives for that which will benefit him after death; and a foolish person is one who subordinates himself to his cravings and desires and expects from Allah the fulfillment of his futile desires. (Tirmidhi)

     

    Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin Al-‘As: Allah’s Messenger said, “Those who act justly will be seated upon pulpits of light before Allah. They will be those who do justice in their decisions, in matters relating to their families, and in all that is referred to them.” (Muslim)

     

    Narrated Jarir bin ‘Abdullah: Allah’s Messenger said, “He who is deprived of kindness and gentleness is, in fact, deprived of all good .” (Muslim)

     

    Narrated Anas: The Prophet said, “Make things easy and do not make them difficult, cheer the people up by conveying glad tidings to them and do not repulse (them).” (Al-Bukhari and Muslim)

     

    Narrated ‘Aishah: Allah’s Messenger said, “Allah is Kind and He loves kindness, and confers upon kindness which He does not confer upon severity, and does not confer upon any thing besides it (kindness).” (Muslim)

     

    Narrated Abud-Darda: Allah’s Messenger said, “The heaviest thing to be placed in the balance of a believing slave on the Day of Judgement will be good behaviour.” (At-Tirmidhi)


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Aamir Mughal Sahab,

     

    The book you have recommended to Shamshad Elahee Ansari Sahab doesn’t seem to me to be a good choice. The very first sentence of the second paragraph of the Brief Overview presented by the publisher reads: “Muhammad (S) is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him, are severe against the disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.” “Severe against the disbelievers?” [Sultan Shahin]

    =============================

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

     

    Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum - The Sealed Nectar (Large) Biography of the Prophet.

     

    That's why I had also suggested the hard copy in Urdu as well, wherein the following Quranic Verse is written:

     

    Yusqawna min raheeqin makhtoomin

     

    They are given to drink of a pure wine, sealed, [AL-MUTAFFIFIN (DEFRAUDING, THE CHEATS, CHEATING) Chapter 83 - Verse 25]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Aamir Mughal Sahab,

     

    The book you have recommended to Shamshad Elahee Ansari Sahab doesn’t seem to me to be a good choice. The very first sentence of the second paragraph of the Brief Overview presented by the publisher reads: “Muhammad (S) is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him, are severe against the disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.” “Severe against the disbelievers?” [Sultan Shahin]

    ==================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    I would say that it is still the best book available [with detail information about Ancient Arabia, Tribes, Culture, Living and narrations of those days when Prophet Ismail (PBUH)'s Descendants settled there] and the text you have mentioned is basically a Quranic Verse revealed about the Companions of the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH].

    Transliteration:

    Muhammadun rasoolu Allahi waallatheena maAAahu ashiddao AAala alkuffari ruhamao baynahum tarahum rukkaAAan sujjadan yabtaghoona fadlan mina Allahi waridwanan seemahum fee wujoohihim min athari alssujoodi thalika mathaluhum fee alttawrati wamathaluhum fee alinjeeli kazarAAin akhraja shatahu faazarahu faistaghlatha faistawa AAala sooqihi yuAAjibu alzzurraAAa liyagheetha bihimu alkuffara waAAada Allahu allatheena amanoo waAAamiloo alssalihati minhum maghfiratan waajran AAatheeman [AL-FATH (VICTORY, CONQUEST) Chapter 48 - Verse 29]

    Interpretation of the meaning:

    Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves. Thou (O Muhammad) seest them bowing and falling prostrate (in worship), seeking bounty from Allah and (His) acceptance. The mark of them is on their foreheads from the traces of prostration. Such is their likeness in the Torah and their likeness in the Gospel - like as sown corn that sendeth forth its shoot and strengtheneth it and riseth firm upon its stalk, delighting the sowers - that He may enrage the disbelievers with (the sight of) them. Allah hath promised, unto such of them as believe and do good works, forgiveness and immense reward. [AL-FATH (VICTORY, CONQUEST) Chapter 48 - Verse 29]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Quote:

    “Dear Ansari Sahab,

    If you are an Indian then I would suggest an Indian author Saifur Rahman Mubarakpuri's  Ar-Raheeq Al-Maktoum (The Sealed Nectar). The book is available online http://comp.uark.edu/~muslim/publications/Ar-Raheeq%20Al-Makhtum.pdf  in English but do get Hard Copy [for authenticity]. Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum - The Sealed Nectar (Large) Biography of the Prophet

    http://www.dar-us-salam.com/store/main.mvc?Screen=PROD%20&Product_Code=004a&Category_Code=Eng_ProphetMuhammad

    Author has won award for this book [Arabic Version].

    This book has details of Hijaz [Present Day Saudi Arabia] and Arabs as well.

    Regards

    Aamir Mughal  /14/2009 4:47:41 AM “

    End of Quote

    ---------------------

    Dear Aamir Mughal Sahab,

    The book you have recommended to Shamshad Elahee Ansari Sahab doesn’t seem to me to be a good choice. The very first sentence of the second paragraph of the Brief Overview presented by the publisher reads:

    “Muhammad (S) is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him, are severe against the disbelievers, and merciful among themselves.”

    “Severe against the disbelievers?”

    And of course, the “disbeliever” would include all those Muslims who do not subscribe to the Saudi-Wahhabi version of Islam, not to speak of people belonging to other religions and having full faith in God, though in the message of God brought by some previous prophet?

    Can such people be Muslims and “with Muhammad (S) is the Messenger of Allah”?

    Aamir Saheb, such people are totally against the Prophet’s and Allah’s teachings through the Prophet (PBUH).

    In any case books awarded in Saudi Arabia should be suspect For Saudi Arabia is a propagator of a certain version of Islam that is causing or at least leading to a lot of mayhem in the world. Of course, all our Wahhabi brothers and sisters are not terrorists, thanks God, but the facts remains by and large true that most Muslim terrorists at the moment are Wahhabi and some Shia.

    Please suggest a more objective book that would present Islam as Mohammad’s Islam and not that of any particular sect among his followers.

    Sultan Shahin


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • The third Caliph had to quell a civil war by killing about 70,000 people [Shamshad Elahee Ansari]

    ====

    Dear Sir,

    There was no civil war and no killing of 70, 000 people during the Tenure of Caliph Uthman [May Allah be pleased with him]. However, conflict started after his martyrdom. The conflicts [not mass killings as you have said above] started between Hazrat Ali [May Allah be pleased with him] and Hazrat Ameer Muawiyah [May Allah be pleased with him] on the method for the Qisas [Retaliation] of Hazrat Uthman's blood and that was it. The number of those who were killed in the conflict of Jamal, and Siffin are highly exaggerated by Historian Tabari and his weak narrations on such wars and other Historians consulted Tabari's History to report those events because Tabari was the first who recorded those events.

    =======

    soon the politics reached an extreme climax and Muawiya (ruled 661-680 AD) turned the whole movement into a kingdom. [Shamshad Elahee Ansari]

    ============

    Dear Sir,

    Same case of misreporting as mentioned earlier in my first paragraph.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Mirza Ulug Beg, a prominent astronomer of middle east (1443) [Shamshad Elahee Ansari]

    ===================

    Dear Ansari Sahab,

    If i am not wrong [do correct me] Ulugh Beg was based in Central Asia not in the Middle East. He was grandson of Mongol King Tamerlane [Timur]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • As a student, I am always interested to know the methodology, exercise, meditational techniques applied by Prophet Mohammad which conferred on a simple Arab Bedouin the highest attainment of Prophethood. We know little about his life before he turned 40. We have almost all accounts of his life until his death from prophethood onwards but history is conspicuously silent about his early life and experience. [Shamshad Elahee Ansari]

    ==========================================

    Dear Ansari Sahab,

    If you are an Indian then I would suggest an Indian author Saifur Rahman Mubarakpuri's  Ar-Raheeq Al-Maktoum (The Sealed Nectar). The book is available online http://comp.uark.edu/~muslim/publications/Ar-Raheeq%20Al-Makhtum.pdf in English but do get Hard Copy [for authenticity]. Ar-Raheeq Al-Makhtum - The Sealed Nectar (Large) Biography of the Prophet

    http://www.dar-us-salam.com/store/main.mvc?Screen=PROD%20&Product_Code=004a&Category_Code=Eng_ProphetMuhammad

    Author has won award for this book [Arabic Version].

    This book have details of Hijaz [Present Day Saudi Arabia] and Arabs as well.

    Regards


    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

     Dear Sultan Shahin,

     

    What I do not understand is the attitude of fellow Muslims. As a wise man said once that "Something in human nature makes us resent the impact of new ideas". I feel it appropriate to quote Napoleon Hill from one of his famous books "The Law of Success".

     

    Quote

    "We hate to be disturbed in the beliefs and prejudices that have been handed down with the family furniture. At maturity too many of us go into hibernation and live off the fact of ancient fetishes. If a new idea invades our den, we rise up snarling from our winter sleep.

     

    But there is no adequate reason why the average man should ever close his mind to fresh "slants" on life. He does just the same. Nothing is more tragic or more common than mental inertia. For every ten men who are physically lazy, there are ten thousand with stagnant minds. And stagnant minds are breeding places for fear".

    Unquote

     

    Can the above be appropriately descriptive of Muslims attitude towards life?

     

    jamsheed basha abumohammed, Chennai


    By jamsheed basha abumohammed -



  • REJOINDER: ON NIAZ FATHEPURI AND HIS THOUGHTS

     

    Shamshad Elahee Ansari

     

     It has been a very interesting experience staying on the New Age Islam page giving Niaz Fatehpuri’s views from Juhi Shahin’s book.  It was also painful to read the reaction from some of the readers who continued to post and repost some offensive comments as the editor kept deleting them for three days running and finally deciding to turn the site a monitored one, taking away the liberty we had to directly post our comments and see it in print almost immediately. I have applauded that decision but I could see that it was taken only under duress. The editor apparently found after three days of continuous harassment that he had no option left.

     

    There cannot be a more beautiful, incredible tribute to a writer, thinker and philosopher posthumously. The relevance of Niaz Fatehpuri can only be understood by going through the reaction of the readers, and watching the seesaw of the last three/four days establishing this fact that the questions which were raised by Niaz Fatehpuri are still alive and kicking with full force and his critics have not lost any of their venom or unwillingness to think new thoughts. I can well imagine the harrowing time the editor of this publication has had over this book excerpt, being accused of all sorts of misdemeanors apparently without any rhyme or reason.

     

    Let me accept this fact at the very outset that I never knew about this author or his writings etc. I read the excerpt from Juhi Shahin’s book Chapter 2nd with great interest. The more I read it closely, the more I felt as if I was reading an articulation of my own self. He has very valid points which could be discussed by any primary student of philosophy. He discussed God, Prophethood, God’s interest in Religion, Heaven, Hell, Rituals and most importantly character ‘Akhlaq’ at length with reason. The only one tenet was missing, he did not say like Buddha “ Appa Deep Bhavo” (Become your own light) but the entire emphasis in his writings and its essence is the same. Secondly, he wants us QUESTIONING which we stopped long ago. We ceased to be a questioning being altogether, losing our right to be called rational beings. He genuinely prescribes this formula to every truth seeker, please apply your own mind, own effort while seeking the path of TRUTH.

     

    What is wrong in this approach? I will come back to this aspect, let us examine the Prophet and cave issue first. Please excuse me for my mistakes of understanding; it’s my own beliefs and I don’t want to offend anyone. As a student, I am always interested to know the methodology, exercise, meditational techniques applied by Prophet Mohammad which conferred on a simple Arab Bedouin the highest attainment of Prophethood. We know little about his life before he turned 40. We have almost all accounts of his life until his death from prophethood onwards but history is conspicuously silent about his early life and experience. His talks, relations, interviews, portraits, etc. Niaz says human character could be defined as external and internal yardsticks which is true. We all know the compelling situation before Prophet and he would often take resort to Hira Cave and then he would emerge with a revelation. It’s all possible and it’s the most logical way to understand the emergence, evolution of a man to Prophethood. This process took 23 long years, in other words we can say, Prophet attained enlightenment at the age of 40 when he experienced his first encounter with TRUTH. He continued with this electric charge for another 23 years until he gets full circle. There are some instances in his life that he would lay down and cover his body with ‘Chader’ after attending/encountering some problems for hours. His wife has witnessed it and said on the record that he saw Prophet shivering and sweating while going through such an experience.

     

    This is the key; we can understand this phenomenon by studying the lives of Indian saints. It happens to a human body when his ‘Kundalni’ is awakened (Kundalni Jagran). Indian Mystics  also tells us about seven Chakras of human body as a pathway to super consciousness, liberation, Moksha or enlightenment; Sufis call it Nijaat,. Buddha took 14 years to reach this stage and once he had it, he came out of the jungle. We have the same detailed story of Mahaveer, Teerthankars in our ancient past and many more from our contemporaries like Jiddu Krishnamurthy, Acharya Rajneesh and many more. We don’t know much about this process and its details in regard to the Prophet, as when actually he started to put himself under such rigorous exercises? We only know he was 40 years old when he got his FIRST revelation. Logically, the process must have started much earlier. I would appreciate if somebody would help me know about the Prophet’s early life’s spiritual experiments. Frankly speaking, I am not concerned with the WORDS, scripture or rituals, rather I am interested to know what was the methodology used by Mohammed which made him Enlightened/Prophet.

     

    If this was the case, we have to probe it further in detail, it’s said that Buddha had a magnetic circle of 40 miles and his presence would make even wild animals calm and quite. All saintly persons have their own aura and you can feel it during their presence. If we assume that Prophet was an enlightened/liberated soul, we would have to accept it with a contradiction that he was amongst few Sword-wielding Prophets/Liberated souls in human history. In India, we have only one such figure i.e. Krishna, I am sorry, I am not including Ram since he had 12 Kala while Krishna had 16. Including Ram we have only three such characters who has been directly-indirectly associated with violence. Violence is considered to stand in contradiction with a Librated soul.

     

    According to some historians, Prophet gave his consent to kill a poet named Kaab bin al Ashraf who instigated masses against Prophet through his poems and second incident is from Madina, when Banu Qurayza’s leader Kab ibn Asad was said to be killed by his own hand, later all male members of his tribe were executed and buried in the middle of the Bazar of Madina. Their number varies from different sources between 60/70 and 600/700. This is the most troublesome part or accusation against Prophet Mohammad for theologists/philosophers. Krishna has to speak volumes to justify violence during Mahabharata but we know little reference on these account form Mohammed. Secondly, we had seen that all great souls were from either King’s family or kings who attained enlightenment/libration and they abandoned their Kingship or politics, but for the Prophet, this case is quite opposite. Attraction for Satta/Political Power is a part of Ahamkaar/Ego and we see Prophet managing all political/state affairs, sending messages, offers and in some case money to neighboring states to accept his Authority or face war etc. How could a religious person be involved in politics of expansionism? How could an enlightened soul have Ahamkaar or Ego which we see in a political personality? We leave these issues apart and returns to the main topic of Niaz Fatehpuri.

     

    Niaz Fatehpuri’s interpretation of the concept of God is really very appealing and logical. God is an independent authority; He is accessible to every human being as he doesn’t close his doors for anyone. One has to earn His respect and make an encounter. Prove yourself and enter the Gate of God. Islam says there were 1,24,000 prophets before Mohammad, all of them had Books as well. Does it mean that God wants to control human beings through his Prophets, all failed and then he sent the final ONE to conclude this process as God got sick of this business? This logic would create 1,24,000 contradictions before the existence of God himself . Correction, self-correction, amendment then again correction what is this? We assume that God is perfect, omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, etc. then why he could not bring only One Prophet to determine the fate of the masses? Why he had to correct himself for not one or two times, but 1,24,000 times, this is the irony of this argument. Why does God need to make a final assembly of all dead on the Day of Judgment and send masses to Hell or Heaven according to their Amal? Niaz Fatehpuri discusses this issue at length and derives strength from Ghazali, Shibli , Iqbal and Sir Syed and states, this is all a state of mind. It’s true, they all are states of minds but one has to rise to such LEVELS of mind. Sorry to say, Rituals can’t get you this state of mind. Rituals were simply a sign/signals toward the path of Enlightenment. They can take you to show the glimpse of that state but you cannot achieve it. Every Teacher had his specific audience and he has to advise methods keeping in view the situation of their audience.

     

    Let me explain it in practical terms. My father was a righteous Muslim and he would offer five –six (Tahajjud) times prayer and it was a pleasant experience even to see him while praying or reciting Quran. I asked him, ‘how do you keep counting your Rakaat while praying? He said, ‘I forget it and again I have to restart it’ this the state of mindlessness. The purity of soul, which is discussed by Niaz is actually mindlessness or Egolessness. Pure heart contains selfless love, compassion, resilience, free from hatred and ego. Ego is the biggest hurdle in the path of truth. Indian and Sufi school of thought tell us about it and devise various methodologies to curb it and move to other stages. Amongst Sunnis, such travellers seek ‘Bait’ to get further guidance, Sufis call it Peer-Mureed, and Hindus have their Guru-Disciple tradition.

     

    Niaz Fatehpuri’s discussion of Roza-Namaz (rituals) is unique. The gist is, one has to go beyond it, one has to imbibe it, one has to flower his own Being-ness, righteousness and it should come in the blood. You have to LIVE it, in what you practice and believe. If it’s being practiced superficially, the result will be reflected in your bad Akhlaq. You will do Haqtalfi, will not pay Zakat and other social, economic dues. You go to any mosque and just watch people while praying; there is no fragrance at all. It all seems robotic- mechanical. How could one not see his dirty feet and have long, dirty foot nails if he prays five times a day? How could you pray and have the courage to steal sandals from the Mosque? How could you pray if you have even a little bad/negative feelings toward anyone? This is all a result of the technical, mechanical way of preaching by the Ulema for many centuries. We have lost the fragrance of Ibadah/prayer otherwise how it is possible that one billion people recite everyday Salam (Peace be upon you) and there is no peace. How is it possible that more than one billion persons are in DUA, crying for the peace, mercy of Almighty and we do not see peace in neighbouring Palestine? There must be some serious FLAW and no one is ready to look into it since only RITUALS are in our blood which is odourless, useless and result-less but with full of EGO. Please spend some time to watch our Mullahs carefully and their EGO. How such stuff can guide the Ummah to a salvation?

     

    Let us come back to the issue of approach which we left incomplete above. Those who see Niaz Fatehuri’s articles, books, statements etc as blasphemous and send him to hell are the progenies of political Islam. The legacy left behind after the death of the Prophet was only political and they had to face a lot of problem. Four Khalifas’ rule ended within 30 years. The third Caliph had to quell a civil war by killing about 70,000 people; soon the politics reached an extreme climax and Muawiya (ruled 661-680 AD) turned the whole movement into a kingdom. The soul and spirit of religious Islam was removed thereafter and what we know today is actually more political Islam and its interpretation only. Politics had its own interest to see the ground realities but for the religious or spiritual person, truth is truth.

     

    We had the most beautiful jewel of Islam called Ijtihad whose life was cut short due to Political Islam. The Kings always want blind support to their rule and authority; why would they then allow the propagation of an idea like Ijtihad which could pose a threat to their authority. It’s interesting to know that the religion which launched a cry against Jahiliya (the pre-Islamic age of ignorance) took 400 years to build its first university.

     

    The absolutism of Islam caused great harm to this region since  it did not have space for independent thinking or research, otherwise natural human mind would have made many great scientific discoveries in that part of the world which came under Muslim rule. Political Islam created a new class, state-sponsored Cleric/Mulla and it became the main stumbling block for any independent/free thinking/research.

     

    History tells us how many great Muslim scientists had to face a hostile situation. Al Mutawakkil had to burn his library at Al Kindi, Ibn Sina had to go underground several time for his research work to avoid confrontation with the state. He was labelled heretic and he had to clarify several times during his life time. Ibn Hitam was another great scholar and faced threats from the Cleric-State combine; he had to disguise himself like a psychiatric patient to save his life. Razi, one more scholar was blinded by the state. Ibn Rushd had to burn all his research papers due to his opposition by Mullas. Mirza Ulug Beg, a prominent astronomer of middle east (1443) said,’ Empires are bound to perish, religions are bound to diminish but the work of scientists will remain immortal’. He was considered a threat to the state, so on the orders of Mullahs, he was killed by his own son. The sectarian, closed mind interpretation of Islam was imposed by the ruler everywhere. Even in India, a famous mathematician named Abdul Hamid Dehalvi (1413) had to face a lot of trauma from Mullahs. He wrote: ‘the religious issues are full of debates and discussion but mathematics is far from any dispute’.

     

    We all know what the Prophet said about the relevance of education or Ilm but what is the end result of his teaching? A religion which fought against the darkness of illiteracy, and for the sake of increasing knowledge, has become a saga of our failure. We continue to kill dogs rather than invent anti-rabies vaccination. We continue to burn oil for light rather than creating SOLAR ENERGY from the desert. We continued to live under harsh hot weather until someone gave us the Air conditioner. We continued to live under stark poverty for centuries until someone came and told us, there is treasure (oil) under your feet.

    We neither have spirituality nor knowledge.

     

    We are standing at the same point (by and large) from where the Prophet wanted to upgrade us.

     

    Niaz Fatehpuri’s approach is the approach of rethinking, soul searching, research and which is meant to take ahead, to think ahead, to evolve new horizons of knowledge, to peep into the past with wide open eyes and move straight into the future with a strong vision.

     

    There was an issue raised by our Pakistani friend, who diverted all the attention for some time to the other side. He said Niaz repented for his work before he died. One must ask: who doesn’t repent before he dies? Many Sahaba-e-karam begged forgiveness to the Almighty before they died. It’s obvious and natural for any Muslim to beg pardon form Allah for his sins. We all pray from God that ‘hamari khataien muaaf farma’ but from here to reach a conclusion that Niaz Fatehpuri repented for his work is a dubious approach and it’s not acceptable.

     

    Same reader raised some arguments about Maulana Azad, I will just quote a few lines from his famous speech. While on the move countering the campaign of Jinnah, he said:  ‘If an angel from heaven came and gave me a choice between Indian freedom and Hindu - Muslim unity, I would pick the latter since they are the two eyes of India”. This was his vision despite his so-called association with Salafis. Every Indian is proud of such leaders.

     

    Thanks to Juhi Shahin who took pains and brought this jewel before the readers. I am surprised to know that this book is published in Pakistan which is almost a de facto theocracy and it is Indian Muslim readers who are making such useless hue and cry, going to the extent of harassing the editor for several days and threatening him with court cases and worse. More surprises he has been asked to wait for. They are out to label Juhi Shahin as a Tasleema, or Rushdie in the making; so on and so forth, whereas all she has done is to introduce the lost jewel of a writer, Niaz Fatehpuri, to an English-speaking audience, at a time when he and his struggle have acquired enormous importance and urgency.

     

    We all know the people who opposed the deployment of intellect throughout the ages! They are the same faces who ransacked Jamia Millia in April - May 1992 against Ex Pro-vice chancellor of Jamia, Professor Mushir Ul Hasan, who is now back as a Vice-Chancellor; they are the same who will oppose every new light. One has to have proper sight/eye for seeing/watching/observing. Apparently we all have it but practically we see through a certain lens and want to see only those images which are pre-approved.

     

    Some other issues also crept up; issues like some people’s proclivity to copy-paste, stealing of material and publishing it under their own name. Despite several requests from the Editor, the concerned individual refused to be buzzed and kept her criminal silence over the issue and continued her tirade under the pretext of being a so-called Mujahida. This issue gains special significance when same persons waged a struggle previously against one author who incidentally picked some article and published it as the greater part of his article on the myth or reality of the 12th Imam. She went on making her outrageous remarks/comments most of the time that went beyond every limit of civility and they could be termed racist or sectarian until the post was removed from this person’s name and the author had to apologise. But the same Mujahida took two articles and posted them under her name for the cause of ‘benefiting Ummah’. All her supporters came and defended her misdeeds, though the same supporters were with her when she earlier waged a war of dirty words with another writer on the issue of plagiarism.

     

    This was the height of hypocrisy, a tag which she would never forget to give to the Editor. She has something special about Julahas. She must be proud of herself that she belongs to a nation where more than two hundred thousand julahas had to sacrifice their thumbs to the British by force so that Manchester’s Clothes could find market in India.

     

    She claims to be a lover of the progeny of the Prophet but has to learn some basic civic sense while uttering some words. The progeny of the Prophet would be surely pleased to see if she behaves with a little decency while certifying someone Jannati, or Lanati, or jahannuni, whatever, and stops behaving like a gate keeper of Heaven or Hell. Let the readers/writers think of their own Aamal, as this is the only testimony for them to determine their fate.

     

    I am submitting my write-up before esteemed readers of New Age Islam for healthy, constructive and positive debate.

     

    Shamshad Elahee Ansari, Dubai


    By Shamshad Elahee Ansari -



  • Dear Sultan Sahab,

    For those who are worried about somebody else's Faith and that too about the Faith of those who are Kalima Reciting Muslims:

    Usaamah bin Zaid reported,

    “Allaah’s Messenger sent us towards Al-Huruqa, and in the morning we attacked them and defeated them. I and an Ansari man followed a man from among them and when we overwhelmed him, he said, “La ilaha illal-Lah.” On hearing that, the Ansari man stopped, but I killed him by stabbing him with my spear. When we returned, the Prophet (sal-Allaahu `alayhe wa sallam) came to know about that and he said:

    "O Usaamah! Did you kill him after he had said “La ilaha ilal-Lah?” I said, “But he said so only to save himself.” He kept on repeating that so often that I wished I had not embraced Islaam before that day. [Agreed upon, and this is the wording of Bukhari]

    and in another version in Sahih Muslim about the same incident:

    ``Did you tear open his heart to see what was in it?'' [Muslim]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Sultan Shahin Sahab,

    For the satisfaction of those who are more worried for the Faith and Salvation [Eman aur Bakhsish] of Allama Niyaz then their ownselves.

    More Details on Alleged Kaafir - Late Allama Niyaz Fathepuri {May Allah have mercy on his soul} from Rohailkhand http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rohilkhand orginal name Niaz Ahmed Khan [Had been a Police Inspector in India Police Service]

    I met today [20:00 hours dated 12-03-09] with the Brother In Law of Late Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri {May Allah have mercy on his soul} who is a Retired Electrical Engineer of Pakistan International Airlines - PIA and permanently settled in Canada and is on a temporary visit in Pakistan. He is around 80 years old and told me very clearly that he and Late Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri [May Allah have mercy on his soul] used to go together to the Mosque for offerring Friday Prayers [when Allama used to live in Nazimabad - Karachi - Sindh] regularly from 1960 till his death [he died due to Throat Cancer]

    Whoever offers prayers as we do and turns his face to our Qiblah and eats the animal slaughtered by us, he is a Muslim for whom is the covenant of Allah and the covenant of the Messenger of Allah; so do not violate Allah's covenant." [Sahih Bukhari]

    ``Ibn Umar related that the Holy Prophet said: If a Muslim calls another kafir, then if he is a kafir let it be so; otherwise, he [the caller] is himself a kafir.''(Sunnan Abu Dawood)

    ``Abu Zarr reported that the Holy Prophet said: No man accuses another man of being a sinner, or of being a kafir, but it reflects back on him if the other is not as he called him.''(Bukhari)

    ``Withhold [your tongues] from those who say `There is no god but Allah' --- do not call them kafir. Whoever calls a reciter of `There is no god but Allah' as a kafir, is nearer to being a kafir himself.'' (Tabarani, reported from Abdullah Ibn Omar)

    Love Sonnets of Ghalib by Sarfaraz K. Niazi s/o Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri

    http://www.bagchee.com/books.php?id=3762

    Sarfaraz's son Omayr is also a PhD and in USA.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Editor,

     

    Good move indeed. Screening of each message was really needed; you must know what happens when democracy is given to mischievous elements. It will keep many goons sit at home and spoil their own neighbourhood instead of emitting negative energies out on the WEB. Most of the standard sites have this feature where site owner maintains the civility rigorously.

     

    Please do not worry about the numbers (quantity), quality is more important for your cause, stick to your belief with your head high without feeling any pressure. Please do not REMOVE any article from the site on calls made by readers even if they are so-called majority. We know many great historical events where majority was proved wrong, be it a political movement or religious or any reform movement.

     

    Also ascertain a limited space for comments to avoid unwarranted cut and paste exercise. Many of the readers are doing it as a FULL time job on this site. Comment must be comments only not a history telling tool. Sorry to say but people MISUSED the liberty you gave them on the site management issue.

     

    Look forward for more surprises ahead.

     

    Best Regards

     

    Shamshad Elahee Ansari


    By Shamshad Elahee Ansari -



  • Dear Satya Paulji,

     

    Thanks very much indeed for your complimnets.

     

    Your suggestion is very valuable. Please keep sharing your thoughts in future as well.

     

    On an average about a hundred new readers join our mailing list. But due to some techinical problems and basically paucity of human resources, we are able to actually actvate thier e-mail IDs on our list only once a week, so we feel like sharing some older, more popular posts with them as well. In future we will try to keep it limited to new postings and those on which some fresh comments have have been posted.

     

    I will think about the publication of newsletters in a book form, though it seems to be a rather difficult proposition. Some other readers have suggested publishing some main articles and a selcection of relevant comments in a book form from time to time. Once I am able to stabilise the funcitnng of the website with God’s help and your blessings, I will think of these projects moer seriously.

     

    Best regards,

     

    Sultan Shahin


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • Date:    Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:26:10 +0530 [03/10/2009 09:26:10 PM IST]

    From: Satya Paul

    To:       Sultan Shahin editor@newageislam.com ,

    Subject:    Should we celebrate The Prophet's birthday? , NewAgeIslam.Com - 10 Mar, 2009

     

    Dear Sultan Shahin,

     

    I am regular reader of New Age Islam newsletter.  I am glad that you are bold enough to challenge the fundamentalist Islam with your rationality. I shall share it with my friends.  May God bless you!

     

     It may be better if you compile your newsletter in the shape of a book every year.

     

     I would also like to suggest that you should not repeat your earlier writings to save your time, energy and save the papers when your readers depute the print, it may reduce your pages but enhance the prestige of it.

     

    I hope you will consider my suggestion.

     

    Yours sincerely,

     

    Satya Paul


    By Satya Paul -



  •  
    Dt. March 11, 2009
     
    Editor newageIslam.com Mr. Sultan Shahin.
     
    It is good that you have finally arrived and  learning the ways to run a website like a responsible citizen,  this new arrangement  made it possible for the likes of Mr Jamsheed basha to come out from hibernation and enlighten us with his what ever limited knowledge of Islam. Now you should also prove your credentials of a practicing Muslim and remove the  Article of Niyaz fahepuri as it is hurting religious sentiments and utterly blasphemous. I also think it would be decent enough for you to remove obnoxious comments of One Mr. Amir Moghul a Pakistani national, since you are now in a position to scrutiny all the messages,  you should take time to edit or completely remove messages that is pointing fingers at individuals, which I believe are still present on your website, with this new setup you are deprived of the excuse that you have been so often giving,  that it is a free world,  it is not now under this new development, leaving little  room for that human error , Your responsibility as an Editor has multliplied manifold now.
    One thing is sure we are going to miss the juicy and intelligent posts by one Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez.  But then everything comes with a price tag.
    May you be guarded against all self invited troubles and strive to be a true Muslim?
     
    Best Regards
     
    SAF RIZVI


    By SAF RIZVI -



  • Sultan Shahin sb

    In the entire sub continent you are left with only one like minded friend Mr. Amir Moghul who is spreading his venom from across the border, from strife torn Pakistan. You keep deleting my good for humanity messages and I will keep re- posting my messages thereby exercising my democratic right, unless of course your site welcomes messages from Pakistani Nationals only, if it appears ‘goondagardi’ to you then let me make it clear it is you who is a Goon here, who is deleting my good messages without any valid reason. You do your job of spreading hatred and hurting people’s religious sentiments and I will do my job of fighting your evil intent, tooth and nail, as a vigilant citizen  and proud daughter of India


    By On behalf of Mrs Kaneez -



  •  As some people were determined to disrupt the continuing debate on Niaz Fatehpuri’s thoughts and personality, continuously posting profanity, personal attacks or other inappropriate and irrelevant comments, the arrangement for posting comments has been modified. From now on your comments will be queued for moderation by site editors and will be published after approval. (Sultan Shahin)

     Dear Sultan Shahin,

    Well done. I really welcome your move. It was my long standing demand as many have taken advantage of the facility available to post unsvoury remarks casting aspersons on individuals and many often using vituperative language. From now on it would be a different story and it would give some civility to the debate. You may lose some but gain many intellectuals in the bargain. All the best with apprecaition.

    One more thing. I would not mind even if you do not post my articles, if they are found to be too offensive to you or too political or too communal. In the event, kindly inform me personally through email. I request you kindly to remove the post of Ayesha Ali, which is too abusive and contain filthy language.

    Jamsheed Basha


    By A.M. Jamsheed Basha, Chennai, India -



  • Dear Readers,

     

    As some people were determined to disrupt the continuing debate on Niaz Fatehpuri’s thoughts and personality, continuously posting profanity, personal attacks or other inappropriate and irrelevant comments, the arrangement for posting comments has been modified. From now on your comments will be queued for moderation by site editors and will be published after approval.

     

    May I also take this opportunity to request commentators to use editing facilities like large font sizes, bold letters, colour and Italics with moderation. Any extra weight makes it that much more difficult for the page to open with speed. This facility is available for the moment but like the facility of direct posting, this too may have to be withdrawn if the present misuse continues.

     

    Editor


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • Dear Amir Mughal,

    Don't you have anything original of your own to say. I have said this earlier and I regret I have to tell this to you again. Can't you be short, direct and to the point? Do you think anyone has the time to read your longish 'cut and paste' comments running into tens of thousands of words.

    Do you realize that if one puts together all your comments under all the articles on this website and then adds up all your original words by removing the 'cut and paste' texts, it would run into a few hundred words and would be equivalent in length to a few comments of say Meraj Zia or Sayyeda Kaneez.

    Your 'cut and paste' habit is so irritating and most of it is so much out of context that Meraj Zia has decided to stop responding to you. There will be others following him soon, if you do not make amends. It is like asking you who is the President of Pakistan and you in your reply instead of simply saying Zardari, naming all the ministers.

    Coming to the above article, who you are debating with? Don't get carried away by the editor's praise of yours, for bringing the debate (I don't know what debate he is talking of, for in a debate there must be atleast one person 'for' and another person 'against' the topic) back on track. What you are doing is going further off the track by brining in sex-related references. What relevance does it have with the Niyaz Fatehpuri or Juhi Shahin?

    If you choose to respond ensure there is no ‘cut and paste’ in it, although I have my doubts whether you would ever stop behaving like a stubborn 3 year old child.


    By HASAN IQBAL -



  • Maulana Nadeem Wajidee I believe would agree with me that Any Muslim who after reciting Kalima says that the Prophet Mohammad saww was  a liar 'naudhbilla'  and used to imagine  that ‘wahis’ are coming to him…Naudhbillah…..such a Muslim is not just an apostate but the worst enemy of Islam and if this is correct then Kafir No. one is Mr Niyaz Fatehpuri (unless of course he repented on his death bed) Kafir no. Two is Juhi Shahin and Kafir No. 3 is Sultan Shahin I don’t think any true Muslim would have any doubt  about the treachery of the three apostates mentioned above.


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Dear sayyeda I'm myself- please discount one avtar from sultan shahin's account in your paranoid counting, i'm sure in due course you will have to discount more.

    And Mr. Editor I second the thought of Dr. Sarkar and Hasan Iqbal by saying that the debate has attaracted record number of comments and readership and has served the purpose for you and Juhi both it's time it be taken off and stored in the archives of New Age islam, in any case now it is only aamir mughal who is acting as a HUMAN BOT in doling out lengthy writeups, rest of us are already looking at other more sensible topics

    regards


    By traveler -



  • Fatehpuri believed that the changes in Islam were brought about by the medium of the hadith  (plural – ahadith, sayings of the Prophet). He claimed that many of the ahadith were simply fabricated to suit the ruler of the day. The reason why he could simply state such a conclusion, taking it for granted that people would agree with him, was that almost all the modernists – Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Shibli Nu’mani and even his contemporaries like Muhammad Iqbal, the philosopher- poet – were to a greater or lesser degree all doubtful of the ahadith in their entirety and were urging Muslims to be cautious in relying on them. Sayyid Ahmad disapproved of classical hadith criticism since it was based on the characters of the people relating the hadith, and not on rational criticism of the actual text.  [See: Zaman, Ulama in Contemporary Islam, 12. Aziz Ahmad, Islamic Modernism in India and Pakista@n: 1857-1964 (London; Bombay; Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1967), 49-50.,  Murad, Intellectual Modernism of Shibli Nu’mani, 186-245. From: Shibli Nu’mani, Sirat al-Nu’man (Lahore: Kutub Kha@nah-i Azi@ziyah, 195?), 170-245. Ibid., Smith, Modern Islam in India, 117]

    =================================

    It is not always possible to give a reference to every 'cut and paste'. Amir Mughal, your blue-eyed boy keeps doing it all the time. [Hasan Iqbal]

    ==============================

    Dear Hasan Sahab,

    Yet another one of such reply [loaded with references and by the way Quran and Hadith have no copyrights] from a Kaafir Wahabi from Across the Border to refute the Hadith Rejector Late. Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri. Read and Enjoy and lets see If Shia Members of this wesite are agreed on the replies of Wahabis against Allama Neyaz Fatehpuri [Allegedly a Deviant as per many Shia Members].

    "QUOTE"

    Why it is Important to stay away from this Deviant Quranites by Shaikh Saleem Al-Hilaalee

    Why it is Important stay away from this Deviant Idea that the Ahaadeeth Should be left aside and the Qur'an alone should be practiced

    I will present some examples to clarify this issue - rather this important point, which is (following) the methodology of the Salaf As-Saalih. There is a statement reported from Al-Farooq, 'Umar Ibn Khattaab, radyAllaahu 'anhu, in which he says: "If the people of innovation and desires debate you with the Qur'aan, then debate them with the Sunnah…"

    What led 'Umar, radyAllaahu 'anhu, to make such a statement? It was due to Allaah's saying, in which He is speaking to the Prophet (saws):

    "And We revealed the dhikr (reminder, Sunnah) so that you (O Muhammad) may give an Explanation to the people of what was (already) revealed to them." [Surah Nahl: 44]

    Is a Muslim, who is firmly grounded in Arabic, knowing its rules and grammar, is this person able to understand the Qur'aan without using the Way of our Messenger (saws)? The answer is no. And if this is not so, then Allaah's saying "so that you (O Muhammad) may give an Explanation to the people of what was (already) revealed to them" would have no significance. And Allaah's Speech is void of having any insignificance in it. Therefore, whoever seeks to understand the Qur'aan through other than the Way of the Messenger (saws), he has gone far astray.

    Furthermore, is this same person (mentioned above) able to understand the Qur'aan and the Sunnah through other than the Way of the Companions of Allaah's Messenger (saws). The answer is also no. This is since, they (the Companions) are the ones who transmitted to us, firstly, the wording of the Qur'aan, which Allaah revealed unto the heart of Muhammad (saws). And secondly, they transmitted to us, the Prophet's Explanation (of it), which has been mentioned in the previously stated ayah, as well his (saws) application of this Noble Qur'aan.
    The Prophet's Explanation (of the Qur'aan) can be divided into three categories:

    1) Speech,

    2) Action and

    3) (Silent) Approval.

    Who are the ones who transmitted his (saws) speech (?) - his Companions. Who are the ones who transmitted his (saws) actions (?) - his Companions. Who are the ones who transmitted his (saws) silent approvals (?) – his Companions. So because of this, it is not possible for us to depend solely on our linguistic capacities for understanding the Qur'aan. Rather, we must seek assistance in understanding the Qur'aan. But this does not mean that we have no need for the (Arabic) language in this matter, no.

    This is why we firmly believe that the non-Arabic speaking people, who have not mastered the Arabic language, fall into many, many errors. This is especially so, since they fall into this fundamental error of not returning back to the Salaf As-Saalih for understanding the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. I do not mean by the words I stated before that we cannot rely on the (Arabic) language for explaining the Qur'aan. How can this be - for if we want to understand the words of the Arabs, then no doubt we must understand the Arabic language. Likewise, in order to understand the Qur'aan and the Sunnah, one must know the Arabic language.
    So we say that the Messenger's (saws) Explanation, which was mentioned in the previous ayah, is divided into three categories: sayings, actions and silent approvals. We will present an example, in order to comprehend that this division is an established fact, which cannot be disputed.

    Allaah says: "And (as for) the male thief and the female thief, cut off their hands." [Surah Al-Maa'idah: 38]
    Look now at how it is not possible for us to explain the Qur'aan based on the language only. The thief according to the language is someone who steals property from some restricted place, regardless of whether this property has value or not. For example someone steals an egg or a loaf of bread – this according to the (Arabic) language is considered a thief. Allaah says: "And (as for) the male thief and the female thief, cut off their hands." Does everyone who steals have to have his hand cut off? The answer is no. Why? It is because the one who is explaining (i.e. the Prophet), who is in charge of explaining that thing which is being explained (i.e. the Qur'aan) has informed us those amongst the thieves whose hands are to be cut off. The one explaining is the Prophet and the thing being explained is the Qur'aan. He (saws) said: "Do not cut off the hand except for (someone who steals) a quarter of a dinar and what is beyond that." So anyone that steals something that is less than a quarter of a dinar, even if according to the language he is called a thief, he is not considered a thief according to the religious definition.

    So here, we come upon a knowledge-based reality, which many students of knowledge are unaware of. On one side, we have an Arabic language, which has been passed down through the generations. And on the other side, we have a religious language, that Allaah Himself has termed and defined, which the Arabs – who spoke the language of the Qur'aan (i.e. Arabic), which the Qur'aan was revealed in - were not aware of before. So if the thief is applied according to the (Arabic) language, it covers all of the thieves. But if the thief is mentioned according to the religious terminology, then not all thieves are included, but rather only those who steal what equals a quarter of a dinar and beyond that. So this is an actual example - it is not possible for us to depend solely on our knowledge of the Arabic language for understanding the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. This is the mistake that many contemporary writers have fallen into nowadays. They place their knowledge of the Arabic language over the Qur'aanic ayaat and the prophetic ahaadeeth. So they interpret these religious texts and come up with innovated interpretations, which the Muslims never heard of in the past.

    Due to this, we say, It is an obligation to understand that the true Call to Islaam is based on three fundamental principles and foundations, which are the

    1) Qur'aan,

    2) the Sunnah and
    3) the way and understanding of the Salaf As-Saalih.

    Therefore the ayah "And (as for) the male thief and the female thief" is not to be interpreted according to the linguistic requirements, but rather according to the requirements of the religious language, which states: "Do not cut off the hand except for (someone who steals) a quarter of a dinar and what is beyond that."

    The remainder of the ayah states: "cut off their hands." What is a hand according to the language? All of this is considered the hand - from the fingertips to the armpit - all of this is the hand. So is the hand to be cut from here or from here or from here? The Messenger of Allaah (saws) has explained this to us with his actions [i.e. to be cut off from the wrist joint]. We don't have any authentic hadeeth – like that one which confirmed which of the thieves is required to have his hand cut off - we don’t have any hadeeth that clearly defines the place from where we are supposed to cut, from the Messenger's Explanation by speech. Instead, there was revealed his Explanation by action - his physical application. How do we come to know of this application (?) from our Salaf As-Saalih - the Companions of the Prophet (saws). This is the second category, which is the Explanation by action. The third category is the approval of Allaah's Messenger for something, which he didn’t reject or forbid. This approval is neither speech from him nor an action that came from him, rather it is an action that came from someone else, which he (saws) saw and approved of. So if the Messenger (saws) saw something and remained silent about it, approving of it, it becomes something approved of and permissible. But if he saw something and rejected it, even if this thing was done by some of his Companions, yet it is authentically established in the texts that he forbade it, then this forbiddance takes precedence over that which he approved of. I will give an example for these two things, based on the ahaadeeth.

    'Abdullaah Ibn 'Umar Ibn Al-Khattaab, [R], said: "We used to drink while standing and eat while walking during the lifetime of the Prophet (saws)."

    So in this hadeeth, 'Abdullaah has informed us of two things:

    1) Drinking while standing, and

    2) Eating while walking.

    And he stated that these were two things that were one at the time of the Prophet (saws). So what is the religious ruling regarding these two matters: drinking while standing and eating while walking?

    If we apply the points we mentioned earlier, we are able to derive the ruling - of course - with a required addition to it, which is that someone knows about what the Messenger of Allaah (saws) has forbidden, through speech, action and (silent) approval.

    So if we refer back to the authentic Sunnah, concerning what is related to the first matter (drinking while standing), which many of the Muslims, if not the majority of them, are being tested with today. And that is opposing the saying of Allaah's Messenger (saws) by drinking while standing. They drink while standing, they (i.e. the men) wear gold and silk. These are facts that no one can deny.

    But did the Prophet (saws) agree with all of this? The answer is that he forbade some of it and he approved some of it. So whatever he forbade then it falls into the bounds of evil (munkar) and whatever he approved, then it falls into the bounds of good (ma'roof). So he forbade drinking while standing in many ahaadeeth. And I do not want to go deep in mentioning all of them - so that firstly, we don’t divert from the time that we have restricted ourselves to discuss this topic so we can take questions at the end, and secondly, this issue requires a special sitting in itself.

    But it is sufficient to present one authentic hadeeth, which has been reported by Imaam Muslim in his Saheeh, from the report of Anas Ibn Maalik, [R], who said: "The Messenger of Allaah (saws) forbade drinking while standing."
    And in another narration [of the hadeeth], he said: "The Messenger of Allaah (saws) restricted (others) from drinking while standing."
    Therefore, this thing which used to be done during the time of Allaah's Messenger (saws), as has been testified to in the report of Ibn 'Umar, was forsaken and restricted. So that thing which they used to do became forbidden, based on the Prophet's (saws) forbiddance of it. But the second part of the hadeeth (of Ibn 'Umar), which states that they used to eat while walking, we did not receive any report that the Messenger of Allaah (saws) forbade this. So we derive from this (silent) approval, a religious ruling. So up to here, we have come to realize the strong need for relying on the way of the Salaf As-Saalih for understanding the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. And that no one can rely on his own knowledge, if not to say his ignorance, to understand the Qur'aan and the Sunnah.
    After making clear this important condition of "upon the methodology of the Salaf As-Saalih", I must give you some examples. In the past, the Muslims split up into many sects. You hear about the Mu'tazilah, you hear about the Murji'ah, you hear about the Khawaarij, you hear about the Zaidiyyah, not to mention the Shi'a and the Raafidah and so on. There is no one amongst these groups, no matter how deep in misguidance they are, that does not share the same saying as the rest of the Muslims, which is that: "We are on the Qur'aan and the Sunnah."

    No one amongst them says: "We don’t follow the Qur'aan and the Sunnah." And if one of them were to say that, he would completely leave the fold of Islaam. So then why did they split up so long as all of them rely on the Qur'aan and the Sunnah - and I bear witness that they do rely on the Qur'aan and the Sunnah for support. But how is this relying done? It is done without relying on the third foundation, which is what the Salaf As-Saalih were upon.

    And there is another additional point that must be noted here - and it is that the Sunnah differs completely from the Noble Qur'aan in the sense that the Noble Qur'aan is preserved between the two covers of the mus-haf, as is well known to everyone. But as for the Sunnah, then for the most part, it is spread out in hundreds, if not thousands of books, amongst which there is a very large portion of them that remain in the hidden world - the world of non- printed manuscripts.

    Furthermore, even these books from them that are in print today, there are those ahaadeeth that are authentic and those that are weak. So those who rely on the Sunnah for support, whether they are from those who ascribe themselves to Ahl-us-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah and the methodology of the Salaf As-Saalih or they are from the other groups - many of them are not able to distinguish the authentic Sunnah from the weak Sunnah. So they fall into contradicting and opposing the Qur’aan and the Sunnah due to their relying on weak and fabricated ahaadeeth. The point is that some of these groups that we just mentioned reject literal meanings stated in the Qur’aan and the prophetic Hadeeth, in the past and also in present days. [For example] The Noble Qur’aan affirms and gives the good tidings to the believers of a very great blessing they will receive in Paradise, which is that the Lord of the Worlds will reveal Himself to them and they will see Him. As one Salafee scholar stated: “The Believers will see Him, (we believe this) without saying how it will be done or making comparisons to that, or giving examples of it.”

    The textual evidences from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah indicate this. So how can some of these past and present-day sects deny this great blessing? As for those groups in the past that rejected this seeing (of Allaah), then there was the Mu’tazilah. Today, according to what I know, there is not found any group on the face of this earth that says: “We are Mu’tazilah. We are following the beliefs of the Mu’tazilah.” However, I did see a foolish man who announced publicly that he was Mu’tazilee. And he rejects many established facts from the Religion, because he acts rashly. So these Mu’tazilah reject this great blessing and they say with their weak intellects: “It is impossible that Allaah can be seen!” So what did they do? Did they reject the Qur’aan? Allaah says in the Qur’aan:

    “Faces on that Day will be bright, looking at their Lord.” [Surah Al-Qiyaamah: 22-23

    Did they reject this ayah? No, they didn’t reject it nor did they disbelieve or apostate. Up to today, the true Ahlus-Sunnah rule that the Mu’tazilah are upon deviance but they do not take them out of the fold of Islaam. This is because they do not reject this ayah, but rather they reject its true meaning, of which its Explanation has been stated in the Sunnah, if we recall. Allaah says about the believers who will enter Paradise: "Faces on that Day will be bright, looking at their Lord." So they changed its meaning – they believe in the ayah's wording but they disbelieve in its meaning. And the wording, as the scholars say, is the mold of the meaning. So if we believe in the wording but disbelieve in the meaning, then this belief (Eemaan) neither nourishes nor avails against hunger. [i.e. is of no benefit]

    So why did these people reject this seeing of Allaah? Their minds are constricted from imagining and conceptualizing that this slave ('abd), that is created and limited is able to see Allaah openly, similar to the case when the Jews requested from Moosaa (to see Allaah), so Allaah prevented them, as is found in that well known story [See Surah Al-Baqarah: 55-59,
    And when ye said: O Moses! We will not believe in thee till we see Allah plainly; and even while ye gazed the lightning seized you.

    Then We revived you after your extinction, that ye might give thanks.

    And We caused the white cloud to overshadow you and sent down on you the manna and the quails, (saying): Eat of the good things wherewith We have provided you - they wronged Us not, but they did wrong themselves.

    And when We said: Go into this township and eat freely of that which is therein, and enter the gate prostrate, and say: "Repentance." We will forgive you your sins and will increase (reward) for the right-doers.

    But those who did wrong changed the word which had been told them for another saying, and We sent down upon the evil-doers wrath from heaven for their evil-doing. [Surah Al-Baqarah: 55-59]
    Allaah said to Moosaa]: "Look upon the mountain, if it stands still, then you shall see Me." [Surah Al-A'raaf: 143]

    Their intellects were narrowed so they felt obliged to play with the Qur'aanic text and change its meaning. Why (?) - because their Eemaan (Faith) in the Unseen is weak and their Faith in their intellect is stronger than their Faith in the Unseen, which they were commanded to have faith in, in the beginning of Surah Al-Baqarah [Chapter 2 of Quran]:

    "Alif Laam Meem.

    This is the Book in which there is no doubt - a guidance to the Muttaqeen -

    [Surah Al-Baqarah: 1-2]

    (who are they?)
    -Those who believe (i.e. have faith) in the Unseen."
    [Surah Al-Baqarah:3]

    Allaah is Unseen, so whenever our Lord talks about Himself, we must affirm that it is the truth and we must believe in it, because our intellects are very limited. The Mu'tazilah did not acknowledge this point, so that is why they denied and rejected many of the facts established in the Religion, such as Allaah's saying:

    "Faces on the Day will be bright, looking at their Lord." [Surah Al-Qiyaamah: 22-23]

    This goes the same for the other ayah, which is more obscure to these people than the first ayah, and it is the saying of Allaah:

    "For those people who do good, they will receive Al-Husnaa (goodness) and Ziyaadah (an increase to that)." [Surah Yoonus: 26]

    Al-Husnaa (goodness) here refers to Paradise, and the Ziyaadah (increase) here means, seeing Allaah in the Hereafter. This is what is stated in a hadeeth reported in Saheeh Muslim, with an authentic chain of narration from Sa'ad Ibn Abee Waqqaas, [R], who said: Allaah's Messenger (saws) said: "'For those people who do good, they will receive Al-Husnaa' - (means) Paradise -'and Ziyaadah' - (means) seeing Allaah."

    The Mu'tazilah and also the Shi'ah, who are Mu'tazilah in their Creed, reject that Allaah will be seen, which is affirmed in the first ayah and explained by the Messenger of Allaah in the second ayah. And there are many ahaadeeth (reaching the level of Mutawaatir) from the Prophet (saws) about this. So their ta'weel (distorting the true meaning) of the Qur'aan brought them to reject the authentic ahaadeeth of Allaah's Messenger (saws). So they left from the realm of being considered the Saved Sect - "That which I and my Companions are upon." Allaah's Messenger believed and had firm faith that the believers would see their Lord, because it is reported in the two Saheeh collections from the narration of a large group of Companions, such as Abu Sa'eed Al-Khudree, Anas Ibn Maalik - and outside of the Saheeh collections – there was Abu Bakr As-Siddeeq and so on.

    The Prophet (saws) said: "Indeed you will see your Lord on the Day of Judgement, just as you see the moon on a (clear) night in which there is a full moon – you have no problem in seeing it."

    What is meant by this, is that you will not have any problem seeing Allaah just as there is no problem in seeing the moon on a clear night of in which there is a full moon, with no clouds. They reject these ahaadeeth based on their intellects, so they have weak Eemaan (Faith).

    This is one example of the things that some sects of the past fell into, and also some sects of the present, such as the Khawaarij, believe in this too. From their ranks are the Ibaadiyyah who nowadays have become active in calling people to their misguidance. They have articles and treatises that they are spreading and distributing, by which they revive the many deviations, which the Khawaarij were known for (doing) in the past, such as their rejecting that Allaah will be seen in Paradise.

    Now we will present you with a present day example, which is the Qadiyanis. Maybe you heard of them. These people say as we say: “I bear witness that there is no god that has the right to be worshipped except Allaah, and that Muhammad is the Messenger of Allaah." They pray the five daily prayers, they establish the Jumu'ah prayer, they make Hajj and 'Umrah to Allaah's sacred house. There is no difference between us and between them - they are like the Muslims. However, they differ with us in many aspects of the Creed, such as their belief that the prophethood did not end. They believe that prophets will come after Muhammad and they claim that one of them came already to Qadiyan, a land in India. So (they say that) anyone that doesn’t believe in this prophet that came to them, then he is a disbeliever. How can they say this when the ayah is clear:

    "Muhammad is not the father of any amongst your men, but (rather he is) the Messenger of Allaah and the seal (last) of the prophets." [Surah Ahzaab: 40]

    How can they say this, when the ahaadeeth have reached the level of Tawaatur, (stating): "There is no prophet after me." So they changed the meaning of the Qur'aan and the Sunnah and they did not interpret the Qur'aan and the Sunnah as the Salaf As-Saalih interpreted them. So the Muslims also followed them in that without any disagreement occurring amongst them, until there came this deviant and misguided person, named Mirza Ghulaam Ahmad Al-Qadiyani who claimed to be a prophet. And he has a long story, which is not the focus of our subject now. So he deceived many people who don’t have knowledge of these facts, which preserves the Muslim from deviating, just as these Qadiyanis deviated with this Dajjaal who claimed prophethood for himself.

    What did they do with Allaah's saying: "But (rather he is) the Messenger of Allaah and the seal (last) of the prophets?" They said that it does not mean that there is no prophet after him, but rather the word khaatam refers to the Prophet's adornment. So just as the khaatam (seal or ring) is the adornment of the finger, then likewise, Muhammad is the adornment of the prophets. So then they did not disbelieve in the ayah. They did not say that Allaah didn't reveal this ayah unto the heart of Muhammad.

    Rather, they disbelieved in its true meaning. So what good is having faith in the wording if there is no faith in the true meaning. If you have no doubt about this fact, then what is the way of coming to known the meanings of the Qur'aan and the Sunnah. You already know the way. It is not for us to rely on our knowledge of the Arabic Language, nor to interpret the Qur'aan and the Sunnah with our desires or our traditions, or our blind following or our madh-habs or our (sufi) orders, but rather, the only way is - as is commonly said:

    "And every good is in following those who came before (Salaf), while every evil is in the innovating of those who came after (Khalaf)." We hope that this serves as a


    "reminder to the one who has a heart or lends his ear while being heedful." [Surah Qaaf: 37]

    [Courtesy: Shaikh Saleem Al-Hilaalee] "UNQUOTE"
    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

    Fatehpuri believed that the changes in Islam were brought about by the medium of the hadith  (plural – ahadith, sayings of the Prophet). He claimed that many of the ahadith were simply fabricated to suit the ruler of the day. The reason why he could simply state such a conclusion, taking it for granted that people would agree with him, was that almost all the modernists – Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Shibli Nu’mani and even his contemporaries like Muhammad Iqbal, the philosopher- poet – were to a greater or lesser degree all doubtful of the ahadith in their entirety and were urging Muslims to be cautious in relying on them. Sayyid Ahmad disapproved of classical hadith criticism since it was based on the characters of the people relating the hadith, and not on rational criticism of the actual text.  [See: Zaman, Ulama in Contemporary Islam, 12. Aziz Ahmad, Islamic Modernism in India and Pakista@n: 1857-1964 (London; Bombay; Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1967), 49-50.,  Murad, Intellectual Modernism of Shibli Nu’mani, 186-245. From: Shibli Nu’mani, Sirat al-Nu’man (Lahore: Kutub Kha@nah-i Azi@ziyah, 195?), 170-245. Ibid., Smith, Modern Islam in India, 117]

    =================================

    It is not always possible to give a reference to every 'cut and paste'. Amir Mughal, your blue-eyed boy keeps doing it all the time. [Hasan Iqbal]

    ==============================

    Dear Hasan Sahab,

    Another one of such reply [loaded with references and by the way Quran and Hadith have no copyrights] from a Kaafir Wahabi from Across the Border to refute the Hadith Rejector Late. Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri. Read and Enjoy.

    Decisions of Allah and Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]

    Allah said:


    "It is not befitting for a believing man or woman, when a matter has been decided by Allaah and His Messenger, to have any option about their decision." [33:36]

    This Verse indicates that when it is confirmed that Allah or Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] have made a decision or have informed about a particular matter, then no believer, male or female, may choose differently. Any opposing choice would contradict Eemaan.

    Ash-Shafi'ee reported a consensus among the scholars of the Sahaabah, the Tabi'een, and their followers, that:

    "If a sunnah of Allah's Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]  becomes manifest to a person, he does not have any choice but to follow it, regardless of what other people say." No Muslim scholar disputes or doubts the truth of this statement. The only evidence that people are required to follow [besides Allah's Book] is the words of the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]

    "who does not say anything out of (his own) desire" [53:3]

    Other people's talks could, at best, be acceptable to follow. But in no way may they oppose or outweigh the Texts (of the Quran and Sunnah). We ask Allah to protect us from the failure [incurred on those who do not abide by this].

    The Guidance Is in Obeying the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]

    Also, Allah said:
    "Say: Obey Allah and obey the Messenger: but if you turn away then he (the Messenger) is only responsible for the duty placed on him, and you for that placed on you. If you obey him, you shall be on right guidance. The Messenger's duty is only clear deliverance [of the Message]" [24:54]

    Note that repeating the verb "obey" here has an important significance that will be discussed below.

    Here Allah makes obeying the Messenger (saws) a condition for guidance; guidance cannot be acquired without this obedience. The duty of the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]  is to deliver the Message; and people's duty is to follow, obey, and submit to him. Bukhari reported that Az-Zuhri1 said:

    "From Allah [comes] the knowledge; from the Messenger (saws) [comes] the deliverance [of the knowledge]; and from us [comes] the submission [to the Message]."

    Thus if people neglect their duty of belief and obedience, they would harm themselves not him; his responsibility is not to make them believe, but only to deliver the Message to them; it is not required from him that people be guided and successful.

    Addressing the Believers

    And Allah said:

    "Believers! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and those charged with authority among you; if you differ in anything, refer it to Allaah and the Messenger (for judgment) if you (truly) believe in Allaah and the Last Day: that is best, and most suitable for final determination" [4:59]

    Allah is requiring obedience to Him and to His Messenger (saws). He starts the ayah with an address to the "believers", hinting that what is required thereafter is a consequence of that name with which they are addressed.

    This is similar to saying, "You whom Allah has favoured and enriched with His bounties, be good to others as Allah has been good to you." And like, "Learned man, teach people what would benefit them." And, "Ruler, rule with justice." And so on.

    For this reason, legislative matters in the Qur'an are frequently addressed to the believers, starting the address with "Believers". For example Allah says:

    "Believers, fasting is prescribed for you..." [2:183]

    And He says:

    "Believer, when the call is proclaimed for prayer on Friday, hasten earnestly to the remembrance of Allaah..." [62:9]

    And He says:

    "Believers, fulfill the contracts... " [5:1]

    Addressing the believers like this carries the implication that: "If you are true believers, you should perform the following action, because it is a requirement for the integrity and sincerity of Iman."

    To Obey the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] is to Obey Allah.

    "Believers! Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger and those charged with authority among you; if you differ in anything, refer it to Allaah and the Messenger (for judgment) if you (truly) believe in Allaah and the Last Day: that is best, and most suitable for final determination" [4:59]


    In the above Verse (4:59), Allah demands obedience to Him, the Messenger, and those of authority. The verb "obey" is applied only once in regard to the Messenger and those of authority. One might expect the opposite - [that it would be applied only once in regard to both Allah and the Messenger] because:

    "He who obeys the Messenger obeys Allaah indeed" [4:80]

    However, this usage here has a subtle meaning. It implies that the Messenger must be obeyed in all that he commands, even if it were not something specifically required in Qur'an.

    Let one then not imagine that the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] should only be obeyed when his commands confirm the Qur'an, otherwise he need not be obeyed. [In refutation of such fallacy, al-Miqdam bin Ma'di Yakrib (R) narrated that] Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] said :

    "There will be a man with full stomach, reclining on his pillow, who will hear a command from me and say, "Let the judge between us (in this matter) be Allah's Book: we obey whatever we find in it." [Know that] indeed, I have been given the Book and, with it, that which is similar to it (the Sunnah)." 2

    However, obeying the people of authority is not required independently, but as part of obeying the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]. This fact is confirmed by the hadith (narrated by Ibn 'Umar (R)):

    "One should listen and obey (those charged with authority) whether it were something he liked or hated, as long as he is not commanded to disobey Allaah (T). If he is commanded to disobey Allaah, he should neither listen nor obey."3

    Toward the end of this ayah (4:59), Allah emphasizes obeying the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]  by saying (what means), "... refer it to Allaah and the Messenger ...." rather than saying, "... and to the Messenger ...". Referring matters to the Qur'an is equivalent to referring them to Allah and the Messenger. Also, Allah's judgement is the same as His Messenger's; and the Messenger's judgment is the same as Allah's.

    Thus if you refer your disputes to Allah, i.e. to His Book, then you refer to His Messenger (saws) as well. And if you refer to His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH], then you refer to Allah as well. This is one of the subtleties of the Qur'an.

    Uulul Amar

    Two views have been expressed by the Sahaabah and the 'ulama (scholars) as to who are the ones "charged with authority". The first is that they are the 'ulama and the other is that they are the rulers.

    In reality, it applies to both groups, because both the 'ulama and the rulers are in charge of the affairs concerning which Allah has sent His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]


    As for the 'ulama, they are charged with protecting the Deen, explaining it, teaching it, and refuting those who deviate from it or try to alter it. Allah gave them this charge, as He said:

    "These [prophets] were the men to whom We granted the Book and Judgement and Prophethood; if these people [of the Scripture] reject them, behold! We shall entrust their charge to a new people who do not reject them..." [6:89]

    This is indeed a great assignment to the 'ulama that requires from people to obey and follow them.

    And as for the rulers, they are charged with establishing the Deen, safeguarding it, compelling people to adhere to it, and punishing those who deviate from it.

    Thus these two groups are in charge of the affairs of people, and other people are their followers and subjects.

    When Dispute is arises.

    Furthermore, there is in the above ayah (4:59) a clear evidence that all matters of disagreement, in all aspects of the Deen, should be referred to Allah and His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]  - and to no one else.

    Anyone referring disputes to other than Allah and His Messenger opposes this command by Allah. And anyone who calls to other than Allah's and His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]  's judgment to resolve disagreements, calls indeed with the call of Jahiliyyah4 .

    One does not truly enter the realm of Iman until he refers all differences arising among people to Allah and His Messenger. For this reason, this ayah continues as, "... if you believe in Allah and the Last Day..."

    Thus if this condition (of referring disputes to Allah and His Messenger) is not satisfied by a person, this implies the absence of Iman in him.

    This ayah should be a sufficient clarification and guidance in this matter (of obeying the Messenger). It constitutes a protection and a support for those who abide by it; and it is a powerful refutation and attack against those who deny it, as Allah said:

    "... That he who would perish might perish in clear evidence [of the truth], and that he who would remain alive might live in clear evidence [of the truth]. And verily Allaah is All-Hearing, All Knowing..." [8:42]

    The earlier and later Muslims agreed that referring matters to Allah means referring them to His Book, and referring matters to the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] means referring them to him personally during his life, and to his Sunnah after his death.

    The Excellence of Obeying the Messenger

    The above ayah (4:59) ends with, "... that is best, and most suitable for final determination. .." This means, "That with which I commanded you (to obey Me and obey My Messenger and the people of authority, and to refer disputes to Me and My Messenger) is better for you in this life and in the Hereafter; it leads to your happiness in both lives. Therefore, it is best and most rewarding for you."

    This indicates that obeying Allah and His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH], and taking them as the referees, is the means to immediate and continued happiness.

    Anyone who examines closely the evils of the world will find that each of them is caused by disobeying the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]. Similarly, every good in the world results from obeying him. Furthermore, all the evils and pains in the Hereafter result from disobeying Prophet Mohammad [PBUH].

    Thus, all the evils in both lives are caused by disobeying the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]
    and by its consequences. If people obeyed Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]  properly, there would be no evil on earth. This applies equally to the general natural catastrophes and calamities, and to the personal evils, pains, and sorrow that occur to people.

    In obeying Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]  is a refuge and a protection for those who want to prosper and be happy. And this prosperity and happiness cannot be achieved until one strives first to learn what the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] taught, and then confirm it with true actions.

    There are two additional actions which complete the happiness arising from truly obeying the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]. The first is to invite people to obey Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] , and the second is to have patience and perseverance in fulfilling this mission.

    First, knowing the Message of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH].


    Second, acting in accordance with this knowledge.

    Third, spreading this knowledge among people and inviting them to it.
     Fourth, persevering and striving in accomplishing all this.

    One who seeks to learn how the Sahaabah (R) lived and who want to follow them should know that this was indeed their way [so let him follow it).
    Footnotes

    1. One of the Tabi'een. He is a famous scholar of Hadith and one of the important teachers of al-Bukhari.

    2. Recorded by Ahmad, Abu Dawud, and others; judged authentic by al-Albani (Sahih ul-Jaami no. 2640).

    3. Recorded by al-Bukhari and Muslim.

    4. Jaahiliyyah: The state of ignorance and disbelief which prevailed in the Arab Peninsula before Islam.


    Following Falsehood: The People of Misery By Imaam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah

    Deviating from the Messenger

    Allah said addressing His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]

    "Say, 'Were I to go astray, I would only stray to the hurt of myself; but if I am guided, it is because of what my Lord reveals unto me; He is indeed All-Hearing, Ever-Near.'" [34:50]

    This carries a clear evidence that the Messenger's guidance occurs only through the wahy1 How surprising it is then to find men with confused minds and conflicting opinions claim to be guided! How does this guidance reach them?

    "He whom Allah guides is rightly guided; but as for him whom He leaves to stray, you will find no protector to lead him" [18:17]

    What misguidance is worse than that of one who claims that guidance does not occur through the wahy! He would rather refer matters to the opinions of this and that person! Great indeed is Allah's bounty toward one whom He guarded from such a serious deviation and a great disaster. All praise is due to Allah, Lord of the peoples.

    Also, Allah said:
    "A Book has been revealed unto you, so let there be no tightness in your chest about it - that you might warn [people] with it, and remind the Believers. Follow [people] what has been sent down to you from your Lord, and do not follow other than Him - as allies or protectors. How seldom do you remember [the admonition]. " [7:2-3]

    Here, Allah commands people to follow what He revealed to His Messenger, and He forbids following others. One can either follow the Revelation or follow others - as allies; Allah does not give other than these two alternatives. Thus, anyone not following the wahy is indeed following falsehoods and other allies instead of Allah. By Allah's Grace, this should be clear and obvious.

    And Allah said:

    "On the Day when the wrong-doer will bite his hands [in despair], saying, 'Oh! Would that I had followed the path shown to me by the Messenger! Ah! Woe is me! Would that I had never taken so- and-so for a confidant! Indeed, he lead me astray from the Message (of Allah) after it had come to me! Ah! Satan is ever a betrayer of man.'" [25:27-29]

    Anyone who follows a person other than the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH], abandoning his guidance for the sake of that person's words or opinions, will surely say these same words. This is why Allah refers here to the confidant as 'so-and-so', which is a generic term that could apply to any person taken as a confidant instead of Allah.

    This applies then to confidants whose friendship is based on anything other than obeying the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]: their friendship will eventually turn to enmity and accusations, as Allah said:

    "The confidants on that Day will be foes unto one another - except the pious." [43:67]

    Allah describes the plight of the followers and of those whom they followed in several places of His Book; He says for instance:

    "On the Day when their faces will be tossed about in the Fire, they will say, 'Woe to us! Would that we had obeyed Allah and obeyed the Messenger!' And they will say, 'Our Lord! We obeyed our chiefs and our great men, and they lead us astray from the right path. Our Lord! Give them double suffering, and banish them utterly from Your Grace!'" [33:66-68]

    Those people will wish that they had obeyed Allah and His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]. But they will do it at a time when wishes avail them nothing. They will confess that they had obeyed their chiefs and leaders and disobeyed the Messenger (saws), acknowledging that they had no excuse for doing so. This realization will lead them to request doubling the punishment and curses for those leaders.

    This carries an important lesson and a useful admonition for a man of reason, Indeed, assistance [in seeing the truth] is from Allah only.

    Partners In Deviation

    Allah said,
    "Who could be more unjust than one who devises lies against Allah or rejects His messages? For such, their appointed portion must reach them from the Book [of Decrees] until, when Our messengers [of death] arrive to take their souls, they say, 'Where are the things that you used to invoke besides Allah?' They will reply, 'They have forsaken us!' And thus they will testify against themselves that they had been denying the truth (kaafirs).

    He (Allah) will say, 'Join those peoples who have preceded you, of men and jinn2, in the Fire.' Every time a new people enters, it curses its sister people [that went before].

    Once they have all joined each other in it, the last of them will say about the first, 'Our Lord! It is these who have misled us, so give them a double suffering in the Fire.' He will reply, 'Every one of you will have a double suffering, but this you do not understand.'

    Then the first of them will say to the last, "See then! You have no advantage over us, so taste of the suffering for all that you did!'" [7:37-39]


    A sensible person should reflect on these ayat, and on the lessons they carry. The first aayah (Al Araaf 37) mentions the two classes of evildoers:

    Those who start fallacies, establish injustice, and call people to it. Thus they distort the truth and initiate falsehood.

    Those who reject or deny the truth.

    Every evildoer belongs to one of these two classes. If, in addition, he invites people to his evil and drives them away from the truth, then he deserves a double penalty because of his disbelief and evil. For this reason Allah says:

    "Those who disbelieve and hinder people from the Path of Allah, for them will We add penalty to penalty because of the mischief that they used to spread" [16:88]

    They deserve a double punishment because of their double evil. But as for those who commit kufr (disbelief) without coaxing others toward it, Allah does not threaten them with a doubled suffering:


    "For those who disbelieve, there is a grievous punishment.. ." [58:4]

    In the above ayat (7:37-39), Allah informs that what had been decreed for the evildoers in their first life reaches them, such as their life span, sustenance, etc.

    Then, when death comes to them, they part with their old claims, acknowledge their falsehood, and become witnesses against themselves.

    Allah commands them to enter into the Fire where many previous peoples have preceded them. Every time a new people enters, its members curse their ancestors who preceded them into the Fire. When they are all in it, the later nations request doubled penalties for the previous ones because they led them astray and drove them away from obeying Allah's messengers.

    Allah replies that the punishment will be doubled for both the "followers" and the "followed", in accordance with their deviation and disbelief, and that a generation does not know what doubled suffering other generations deserve.

    The former generation then tells the later, "You do not possess any advantage over us. You had your own messengers who showed you the truth, warned you against our deviation, and forbade you from following or imitating us. Yet you rejected them and insisted on following and imitating us, and on forsaking the guidance of the messengers. Thus what advantage do you have over us, when you strayed just as we did, and when you gave up the truth just like us? You strayed because of us, just as we strayed because of other people. You can claim no advantage over us, and thus you should taste the suffering because of what you earned yourselves."

    By Allah, this is indeed a strong admonition and an eloquent advice for any living heart! These, and similar ayat would awaken the hearts of those who migrate to Allah (T). But as for the lazy people, they have no effect on them.

    Untrue Followers

    The above discussion deals with the followers who share in the deviation with those whom they follow.

    Another case is that of the followers who turn away from whom they claim to follow, taking a different course than theirs, while maintaining false claims of true compliance with them. Allah  mentions such people in the following:

    "Then would those who had been followed disown their followers; they (the followers) would see the suffering [awaiting them], and all relations between them would be cut off. And then those followers would say: 'If we can only have one more chance: we would disown them as they have disowned us.' Thus will Allah show them the fruits of their deeds as nothing but bitter regrets. Nor will there be a way for them out of the Fire" [2:166-167]

    The followed ones are truly guided. Their "followers" claim to adhere to them when, in reality, they follow a different way and guidance. They claim to love them, presuming that this love would benefit them despite their deviation. But they will discover on the Day of Judgement that they will be disowned by them. They take them as allies instead of Allah, imagining this to benefit them!

    Great indeed is the deviation of a person who takes other than Allah and His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] for allies and confidants, making peace or hostility for their sake, and getting satisfied or infuriated for their cause. Regardless of how numerous his deeds are, or how much effort and toil he puts into them, they will be futile on the Day of Judgement, and will only add to his misery and regret.

    His allegiance and enmity, love and hatred, satisfaction and anger, and so on, are not sincerely maintained for Allah and His Messenger; because of this, Allah will shatter his deeds and sever his connections.

    The Only Un-severed Tie

    Thus, on the Day of Resurrection, all connections and allegiances that had not been for Allah will be severed, leaving only one tie: that which connects a 'abd to his Lord.

    This tie is maintained by:

    Continued migration to Allah and to His Prophet Mohammad [PBUH].


    Continuously purifying one's acts of worship to Allah. This includes love, hatred, giving, preventing, taking as allies or enemies, and the like.

    Continuously purifying one's adherence to the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]. This includes abandoning others' opinions for what he says, discarding anything that disagrees with his guidance, and associating none with him in this adherence.

    This is the only tie that will not be severed. It is the true relationship between a 'abd and his Lord: the relationship of pure 'uboodiyyah. It is the only thing that he continues to long for, no matter how far he departs from it.

    This relationship [with Allah] is the only one that profits man. Nothing else will profit him in any of his three lives: the first, the intermediate (barzakh), and the final eternal life. He cannot endure or live or be happy and successful without this relationship.
    Conclusion

    In conclusion, on the Day of Judgement Allah will sever all connections and ties that are among people in this life, sparing only the ties between them and Him - the ties that reflect pure 'uboodiyyah (servitude), which can only be accomplished through true adherence to Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]. Allah said:
    "And We shall turn to whatever deeds they did (in the first life), and We shall make such deeds as floating dust scattered about" [25:23]

    So all the deeds of the first life conflicting with the way and guidance of Allah's messengers, and with which was sought anything other than Allah's Countenance, will be turned by Allah (on the Day of Judgement) into scattered dust, availing their owners nothing.

    This is indeed one of the greatest miseries on the Day of Judgement: for one to find all he did completely lost and worthless, at a time when one will be in the greatest need for every good deed.

    FOOTNOTES

    Wahy: The revelation.

    Jinn: An invisible creation that Allah (T) made from fire and smoke. Like human beings, the jinns have a choice of action, and are accountable for their deeds. Satan is one of the jinns.

    The People of Misery By Imaam ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah From the book Ar-Risaalat ut-Tabukiyyah Translation & Comments by Muhammad al-Jibaali
     "UNQUOTE"
    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

    Dear Mr. Sultan Shahin,

    I would have loved to address this post to Niyaz Fatehpuri but since than man is long dead and I do not notice anyone explicitly supporting his theory except you, by way of putting it up on your website for the sake of a debate as you have said. My condolences to you on the passing away of your dear friend. Pray to God that his soul rests in peace.

    No I haven't changed as you have mentioned. My beliefs remain intact Alhamdolillah. If you noticed a change in my tone it was because of my anger at your having put up extracts from a book on Niyaz Fatehpuri who did not believe Quran to be the word of God. Niyaz Fatehpuri therefore was not a Muslim. All the sects of Muslims despite their differences believe in Quran to be a word God. There cannot be a debate on a theory of a Non-Muslim, which is a non-issue. The kind of blasphemy Niyaz Fatehpuri indulged in is worse than that of Salman Rushdie and Taslima Nasreen.

    As for your comments on Sayyeda Kaneez, I am disappointed by the same. She has as much the right to speak her mind as do you, I, Meraj Zia and Amir Mughal and others. Some of us may sometimes not completely agree with her choice of words but as we have all come to understand that is the way she is. Your repeated remarks on her stealing of an article and drawing parallels with Basha's act are out of place as Mr. Meraj Zia has pointed out; that there is a difference between a comment and an article. She never called them her own. It is not always possible to give a reference to every 'cut and paste'. Amir Mughal, your blue-eyed boy keeps doing it all the time.

    As an editor of this website it is unfair for you to take sides. Your job as a referee is to diffuse and not to ignite. We spend our valuable time posting comments on the articles you put up on this website. Just as the number of viewers determines the TRP of any television programme it is the number of readers and their comments that determines the rating of a website. If you do a quick check you would realise that it is a about a dozen of us comprising Amir Mughal, Sayedda Kaneez, Meraj Zia, Basha, Manzoor Illahi, Aslam Khan Barelvi, myself and some others who account for over 50% of the comments on this website.

    If people stop commenting on the articles or on each others comments what would be the articles or for that matter the website worth. Please therefore do not see us as Shias or Sunnis or Wahabis. It hurts. Treat us as readers and commentators and value whatever we have to say. You may not always agree with us but that is what blogs, posts and comments are about.

    Coming back to Niyaz Fatehpuri and your daughter Juhi Shahin's book, this article has already attracted a record number of comments and served the purpose. Interestingly enough there hasn't been much said on the article itself. Most of the comments are directed at you for putting up the article. It's time now for you to take it off the front page and end this useless debate and brick-batting.

      


    By HASAN IQBAL -



  • Fatehpuri believed that the changes in Islam were brought about by the medium of the hadith  (plural – ahadith, sayings of the Prophet). He claimed that many of the ahadith were simply fabricated to suit the ruler of the day. The reason why he could simply state such a conclusion, taking it for granted that people would agree with him, was that almost all the modernists – Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Shibli Nu’mani and even his contemporaries like Muhammad Iqbal, the philosopher- poet – were to a greater or lesser degree all doubtful of the ahadith in their entirety and were urging Muslims to be cautious in relying on them. Sayyid Ahmad disapproved of classical hadith criticism since it was based on the characters of the people relating the hadith, and not on rational criticism of the actual text.  [See: Zaman, Ulama in Contemporary Islam, 12. Aziz Ahmad, Islamic Modernism in India and Pakista@n: 1857-1964 (London; Bombay; Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1967), 49-50.,  Murad, Intellectual Modernism of Shibli Nu’mani, 186-245. From: Shibli Nu’mani, Sirat al-Nu’man (Lahore: Kutub Kha@nah-i Azi@ziyah, 195?), 170-245. Ibid., Smith, Modern Islam in India, 117]

    ====================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    BACK TO THE ORIGINAL TOPIC OF NIYAZ FATEHPURI:

    These Hadith rejectors give argument that several Hadiths are balsphemous regarding Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]'s Honour and they also say that Hadith is basically in Clash with Science

     

    All the Prophets [PBUT] were human [Humans but blessed amongst Human Men - Afzalul Bashar]. People object on several Hadiths [SOME CONSIDER THESE HADITHS BLASPHEMIC] related with human feelings in the Prophets [PBUT].


    As a human being it was natural for the Prophets [PBUT] to have human feelings like e.g. Anger-Wrath [a must to fight battle against disbelievers and when someone amongst Muslims show something against the Shariah] Lust [a natural thing for a married man for his wife to produce children, can any human being [PROPHETS - PBUT are included] produce children without lust?], Hunger, Thirst, Sadness [Can any human being cry without being sad], Joy [can anyone laugh or smile without the feelings of joy]. Human being also get injured and get sick and they also die and all the things happened with the Prophets [PBUT], Human being also forget things, list goes on and on.......

    Prophets [Peace be upon them] were humans not Angels.



    1- We sent not before thee (any messengers) save men whom We inspired from among the folk of the townships - Have they not travelled in the land and seen the nature of the consequence for those who were before them? And verily the abode of the Hereafter, for those who ward off (evil), is best. Have ye then no sense? – [YUSUF (JOSEPH) Chapter 12 Verse 109]
    2- Their messengers said: Can there be doubt concerning Allah, the Creator of the heavens and the earth? He calleth you that He may forgive you your sins and reprieve you unto an appointed term. They said: Ye are but mortals like us, who would fain turn us away from what our fathers used to worship. Then bring some clear warrant. Their messengers said unto them: We are but mortals like you, but Allah giveth grace unto whom He will of His slaves. It is not ours to bring you a warrant unless by the permission of Allah. In Allah let believers put their trust! [IBRAHIM (ABRAHAM) Chapter 14 Verse 10 and 11]

    3- Say: I am only a mortal like you. My Lord inspireth in me that your Allah is only One Allah. And whoever hopeth for the meeting with his Lord, let him do righteous work, and make none sharer of the worship due unto his Lord. [AL-KAHF (THE CAVE) Chapter 18 Verse 110]

    Death of the Prophets [PBUT] [natural for a human being to die]

    We appointed immortality for no mortal before thee. What! if thou diest, can they be immortal! [AL-ANBIYA (THE PROPHETS) Chapter 21 - Verse 34]

    Lo! thou wilt die, and lo! they will die; [AZ-ZUMAR (THE TROOPS, THRONGS)Chapter 39 - Verse 30]

    Allah says:

    And whatsoever the messenger giveth you, take it. And whatsoever he forbiddeth, abstain (from it). And keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is stern in reprisal. [AL-HASHR (EXILE, BANISHMENT) Chapter 59 - Verse 7]

    People who felt Islam as a burden on their shoulders or suffered from inferiority complex started joining them, in Pakistan alone you would find many showbiz personalities dancing about and saying 'I get my inspirations from the Qur'an'. Their basic Ideology is that Ahaadeeth should be left aside and the Qur'an alone should be practiced, to prove their ideology they made various criticisms on hadeeth.

    For each criticism on Hadith, adequate response from the Qur'an is given:


    1 - Any Hadith that go against nature or natural sciences is fabricated.

    We said: O fire, be coolness and peace for Abraham, [AL-ANBIYA (THE PROPHETS) Chapter 21 - Verse 69]

    What are we to say about fires which are meant to bring coolness? If we are to reject Ahaadeeth on this principal then the same can be said for this ayah as well, but the Ahl-e-Quran would never raise this point when discussing Ayahs; why this prejudice against hadeeth only? An explanation has never been given.


    2 - Hadith suggests that Allah has a throne and the sun prostrates Allah.

    Hast thou not seen that unto Allah payeth adoration whosoever is in the heavens and whosoever is in the earth, and the sun, and the moon, and the stars, and the hills, and the trees, and the beasts, and many of mankind [AL-HAJJ (THE PILGRIMAGE) Chapter 22 - Verse 18]

    Not only the sun but other things as well prostrate Allah.

    The seven heavens and the earth and all that is therein praise Him, and there is not a thing but hymneth His praise; but ye understand not their praise. Lo! He is ever Clement, Forgiving. [AL-ISRA (ISRA', THE NIGHT JOURNEY, CHILDREN OF ISRAEL) Chapter 17 - Verse 44]

    We can't understand their worship but we have to acknowledge their worship whether it is mentioned in Qur'an or Ahaadeeth, why reject one and acknowledge the other?

    Now does Allah have a throne?

    and His Throne was upon the water [HUD (HUD) Chapter 11 - Verse 7]

    3 - Any hadith will be considered fabricated which suggests that the tree cried.

    And we subdued the hills and the birds to hymn (His) praise along with David. We were the doers (thereof). [AL-ANBIYA (THE PROPHETS) Chapter 21 - Verse 79]

    What are we to say about mountains which praise Allah, not only that some rocks fear Allah.

    And indeed there are rocks which fall down for the fear of Allah.[AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 74]

    So Shibli, Sir Syed, Pervez, Fatehpuri or even Imam Abu Hanifah [May Allah have mercy on his soul] first reject these Verses then criticize Hadiths; if not and certainly not then why not believe in Hadith which carry a similar meaning and are also revealed by Allah?

    4 - Hadith grants paradise to people if they say the kalima only.

    Well, some get paradise by saying our lord is Allah.

    Lo! those who say: Our Lord is Allah, and afterward are upright, the angels descend upon them, saying: Fear not nor grieve, but hear good tidings of the paradise which ye are promised. [FUSSILAT (EXPLAINED IN DETAIL) Chapter 41 - Verse 30]

    The hadith is just like the above verse, where after saying 'Our lord Allah' they have to remain firm in their belief.

    5 - Hadith forgives people 's sins if they perform small acts such as ablution.

    Ablution is a very commendable act, it is done for salah but the Quran grants forgiveness just by saying a word and prostrating.

    enter the gate prostrate, and say: "Repentance. " We will forgive you your sins and will increase (reward) for the right-doers. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 58]

    6 - Why do Hadith have conflicting reports regarding one matter? This alone proves their fabrication.

    What are you to say when there is an Verse which doesn't tell a precise event but rather shows some ambiguity.

    And We sent him to a hundred thousand (folk) or more [AS-SAAFFAT (THOSE WHO SET THE RANKS,DRAWN UP IN RANKS) Chapter 37 - Verse 147]

    7 - Hadith insults Prophet Abraham (PBUH) by suggesting he lied three times.

    They said: Is it thou who hast done this to our gods, O Abraham? He said: But this, their chief hath done it. So question them, if they can speak. [AL-ANBIYA (THE PROPHETS) Chapter 21 - Verse 62 and 63]

    Now what are we to call this? Whatever the reason it would be termed a lie. This is one of the three events the hadith refers to, so criticize Quran first.

    The word used in hadith is 'Kazib', which usually means 'lie', but it also means 'mistake, an arrow not hitting the target or something said which has dual meaning etc'. The appropriate meaning of kazib in this hadeeth would be 'something said which has dual meaning'.

    8 - Is spit of the Prophet (SallAllaho Alaihi Wasallam) meant to be a cure?

    Yes, it is meant to be a cure. If a breathe of a Prophet can bring things to life then the saliva of another prophet can be cure.

    And will make him a messenger unto the Children of Israel, (saying): Lo! I come unto you with a sign from your Lord. Lo! I fashion for you out of clay the likeness of a bird, and I breathe into it and it is a bird, by Allah's leave. I heal him who was born blind, and the leper, and I raise the dead, by Allah's leave. And I announce unto you what ye eat and what ye store up in your houses. Lo! herein verily is a portent for you, if ye are to be believers. [AL-E-IMRAN (THE FAMILY OF 'IMRAN, THE HOUSE OF 'IMRAN) Chapter 3 - Verse 49]

    Allah shows miracles through his Prophets [PBUT]

    9 - Any hadith which suggest that the throne of Allah shacked on someone's death, such hadith is definitely fabricated.

    And the heaven and the earth wept not for them, nor were they reprieved. [AD-DUKHAN (SMOKE) Chapter 44 - Verse 29]

    What are you to say about the sky and earth not weeping on someone 's death, so this means it does weep on someone 's death. If you are to say that it is only a figure of speech then the same can be said about the hadith, why reject one and accept the other?

    10 - Hadith were collected and compiled by humans, they could have made mistakes. While for Qur'an Allah has promised its protection.


    Who do you think collected and protected the Quran? Angels?

    About the promise to protect the Qur'an, there is no such verse which suggests that Allah will protect the Quran only.

    Lo! We, even We, reveal the Reminder, and lo! We verily are its Guardian. [AL-HIJR (AL-HIJR, STONELAND, ROCK CITY) Chapter 15 - Verse 9]

    The word used in the Arabic text is 'Zikr' which can be applied to both Qur'an and Ahaadeeth.

    11 - It is in an hadith that the Prophet (PBUH) used to have intercourse with his wife while he was fasting.

    There is no such hadith which suggests that, the word 'mubasharat' in the Arabic text has confused the people. Imam Shoukani says mubasharat means 'the touching of two bodies' (Nail-ul-Autar, Chapter taqbeel-saim) So the hadith only means that you can touch your wife or kiss her, during the process your body can touch her.


    12 - It is in hadith that there are verses which were later abrogated.

    Were the Verses abrogated in the lifetime of the Prophet (PBUH)?

    If so, then what is wrong with that if the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) told us this is Quran and later if he himself tells us these ayahs are abrogated, why are we not to believe him?

    And whatsoever the messenger giveth you, take it. And whatsoever he forbiddeth, abstain (from it). And keep your duty to Allah. Lo! Allah is stern in reprisal. [AL-HASHR (EXILE, BANISHMENT) Chapter 59 - Verse 7]

    If you object on the Hadiths which show Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]'s anger then how would you define this Quranic Verse? Please check the name of the Chapter [Surah]


    He frowned and turned away Because the blind man came unto him. [ABASA (HE FROWNED) Chapter 80 - Verse 1 and 2]

    Just two mionr questions

    1- Who is the person which is being discussed in the Verse below? Would you like to define it through Quran without the help of Hadith

    “(The prophet) frowned and turned away because there came to him a blind man” (80:1-2)

    2- Who was the second person in the Cave? Would you like to define it through Quran without Hadith?

    “Being the second of the two, they two were in cave and he said to his companion, ‘Have no fear, for Allah is with us”. (9:40)

    "UNQUOTE"

    Courtesy: Lecture by Late Muhammad Ismail Salafi - Bahawalpur - Punjab - Pakistan, which he gave in the late 50s.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

     

    Dear Ms Sayeeda,

     

     

    Please read the previous pages wherein I tried to refute Late. Allama Neyaz Fatehpuri's views and ideology with the references of Quran and Hadith [Dr Sarkar and Traveller have mentioned and not only them but Sultan Sahab as well]. Regarding speaking freely about faith one has to be careful on this website where in the presence of Deputy Allah Mian [i.e. You] who hold the lease and certificate of Kafir [Infidel], Momin [Muslim], Jahannumi [Infernal] and Jannati [Successful] and not only this certificate but also hold magnifying glass to check our Filthy Bloodline [as per Ms.Sayyeda] and doubtful status [whether those who differ with Ms. Sayyeda's view, are Legitimate or Illegitimate].

     

    Ms Sayyeda Kaneez in the light of her own statement: Amir Mughal

     

     

    Dear Mr Shahin,

     

    Your ardent disciple Mr Amir Mughal posted this above mentioned comments on Kaneez Sayeeda calling her Deputy Allah Mian.  This is atrocious and unacceptable. Attribution to Allah contradicts the concept of tawheed, one of the pillars of Islam even if it is a fun.  Coming from Amir Mughal who doles out Hadith after Hadith and who has made this `once a vibrant' website into a graveyard of his dead thoughts, this is more shocking as he had quoted so many verses on my use of `core of your heart'. ThAT WAS in English an idiom

    Mr Mughal should know what our kalima says.

    You complain on the heavy load of matters on the website.  Please see what this man posts, he jumps on all issues whether he is required or not with his lengthy, so lengthy comments.  His posts are so boring and I am sure most of the visitors would not even dare to read.  What he says only he can understand.

    Plagiarist and Jinnah lover Jamshed Basha may have run out of the site not because of Kaneez Sayeeda but because of the fear of reading Mughal trash.  Any healthy debates and Mughal murders that with his idiosyncratic thought.  If at all you want to save your site kick this man out of the debate. 

    By the way, Mughal did not dole out any Hadith Quran verses which lie next to his computer on his use of Deputy Allah Mian and  did not reply to my post.

    If you recall a journalist  of Arab news in Saudi Arabia was almost send to the gallows for printing a cartoon which said `Oh Allah Are you there'

    How I wished Mughal was there in Saudi Arabia at this time and with this blasphemous comment

     

    ALLAH HAFIZ

     

     

     


    By meraj ziya -



  • Fatehpuri believed that the changes in Islam were brought about by the medium of the hadith  (plural – ahadith, sayings of the Prophet). He claimed that many of the ahadith were simply fabricated to suit the ruler of the day. The reason why he could simply state such a conclusion, taking it for granted that people would agree with him, was that almost all the modernists – Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Shibli Nu’mani and even his contemporaries like Muhammad Iqbal, the philosopher- poet – were to a greater or lesser degree all doubtful of the ahadith in their entirety and were urging Muslims to be cautious in relying on them. Sayyid Ahmad disapproved of classical hadith criticism since it was based on the characters of the people relating the hadith, and not on rational criticism of the actual text.  [See: Zaman, Ulama in Contemporary Islam, 12. Aziz Ahmad, Islamic Modernism in India and Pakista@n: 1857-1964 (London; Bombay; Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1967), 49-50.,  Murad, Intellectual Modernism of Shibli Nu’mani, 186-245. From: Shibli Nu’mani, Sirat al-Nu’man (Lahore: Kutub Kha@nah-i Azi@ziyah, 195?), 170-245. Ibid., Smith, Modern Islam in India, 117]

    ====================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    BACK TO THE ORIGINAL TOPIC OF NIYAZ FATEHPURI:

    On Hadith a noted Political Maulvi of the Sub-Continent Ubaidullah Sindhi couldn't teach Bukhari because of certain 'explicit Hadiths' [as per him but he was and is not Hujjat - Proof] then why didn't he feel any shame while teaching Quranic Verse like these, which are quite explicit and Maulana Ubaidullah Sindhi should have discarded these verses from Quran due to Maulana Illogical and absurd shame.

     

    Wamaryama ibnata AAimrana allatee ahsanat farjaha fanafakhna feehi min roohina wasaddaqat bikalimati rabbiha wakutubihi wakanat mina alqaniteena

    [AT-TAHRIM (BANNING, PROHIBITION) Chapter 66 - Verse 12]


    Arabic Word in the verse: Farjaha or Farj means Vagina [should I say it in Chaste Urdu]

    Interpretation of the meaning:

    And Mary, daughter of 'Imran, whose body was chaste, therefor We breathed therein something of Our Spirit. And she put faith in the words of her Lord and His scriptures, and was of the obedient.

    Waallatee ahsanat farjaha fanafakhna feeha min roohina wajaAAalnaha waibnaha ayatan lilAAalameena


    AL-ANBIYA (THE PROPHETS) Chapter 21 - Verse 91]

    Arabic Word in the verse: Farjaha or Farj means Vagina [should I say it in Chaste Urdu]

    Interpretation of the meaning:

    And she who was chaste, therefor We breathed into her (something) of Our Spirit and made her and her son a token for (all) peoples.
    Qalat anna yakoonu lee ghulamun walam yamsasnee basharun walam aku baghiyyan
    [MARYAM (MARY) Chapter 19 - Verse 20]

    Interpretation of the meaning:

    She said: How can I have a son when no mortal hath touched me, neither have I been unchaste?

    How would you define the touching by a man? What kind of a touch makes woman pregnant? Please define or would you prefer silence because of the shame like Ubaidullah Sindhi!

    Qalat rabbi anna yakoonu lee waladun walam yamsasnee basharun qala kathaliki Allahu yakhluqu ma yashao itha qada amran fainnama yaqoolu lahu kun fayakoonu
    [AL-E-IMRAN (THE FAMILY OF 'IMRAN, THE HOUSE OF 'IMRAN) Chapter 3 - Verse 47]
    Interpretation of the meaning:
    She said: My Lord! How can I have a child when no mortal hath touched me? He said: So (it will be). Allah createth what He will. If He decreeth a thing, He saith unto it only: Be! and it is.
    Dear Sir, What kind of a Man's Touch makes women pregnant? Wouldn't we explain this just because of Ubaidullah Sindhi's type of shame!

    warabaibukumu allatee fee hujoorikum min nisaikumu allatee dakhaltum bihinna fain lam takoonoo dakhaltum bihinna fala junaha AAalaykum
    [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 23]
    Forbidden unto you are your mothers, and your daughters, and your sisters, and your father's sisters, and your mother's sisters, and your brother's daughters and your sister's daughters, and your foster-mothers, and your foster-sisters, and your mothers-in-law, and your step-daughters who are under your protection (born) of your women unto whom ye have gone in - but if ye have not gone in unto them, then it is no sin for you (to marry their daughters) - and the wives of your sons who (spring) from your own loins. And (it is forbidden unto you) that ye should have two sisters together, except what hath already happened (of that nature) in the past. Lo! Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful.

    Would Ubaidullah Sindhi's shame stop us to define even the Explicit Quranic Verses?

    Nisaokum harthun lakum fatoo harthakum anna shitum waqaddimoo lianfusikum waittaqoo Allaha waiAAlamoo annakum mulaqoohu wabashshiri almumineena

    [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 223]

    Interpretation of the meaning:
    Your women are a tilth for you so go to your tilth as ye will, and send (good deeds) before you for your souls, and fear Allah, and know that ye will (one day) meet Him. Give glad tidings to believers, (O Muhammad).

    If we would have to rely on Mullah Ubaidullah Sindhi's so-called Shame then every men would have turned his wife into a catamite. Hadith regarding this verse explains that Intercourse with wife is only allowed in Vagina means Anal Sex is unlawful and forbidden [Strictly Haraam] even with one's wife what to talk of male.

    Alam yaku nutfatan min manayyin yumna

    [AL-QIYAMA (THE RISING OF THE DEAD, RESURRECTION) Chapter 75 - Verse 37]

    Interpretation of the meaning:
    Was he not a drop of fluid which gushed forth?

    Arabic Mani means Sperm [in chaste Urdu Mada Manwiya and to make it thick [Garha] for which these Indo Pak Mullah would sell their soul to get Kushta/Tilla - aphrodisiac] but AH! their so-called shame. Allah is discussing it and these Shameless Mullah [Bayghairat] avoiding the discussion.

    Waannahu khalaqa alzzawjayni alththakara waalontha

    Min nutfatin itha tumna
    [AN-NAJM (THE STAR) Chapter 53 - Verse 45 and 46]
    Interpretation of the meaning:
    And that He createth the two spouses, the male and the female, From a drop (of seed) when it is poured forth;
    Now where has gone the shame of Obaidullah Sindhi? What is being discussed here if not the Intercourse between Man and Woman and word Sperm i.e. Nutfa in Arabic is in the Quranic Verse and men emit Sperm through Penis [Should I use chaste Urdu]

    Afaraaytum ma tumnoona
    Aantum takhluqoonahu am nahnu alkhaliqoona

    AL-WAQIA (THE EVENT, THE INEVITABLE) Chapter 56 - Verse 58 and 59]
    Interpretation of the meaning:
    Have ye seen that which ye emit? Do ye create it or are We the Creator?
    Waallatheena hum lifuroojihim hafithoona
    Illa AAala azwajihim aw ma malakat aymanuhum fainnahum ghayru maloomeena

    [AL-MAARIJ (THE ASCENDING STAIRWAYS) Chapter 70 Verse 29 and 30]

    Interpretation of the meaning:
    And those who preserve their chastity Save with their wives and those whom their right hands possess, for thus they are not blameworthy;

    Again Furooj [Vagina] is used in Quranic Verse! I wonder how the women protect their Vagina [Furooj]?


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • “Dear Sultan Sahab,

    “BACK TO THE ORIGINAL TOPIC OF NIYAZ FATEHPURI:”

    Aamir Mughal

    ---

    Dear Aamir Mughal Sahab,

    Thanks very much indeed for your efforts to bring the discussion back on rails. As you can see there are some people who have not had a new thought in their minds since they came out of their madrasas or their mother’s laps who don’t want to allow us to do so. However, you must understand that the majority of our community, if not the humanity, is like that. This is why a need was felt for having a site on which we Muslims and occasionally visiting non-Muslims too can have free discussion and try to sort out our problems.

    There has to be a reason why Allah has forsaken us and perhaps already decided to pass on the baton of ideological leadership of the world to others. You may have noticed that Islamic values are being accepted by other people, some grudgingly, some nominally, some only in theory, thus imperfectly, of course, but these are Islamic values – Free Expression of ideas , for instance -- that other communities are adopting and trying to practice in their own hesitant ways. We are just not prepared to listen to others, not even other Muslims.

    You may have noticed the dichotomy – I will not call it hypocrisy, for that has to be conscious and Muslims are living a zombie-like existence – of Muslims celebrating the fact of any Tom, Dick and Harry from anywhere in the world, of whatever intellectual level or background and motivation including just to marry twice, converting to Islam: but these same Muslims are also bent upon driving out of the fold of Islam large groups of  Muslims who may not belong to their small tribe, not only on a sectarian or sub-sectarian basis but also  on the basis of  their caste or gotra. Practically every sect considers other sects out of Islam. Practically every mufti Mullah keeps issuing fatwas against all thinking Muslims who may be engaged in seeking to advance the conditions in which the community lives. How many times Sir Syed was declared Kafir? How many times was Maulana Azad?

    It is these unthinking Mullahs and Mullains, some of whom may not even be bearded, indeed may have their beards in their stomachs, as the saying goes, that we are up against. Please be patient. Keep thinking and writing regardless of the disruptions on this site. You know I do not agree with you on many issues of import. On the issue of what I see as Niyaz Fatehpuri’s increasing relevance for Muslims in the contemporary world we have divergent views. But that is how we both grow, by discussing our differences openly and by listening to the others’ viewpoints. If there is one major difference between the down-in-the-dumps Muslim community and the upwardly mobile non-Muslim communities, it is this. They listen to each other and allow every one to speak his or her mind. Of course, they too are not perfect. Perhaps human beings can never be perfect. But at least they accept the need for free expression of views and try to practice it to the extent possible and the Muslim societies all over the world do the opposite. The worst in this regard is, of course, Saudi Arabia, the bastion of Sunni/Wahhabi Islam and only slightly better is Iran, the citadel of Shia Islam. The rest of the Muslim world too is living in the pre-Islamic period of the Jahiliya. Some have changed the kalmia itself and ask others about their beliefs; some want to ban practically any book that appears to be talking in terms of reason and rationality. In this environment of irrationality Neyaz Fatehpuri is more relevant than ever. Yes, Neyaz Fatehpuri does not attach the same sanctity to Hadees, as do say, unthinking Wahhabis and other Sunnis. But Shias reject Hadees too: why should they be after his blood or after people who would want to read him.

    If someone doesn’t like what is in Neyaz Fatehpuri, try to answer him cogently and convince other Muslims that he was wrong. Argue with him. If you can’t do that, just shut up. Is your faith so fragile that you will lose it if someone speaks against it or gives a different view of the same faith?

    As for my daughter Juhi’s book, she has just introduced this rational, thinking person of great intellectual depth to the contemporary and for the first time to the English-speaking world. Read this book and get a glimpse of Niaz Fatehpuri’s world-view. He lived and published his magazine Nigaar from 1920s to 1966. He lived among the Mullahs and Mullahins all his life. He faced much more idiotic obscurantists than you see on this site asking for a ban on a book about him as if they alone have a right to live in the world and nobody should read anything that these ignoramuses don’t like.

    This debate has taken place again and again. Until those who want to read serious books and rethink Islam win the argument and succeed in shutting up these unthinking Mullahs and Mullahins, there is no future for the Muslim community. Rest of the world will keep thinking, writing, reading, and growing better and better. We will keep wallowing in our dirty pool for ever – such of course is the fate of communities whom God forsakes, as He seems to have forsaken us.

    Please Mr. Aamir, or any one else, including Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima, keep disagreeing with me or anything that appears on this site, and keep commenting. My only demand is don’t steal from other people’s write-ups and don’t abuse and taunt serious people on the site who come to learn or contribute their learning. I have just seen and am deleting your comments in which you published somebody’s article on the medicinal value of dates. If you keep posting it as you have done all day today, I will keep deleting it; anything offensive or irrelevant or stolen is just not allowed. We can have a separate thread discussing health benefits of Dates, though. I will find out the real author and publication and carry it with these references courtesy the original publication site. If you want some subject discussed on the site, please send it to me on Editor@NewAgeIslam.com along with full references where you are taking it from and I will consider putting it up. The goondagardi you have done all day today, as you did yesterday and day before, is not going to be allowed and is not going to bear any fruit. This site has some rules and you have to follow them if you want to continue visiting us.

    Please, Mr. Aamir, don’t fall for these disruptive tactics and rest assured I am not going to allow this. Some people have long exploited my democratic temperament, but no longer.

    I thank you again Aamir Mughal Saheb for trying to rescue the discussion on this thread from persistent disruption.

    Sultan Shahin


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • Dear Mr. Sultan Shahin

    If you have so much against a correspondent who visits your website, why don't you lodge a formal complaint with the competent authority against Mrs. sayyeda kaneez as you are also a legal expert which  is evident from your earlier message and of late you have been cataloging and numbering each and every message of individuals, again a good practice and will prove useful,  I would also suggest Mrs sayyeda kaneez to lodge a formal complaint,  if she has any,  against you or your website for hurting public sentiments with the competent Court having jurisdiction. I would also request Ms Kaneez not to copy my message in original.

    Coming back to you,  tell me Mr Shahin where do I fit into this picture? Why do you keep complaining nonsensically to me that he did that, she said that, I am not your school teacher neither you are a school Kid.

    All said and done, the fact remains that you are indulging in Blasphemy and hurting sentiments of Muslims mine for sure. A reply to this message is not at all required,   you may enjoy the privilege of ignoring it for some time.

    SAF RIZVI


    By SAF RIZVI -



  • Sultan Shahin

     

    My supporter is the one and only Allah swt and I am not a coward and a cheat like yourself (you were quick in removing the line from the Quran link on your site  “the eternal present tense” after I pointed it out questioning your ability as an editor) I do not depend on others. My reasoning ability, My faith In Allah swt and my honesty is my strength. I don’t need any mortal’s support as you do all the time when you beg for it from mentally retarded Amir Moghul, oh..bhaijan of course.. He has already given the certificate of his being a Mushrik when he called me Deputy of Allah swt Astaghfirrullah’

    You would not realize how much sentimental heart aches you have inflicted upon us poor Muslims by your blasphemous ranting about abrogating the verses from the Quran-e-Pak and then with the Article by your daughter Juhi Shahin: Mohammad saww which was never questioned even by the most rigid non believers of his time.


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  •  

    Dear Mr. SAF RIZVI,

    I am not at all accusing you “of running a Blog with blasphemous comments and articles”. I am merely trying to sensitize my readers to the implications of your comment. If it is wrong in the eyes of Mr. SAF RIZVI, at least, I am telling them, to quote without his express permission from a comment Mr. RIZVI posted some time ago on this site, then surely it must be wrong for them to filch full-fledged well-researched original articles from other sites and post them under their name without any reference even to the fact that they are from somewhere else, as Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez did on this site twice. She did not even inform the site of this fact even after one of her articles was discovered to have been lifted from somewhere else by one of the alert readers who had earlier recommended that “her” comment be published as an article on the front page of the site. She was specifically asked if “her” another comment too contained material lifted from some other site but she did not respond, even though she was very much present on the site taunting others and distributing visas to hell and heaven as usual.

    The reason I have to do this is that she has a whole band of people supporting her in this act. I can understand that as a result of a sort of Shia tribal bonding. As a regular visitor to this site you may have notice the kind of abuses some Shia readers have been hurling at non-Shias, particularly Wahhabis. I am not aware of any Wahhabi retaliating in kind. They too, like the Shias, engage in debates and merely try to deflect issues and point fingers at others. But they have not used abusive language on this site at least. Now, am I dividing the community between Shia-Sunni, etc. by pointing this out? No. Shias are considered in the South Asian sub-continent at least a decent and well-educated community. By and large they belonged to the feudal class and for all the shortcomings of feudal, they are certainly decent and dignified.  Before I started this stie and came across the likes of Sayyeda Kaneez, I had not known any Shia hurling abuses. My Shia fiends, one of whom, a retired professor, passed away recently and I am still in mourning, was the most soft-spoken person I have known in my life. He too was a committed Shia and most of the books I have read on Shia Islam were given to me by him from his personal library. May his soul rest in peace.

    What has troubled me most, however, is that a distinguished contributor to this site, Dr. Sarkar Haider, who in a recent article called for Ijtihad, also seems to think that she has done no wrong. His argument is that since this appeared as comment and not as an article, so it is all right and that she never claimed this article to be written by her even though it appeared under her name.

    I am only trying to tell these readers, quoting from your letter, that even if the immorality of filching material from other writers and publications does not matter to you, there may be some legal dimension to it as well and those who run the site will be held responsible for this. It is necessary, therefore, for me to guard against this. I must ask my readers to be as vigilant as Mr. Shamshad Elahee Ansari was in this case and Mr. HASAN IQBAL in another similar case. I am grateful to these readers and commentators on the site for informing me of this thievery. I know I am using harsh words but the degree of shameless brazenness of this person has caught me by surprise. As I said earlier, she continues to taunt other commentators on the site and distribute visas to hell and heaven.   

    Regards, Sultan Shahin

    P. S. I must illustrate another point I have made above by quoting Mr. Aamir Mughal’s latest comments on the issue of Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez. He has borne her barbs for months and been steadfast even though some like Mr. Jamsheed Basha got scared and ran away. He seems to have lost his patience, however.

     ---------------------------------

    3/10/2009 12:13:59 AM

    Aamir Mughal

    "Amir Moghul Bhaijan salaamz

     

    You mean to say, your stand on issues of faith in Islam is determined by what I feel and say about you? How can you be so silly Amir Moghul bhaijan…You should freely speak about your faith with conviction irrespective of what other have to say, be it me or be it any  friend or foe." [Sayyeda]

    -----------------------

     

    Dear Ms Sayyeda,

     

    Please read the previous pages wherein I tried to refute Late. Allama Neyaz Fatehpuri's views and ideology with the references of Quran and Hadith [Dr Sarkar and Traveller have mentioned and not only them but Sultan Sahab as well]. Regarding speaking freely about faith one has to be careful on this website where in the presence of Deputy Allah Mian [i.e. You] who hold the lease and certificate of Kafir [Infidel], Momin [Muslim], Jahannumi [Infernal] and Jannati [Successful] and not only this certificate but also hold magnifying glass to check our Filthy Bloodline [as per Ms.Sayyeda] and doubtful status [whether those who differ with Ms. Sayyeda's view, are Legitimate or Illegitimate].

     

    Ms Sayyeda Kaneez in the light of her own statement

     

    "QUOTE"

    12/19/2008 9:43:41 AM                           Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima 

     Janab Hasan Iqbal  sahab  salaamun alaikum

     Both Amir moghul and Jamsed Basha are cheats and born from bad blood, Amir Moghul will stoop down to any level to defend his crossbreed ancestors, Janab Hasan sahab , ye Amir Moghul aur Jamshed Basha ‘KUTTEY ki sab se Ghatia Nasal ke log hain’

    "UNQUOTE"


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • Sultan shahin reply to this message....of my earshwhile supporter as you say.

    /10/2009 3:49:57 PM

     

     

     

    SAF RIZVI

    Dear Mr. Sultan Shahin 

     

    I have gone through legalities involved and liabilities of a blogger so painstakingly researched by you, I have this suggestion, keep up the good work, you never know when it might come handy. I could not understand this fact though? Are you accusing me of running a Blog with blasphemous comments and articles? Gentleman I am not, On the contrary you are. Please do some more research and enlighten us so that we could use your legal expertise about the law of the land against any person who indulges in Blasphemy amounting to hurting sentiments of a large community despite repeated request for not indulging in such activity. Please do add to my little knowledge of IPC / CRPC that govern both you and me as a citizen of India. You lift up a Blasphemous article from a book published in Pakistan by some Firozsons Pvt. Ltd  publications authored by one Juhi Shahin and reproduce it on your website ,  when people protested  and asked you to remove it,  you taunt and threaten with your incomplete research of the IT act 2000 and its amendments and add-ons . Your intentions are not at all honorable Mr Shahin.

    You are advised once again, to remove the article of Niyaz Fatehpuri from your website NewageIslam.com before the matter goes out of your hands and mine as well, and show some respect for people’s sentiments if not to Islam, its Prophet and the Quran.

     

    Do not  get hyper as there is nothing personal about all this.

     

    Regards 

     

    S A F RIZVI


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Fatehpuri believed that the changes in Islam were brought about by the medium of the hadith  (plural – ahadith, sayings of the Prophet). He claimed that many of the ahadith were simply fabricated to suit the ruler of the day. The reason why he could simply state such a conclusion, taking it for granted that people would agree with him, was that almost all the modernists – Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Shibli Nu’mani and even his contemporaries like Muhammad Iqbal, the philosopher- poet – were to a greater or lesser degree all doubtful of the ahadith in their entirety and were urging Muslims to be cautious in relying on them. Sayyid Ahmad disapproved of classical hadith criticism since it was based on the characters of the people relating the hadith, and not on rational criticism of the actual text.  [See: Zaman, Ulama in Contemporary Islam, 12. Aziz Ahmad, Islamic Modernism in India and Pakista@n: 1857-1964 (London; Bombay; Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1967), 49-50.,  Murad, Intellectual Modernism of Shibli Nu’mani, 186-245. From: Shibli Nu’mani, Sirat al-Nu’man (Lahore: Kutub Kha@nah-i Azi@ziyah, 195?), 170-245. Ibid., Smith, Modern Islam in India, 117]

    ====================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    BACK TO THE ORIGINAL TOPIC OF NIYAZ FATEHPURI:

    Sir Syed Ahmed Khan [A Racist Bigot from the Ajlaf of India] is being quoted to support. The reality of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan and Hanafi Maulvis [always against Hadith even if the Hadith is authentic but goes against their Rampant Fiqh] are as under:

     Dear Mr Sultan,

    You wouldn't have suggested to revive Aligarh Movement had you been aware of Racist Face of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan or not not only his Racism and Bigotry towards Newly Converted Muslims [who used to be scheduled caste before their conversion to Muslims faith] but also the Racist Behaviour of Spiritual God Father of Deobandis i.e. Hakeemul Ummat Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi [amongst one of rare Deobandi Sufi Mullahs who supported Pakistan and Secular Jinnah but I wonder where did Thanvi Sahab find Ashraf and Ajlaf class division in the so-called Humanist Sufi Literature of Ibn Arabi, Hallaj, Mohasibi, Baghdadi, Rumi, Juwaribi...]. Isn't it strange that Mullahs of India [Deobandi, Ahle Hadith, Barelvis and Shias] had declared that Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was Deviant because he rejected the Hadith and Sir Syed interpreted Quran as per his whim and desire but these Elite Class Mullahs of India [because of their connection to Rampantly Lecherous Mughal Court] and SirSyed Ahmed Khan had one thing in common that both of these were Extremely Prejudiced towards Ajlaf [as per them the Lower Class] and here they violated the very basic spirit of Islam [equality] and message of Quran [supremacy is as per piety not colour and creed]

    It is true Sir Syed Ahmed Khan, an ardent advocate of modern education among Muslims and founder of Mohommedan Anglo-Oriental College (MAO) opposed Muslims joining the Congress but it was because of his priority to modern education rather than politics and not because of lack of patriotism. Also, he was representing the interests of upper classes of Muslims i.e. ashraf. Sir Syed was Quran Aloner [means no need of Hadith] but Sir Syed and Mullahs even violated a very Quranic Verse which is openly against any kind of Racism and Racial Supremacy.

    Quran alone logic says this about the equality of Human Being:

    O mankind! Lo! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. Lo! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Lo! Allah is Knower, Aware. [AL-HUJRAAT (THE PRIVATE APARTMENTS, THE INNER APARTMENTS) Chapter 49 Verse 13]

    "QUOTE"
    The position of the Julahas had got thoroughly undermined and this inferior-lowly people (badzaat) were most active in the uproar(1857 rebellion).(Sir Syed Khan 1958:60)

    Sir Syed had only the Ashraaf interests in mind when he started his educational movement. In an address at the foundation laying ceremony of ‘Madrasa Anjuman-e-Islamia’ in Bareli where children from the so-called ‘low-caste’ communities used to study, he said that he finds no use in teaching English to them. “It is better and in the interests of the community that they are engaged in the old form of study… It appears appropriate if you teach them some writing and math. They should also be taught small tracts on everyday affairs and through which they know basic beliefs and practices of the Islamic faith.

    Sir Syed Ahmad was Flagrant Racist and Bigot and he hated the Ajlaf [Working Class of India particularly Bengalis]

    Sir Syed pioneered the cause of English education and rational and scientific thought amongst Indian Muslims. He was concerned only with the future of Muslim Ashraf ; not with the future of all Muslims i.e including the poor. This is not widely realised. He looked upon 'low born' people with contempt. For example, commenting upon qualifications for Membership of the Viceroy's Legislative Council, Sir Syed expressed his deeply rooted class (caste ?) prejudice when he said that 'It is essential for theViceroy's Council to have members of high social standing. Would our aristocracy like that a man of low caste or insignificant origin, though he may be a BA. or an MA., and have the requisite ability, be placed in a position of authority above them and have the power of making laws that affect their lives and property?

    All those Deobandi, Barelvi and Ahle-Hadith Mullahs like Ashraf Ali Thanvi, Ahmed Raza Khan Barelvi, House of Shah Waliullah and even Rationalists like Sir Syed Ahmed and Company who Claim the Lease of Islam in Undivided Sub Continent, were Bigot Racist to the core while Deobandi, Bareliv and Ahle-Hadith of India also carried this Filthy Baggage of Sufiism with them in the name of Islam. Their thoughts are as under:

    Sayyads, Ashrafs, Ajlafs, Jolahas, Rajputs, etc. Marriages were disallowed between the high caste Ashrafs, Sayyads, Sheikhs or Pathans and the low caste Ansaris, Kunjras or Qureshis. The founder of the Aligarh Muslim University, Sir Sayyad Ahmad Khan, denied backward Muslims entry into AMU and kept its door open only for the Ashrafs. Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanvi wrote a book [Bahishti Zewar - Heavenly Ornaments] in which he said that the Sayyads are the highest caste and after them Ansaris, Qureshis, and Sheikhs but Mughals and Pashtun though High Caste but cannot be compared with Syeds.

    Three groups found in Indian Muslims of Bengal:
    Ashraf or better class Muslims ? The Syeds, Sheikhs, Pathans, Moghul, Mallik, and Mirza.

    Ajlaf or lower caste Muslims ? Cultivating Sheikhs, and others who were originally Hindus, Darzi, Jolaha, Fakir, Mallah, Kula Kunjara, Kasai, Kalal, Dhunia, Abdal, Bako, Chamba, Dafali, Dhobi, Hajjan, etc.

    Arzal or degraded class ? include Bhanar, Halalkhor, , Kasbi, Lalbegi, Maugta, Mehra.  "UNQUOTE"
    These Rascal Maulvis of India had no sense at all that there is no such thing called High Caste in Islam. If you would go through Holy Scripture of all the three Known Revealed Religions you will be amazed to know that many such professions which are considered low caste Professions were the Professions adopted by Prophets [PBUT] and Companions of the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]

    References:

    1 - S M Jain:The Aligarh Movements, Its Origin and Development, 1885-1906.
    2 - Paul R Brass.Language, Religion, and Politics in North India Cambridge 1974.
    For More Reading:
    1 - Hayat-e-Jawed by Altaf Hussain Hali.
    2 - Maqalat-e-Sir Syed [Published in Lahore]
    3 - Sugata Bose and Ayesha Jalal (eds.), Nationalism, Democracy and Development: State and Politics in India, Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998-9)  For more explicit and incriminating details on Muta'assib [Extremely Prejudiced India's Muslim Religious Class and Intellectuals of North India - particularly Anti Hadith Hanafi Scholars of Deoband and Bareli] Caste System, Prejudice and Racism in Mullahs.? Caste System, Prejudice and Racism in Mullahs - 1

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/01/caste-system-prejudice-and-racism-in.html

    Caste System, Prejudice and Racism in Mullahs - 2

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/01/caste-system-prejudice-and-racism-in_16.html

    Caste System, Prejudice and Racism in Mullahs - 3

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/01/caste-system-prejudice-and-racism-in_3608.html

    Caste System, Prejudice and Racism in Mullahs - 4

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/01/caste-system-prejudice-and-racism-in_3178.html

    Caste System, Prejudice and Racism in Mullahs - 5

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/01/caste-system-prejudice-and-racism-in_1370.html

    Caste System, Prejudice and Racism in Mullahs - 6

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2009/01/caste-system-prejudice-and-racism-in_6727.html
    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Fatehpuri believed that the changes in Islam were brought about by the medium of the hadith  (plural – ahadith, sayings of the Prophet). He claimed that many of the ahadith were simply fabricated to suit the ruler of the day. The reason why he could simply state such a conclusion, taking it for granted that people would agree with him, was that almost all the modernists – Sayyid Ahmad Khan, Shibli Nu’mani and even his contemporaries like Muhammad Iqbal, the philosopher- poet – were to a greater or lesser degree all doubtful of the ahadith in their entirety and were urging Muslims to be cautious in relying on them. Sayyid Ahmad disapproved of classical hadith criticism since it was based on the characters of the people relating the hadith, and not on rational criticism of the actual text. Shibli Nu’mani (1857-1914), one of the most prominent intellectuals of that time, and by far the most traditional teacher at the Aligarh school, was also conscious of the need to define hadith and its use. Seventy-five pages of his Sirat al-Nu’man are written just to demonstrate how cautious and critical Abu Hanifah was in accepting a hadith as true and binding. [See: Zaman, Ulama in Contemporary Islam, 12. Aziz Ahmad, Islamic Modernism in India and Pakista@n: 1857-1964 (London; Bombay; Karachi: Oxford University Press, 1967), 49-50.,  Murad, Intellectual Modernism of Shibli Nu’mani, 186-245. From: Shibli Nu’mani, Sirat al-Nu’man (Lahore: Kutub Kha@nah-i Azi@ziyah, 195?), 170-245. Ibid., Smith, Modern Islam in India, 117]

    ===============================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    BACK TO THE ORIGINAL TOPIC OF NIYAZ FATEHPURI:

     

    Shibli is quoted regarding Imam Abu Hanifa's alleged cautiousness regarding Hadith. I wonder what Shibli, Syed Ahmed Khan and Fatehpuri have to say about Absurdities in Hanafi Fiqh Books which are attributed toward Imam Abu Hanifa and Muslims of Turkey, Central Asia and particulary Afghanistan, India and Pakistan have been told that Islam is What Hanafi Fiqh say and Hanafi Scholars Declare. I wonder if anybody has gone through the Pearls of Wisdom in Hanafi Fiqh Books particularly the Fatawa-e-Alamgir [worse than Kamasutra]

     

    I wonder where the hell all the Scholars of [Hanafi Fiqh of India and Pakistan] Pakistan and India were and still are sleeping.

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

     

    Ibn Qayyam in his book above exposed the absurdities of Fiqh in 2 Volumes of I'laam ul Muwaqqi'een 'an Rabb il 'Aalameen Ibn Qayyam [translated by Muhammad Sahab Junagadhi in India, preface was written by Abul Kalam Azad]
    There is a book by Hanafi Scholars namely Kitabul Heel [Book of excuses] wherein these Rampant Fatwa Mongering Hanafi Scholars issued 250 Fatwa [Religious edicts] which has made Unlawful [Haraam] into Lawful [Halal]. In one of the Fatwa from Qazi Abu Yusuf [who is praised by the 20th Century Abdullah Ibn Saba (Creator of Shia Religion) i.e. Mawdoodi of Jamat-e-Islami in his book Khilafat o Malookiyat] had advised to an Abbasi Caliph that he can sexually use the slave woman freed by Caliph's Father [as per Quran and Hadith this is Haraam].
    Another absurdity of Hanafi Fiqh as per their books

    Crow [Kawwa in Urdu - Ghurab is Arabic] is clearly declared Haram in Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah]
    But Hanafi Fiqh books Fatawa Alamgiri [Egyptian Edition], Mabsoot, Ainal Sharah Hidaya, Kitabul Behrar Riqaiq Sharah Kunzul Daqaiq decalres that eating Crow is Halal [Lawful]

     

    Another absurdity rather Blasphmey attributed towrds Hanafi Fiqh, their Hanafi Fiqh books and Hanafi Scholars that writing Quranic Verse with blood and urine [for recovery from Illness] is allowed. Reference is attributed Fourth Hijri's Hanafi Scholar Abu Bakar Mohammad Bin Ahmed Skaf, Fatawa Qazi Khan Chapter Bab Al Hazar Wal Ibahat, Kitabul Behrar Riqaiq Sharah Kunzul Daqaiq bab Tanzih Al Bair Bu Qooh, Fatawa Sirajiya Bab Al Tadawi, Hamawi Sharah Al Ashba Walnazair Bab Al quaeeda Al Khamisa Al Zarar La Yazal, Raddal Mukhtar Sharah Darr Al Mukhtar aka Fatawa Shami Bab Al Tadawi Bil Mehram.

    And one such absurdities of Hanafi Fiqh is that you can offer Salat while carrying puppy [clear violation of Quran and Hadith].

     

    What I have learned through different sources that these Deobandis and Barelvis are basically the same with minor differences they both allegedly follow the Fiqh [Attributed to Imam Abu Haneefah] Hanafi and his followers and books these Deobandi and Barelvi read, quotes of which are as under:

    Radd al-Muhtar ala ad-Dur al-Mukhtar is a book on Islam by 19th century Hanafi Scholar Ibn Abidin. A commentary on Imam al-Haskafi's Durr al-Mukhtar, it is commonly known as Radd al-Muhtar. It is said to be a compilation of the great Fatwas of Imam Abu Hanifa [May Allah have mercy on his soul], and Hidayah is the name of a famous Hanafi juridical work by Burhan-ud-din Ali bin Abi Bakr al-Marghinani (1152-1197) which is considered widely authoritative as a guide to Fiqh amongst Muslims in Central Asia, Afghanistan and India, and is the basis for much of the Anglo-Islamic law in India and Pakistan.

    Now read the excerpts from these two Books through which Deobandi and Barelvi Calamity in Pakistan want to Implement Islamic Law. Rampant Lal Mosque Anarchist, Binori Town, Madressah Haqqania, Talibans and other such Anarchist called these perversions mentioned below The Islamic Law!

    "QUOTE"

    1 - Be the curse of Allah be on those who reject Imam Abu Hanifa (Muqadimah dar Mukhtar)

    2 - When The Prophet Issa [Jesus - PBUH] will come back he will follow the Madhab [Fiqh] of Abu Hanifa (Muqadimah dar Mukhtar)

    3 - Khidr spent 30 years to learn knowledge from Abu Hanifa, then Qushayri learnt from Khidr during 3 years and he wrote more than 1000 books and put them in a box in the sea. When Isa aley salam will take these books and act upon them. (Muqadimah dar Mukhtar)

    3 - Is someone pays a woman to do zina [adultery] , there is no hadd [no punishment] ( Dar Mukhtar, kitab Hudud, fatawa khaniyah misr vol 3 p 508, kanz daqaiq ed deoband p 180, and this fatwa is attributed to Imam Abu Hanifa while his two students say there is hadd [Adultery Law]. It is well known that the hanafi books of fiqh there is no Chain of Narration [isnad] to their Imam)

    4 - The salary of the prostitute is halal [lawful] (Chalpi shara Wiqayah)

    5 - If he pays a woman to do zina or wati [Adultery or Intercourse] or if he says I will give you so much dirham or she says give me so much, there is no had [no punishment under Adultery Law] (Alamgiri, vol 2 p 168)

    6 - If someone does jima [intercourse] with an animal or with a dead or a young girl and there is no inzal [ejaculation] , then ghusl [bathe] is not wajib [obligatory] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab taharah, masail ghusl, aussi Alamgiri, Kitab taharah)

    7 - If someone does sodomy with a woman who fasts or a man who fasts, their fast is not broken (Hidayah, Kitab Sawm)

    8 - If a young boy of 10 does Jima [intercourse] with a balighah [adult] Woman, there is no Ghusl [bathe]( Alamgiri Kitab taharah)

    9 - If someone enters his penis in his dubur (anus), then ghusl is not obligatory (Dar Mukhtar Kitab taharah Masail Ghusl)

    10 - If a man in his dubur [anus] or a woman in her vagina enters the penis of the dead, or his finger, or wood, there is no ghusl [bathe] (Hidayah Kitab Taharah)

    11 - If someone enters the penis of an animal in her vagina or dubur [anus], the ghusl [bathe] is not wajib [obligatory] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab Taharah Masail Ghusl)

    12 - If someone enters the penis of a boy without desire in her vagina or dubur [anus], the ghusl [bathe] is not wajib [obligatory] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab taharah Masail Ghusl)

    13 - After doing Jima [Intercourse] with a young girl, it is not necessary to clean his penis (Dar Mukhtar Kitab taharah Masail Ghusl)

    14 - If someone does jima [intercourse] with a virgin and the maidenhead is not broken, ghusl [bathe] is not wajib [obligatory] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab taharah Masail Ghusl)

    15 - If someone does wati [intercourse] in the dubur [have anal sex or commit bestiality] of an animal or in his anus and there is no inzal, then Ghusl [bathe] is not wajib [obligatory] (Hidayah kitab taharah)

    16 - If the balighah woman [adult woman] does wati [intercourse] with a young boy or with a crazy, then the woman has no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    17 - If someone does wati [intercourse] with a non balighah woman [non adult woman], or with a dead or an animal, there is no hadd [punishment] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    18 - If someone does zina [adultery] with the salve of his child or great child, there is no hadd (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    19 - If someone does zina [adultery] with the slave of grand father or grand mother, there is no Hadd [Punishment for Adultery](Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    20 - If someone has a slave in rahn (security for loan) and he does zina [adultery], there is no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    21 - If someone does nikah [Marriage] with a mahram [sister, mother or daughter or real blood aunt] for ever woman and consider it halal [lawful], there is no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    22 - The woman that are for ever forbidden, and he does nikah and he even if he considers that haram [Unlawful] , there is no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud, et Alamgiri who attribute that to Imam Abu Hanifa)

    23 - If he does nikah [marriage] with a woman and joins in nikah his wife’s sister or mother, there is no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] (Alamgiri)

    24 - If he does temporary marriage [Muta'ah] and he considers that haram [Unlawful], there is no hadd [[Punishment for Adultery] (Alamgiri)

    25 - If someone does nikah with a woman who is married before, and he knows she has a husband and it is haram [Unlawful] , there is no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] Fatawa Khaniya misr vol 3 p 508)

    26 - There is no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] of zina [Adultery] for the one who cannot speak, neither any hadd [Punishment for Adultery] for something else, even if the witness are present and he admits with isharah [gesture] or by writing (Alamgiri misr, vol 2 p 168)

    27 - If someone kidnaps a slave, does zina [Adultery] and pay his responsible [Owner] for her price, there is no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    28 - If someone gives permission to another to do zina [Intercourse] with his slave, there is no hadd [Punishment for Adultery] (Alamgiri vol 2 p 169)

    29 - If the Khalifah or the imam or the king does zina [ADULTERY] there is no hadd [PUNISHMENT] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud) [also in Hidaya and that Hidaya is being taught in Pakistani Madressah]

    30 - There is no hadd for sodomy [Anal Intercourse] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    31 - If someone does zina [ADULTERY] in dar ul harb [Land/Country of Infidels] or in the land of revolted people, there is no hadd [PUNISHMENT] (Dar Mukhtar Kitab hudud)

    32 - The muslim can take riba [Interest] from a Infidel, in dar ul harb [Land/Country of Infidels] (Dar Mukhtar vol 4 p 209)

    33 - This is also true for the one who becomes muslim and does not do Hijrah, whe can take riba from him( Dar Mukhtar vol 4 p 210)

    34 - If someone prays holding a dog in his hands, his prayer is not fasid [INVALID] (Dar Mukhtar misr vol 1 p 153)

    35 - If someone in prayer watches the private part of a woman, his prayer [Salat] is not broken [means it will remain valid] ( Maraqi Al falah misr vol 1 p 200)

    36 - If someone watches at book of fiqh during prayer, is prayer is not broken. ( Alamgiri vol,1 p 106)

    37 - If someone prays and holds the Quran and reads from it, is prayer is fasid [Invalid] (Dar Mukhtar vol 1 p 641)

    38 - If in the conditions of Imam in the first cases there is equality, then The one whose wife is more beautiful ( Dar Mukhtar vol 1 p 412)

    39 - Then the one who has the biggest head and the shortest member [Penis] (Dar Mukhtar vol 1 p 412)

    40 - The meaning of member is penis (Rad Mukhtar Sharh Dar Mukhar, p 413)

    41 - The one who does watch the vagina of a woman in a miror or in water, then the mother of this woman is forbidden to him (Dur Mukhtar, Kitab Nikah, fasl fil Muharamat)

    "UNQUOTE"


    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

    My respected friends of islamic faith, 

    adaab, and Eed mubarak. may allah bestow wisdom upon u, and send me

    some sweets on the occassion.

    D N Kashyap


    By D N Kashyap -



  • Dear Dr. Sarkar Haider,

    You continue to defend Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima using articles written by other people and published on other sites as her own in the comment section. I was wondering if you missed the following post. Do please go through it and as a supporter of Ijtihad and rethinking, maybe rethink. I would very much appreciate your comments. It is very important for maintaining the dignity of www.NewAgeIslam.com that we settle the matter. Is it okay to lift things from other writers and/or websites and publish them in the comment section of a non-monitored website?

    If you publish something under your name, are you not claiming that it is something written by you. Why do you need to make a separate “claimer” for that? One can understand disclaimers, saying that though this matter appears under my name it is not mine and I have taken it from this publication and this writer. But Claimers? What is that?

    I am just trying to banish from www.NewAgeIslam.com determined, brazen, shameless thievery, not the thief herself. She is a valuable contributor, as you say, and indeed she has made some useful comments from time to time. I particularly value her nationalist credentials as she does not see any contradiction between Islam and India’s composite nationalism. She is also against Wahhabi terrorism, though she seems not to mind Shia terrorism. As Mr. Amir Mughal pointed out she seems to consider herself Deputy God, a Khudai Hawaldar, deciding who will go to Hell and Heaven. She can also be very abusive. No part of any reader’s body is sacrosanct for her. Examples are galore on the site, though I have deleted most of them, but tell-tale signs must be there and you can use the site’s search engine to find that too.

    I hope you will read the following notice sent by Mr. SAF RIZVI and my comments below that rethink the issue of thievery on websites. Can a site afford to allow that, particularly in the light of a recent Supreme Court judgement which holds bloggers responsible for what appears on their sites as comments? The fact that this comment section is unmonitored is no longer a defence. The court does not see any difference in the main site and the comment section. Should you then differentiate   I am sure you too as a valuable contributor to www.NewAgeIslam.com want to maintain its dignity and seriousness. Obscurantists would naturally want to disrupt the process of any rethinking among Muslims, as they have nothing to say in favour of keeping the Muslims bound with the pre-Islamic tribalism of the Jahiliya. People resort to abuse and goondagardi when they have no arguments to proffer.

    ----------------------------------------------

    "Mr. Sultan Shahin Editor NewageIslam.com

    "I ask you not to reproduce any of my previous posts without my written permission in your own messages to prove your point of view, Nowhere in your terms and condition it is mentioned that the posts of individuals become the property of NewageIslam.com and If you argue this case then you have no moral or legal right to edit the original messages. I believe you would abstain from reproducing my Posts in future unless allowed by the undersigned. ... I sincerely hope you would maintain the dignity of Journalism and the post of Editor. "

    "SAF RIZVI"

    --------------------------------------------------------------

    I hope Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima and her band of supporters for free and unquestioned copy-right violations have read the comment of their erstwhile supporter Mr. SAF RIZVI who is probably ashamed of his earlier stance and does not want his comments reproduced. According to her this team includes formidable names of honourable and civilised intellectuals and also some tigers who cannot open their foul mouths without abusing somebody and calling them unprintable names. These are the following in the words of Sayyeda kaneez: "Mr. Hasan Iqbal, Mr Kabir and then again Mr Rahmat kabir, Mr Meraj Ziya, Mr Zohair Khan  and his colleagues or relatives (Zuber, Hammad, Salim, Erum, Farhana, Rizwan and  Zuhair) and of course the Two tigers Janab Tabrez Ali /Alam of jaunpur and Janab Mohtaram Aslam khan Barailvi sahib."

    I don't understand why this list does not include either Mr. Traveller or Dr. Sarkar Haider, both of whom have extended unconditional support to free and untrammelled copyright violation in the comment section. Mr. Traveller, it must be pointed out, had some reservations about Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez not having pointed out that the article – the first of the two in question – was not hers when there were demands on the site that her post was so good and useful it should be posted on the  front page of the main site. To his credit he realised that if I had accepted the suggestion made by two readers the article would have gone under her name and at least at that point she should have said that this was not her article and she had merely copy-pasted it from some other site and did not remember from where and whose article it was, though that was not difficult to find out.

     It would be interesting to see what all these gentlemen have to say to Mr. SAF RIZVI's above-mentioned comments which are part of his letter originally posted below on this thread.

    If comments made by somebody on the same website sometime ago cannot be reproduced by the editor of the site as an illustration in his comments to buttress his arguments, with full reference, according to Mr. RIZVI, without his express permission, what case is there for people like Syyeda Kaneez reproducing entire articles as part of their comments from other sites and written by other authors without even mentioning that this article was written by somebody else. The unfortunate thing is that perhaps bound by his sectarian loyalty, (I would love to be proven wrong on this point) even Mr. SAF RIZI, who is so pious a believer in the Holy Quran’s teachings of piety., and so  touchy about his own comments, just comments, mind you, not well-researched original articles, being reproduced as a part of a comment on the same site, will not reprimand his co-sectarian for what must be according to his light abominable thievery calling for legal action on the part of the writer or the publisher.

    If you have not read this request made by Mr. SAF RIZVI to the editor of the site carefully yet, please do so again and again and again. It is very very instructive. It will open your eyes to new avenues. Even the Supreme Court has now said that bloggers are responsible for what appears as comment even in unmonitored sites.

    I hope Mr. SAF RIZVI won't mind my asking readers to read his letter more carefully. I hope he would not feel the need to bring any legal action against www.NewAgeIslam.com  for that. I am only quoting part of his recent comment, not using his letter as my own. After all he has just written it now and won’t be feeling ashamed of it already; he would probably do that later as is his wont.

    Regards, Sultan Shahin

    =====================

    Interested people will also find this instructive:

    From Times of India

     

    A 19-year-old blogger’s case could forever change the ground rules of blogging. Bloggers may no longer express their uninhibited views on everything under the sun, for the Supreme Court said they may face libel and even prosecution for the blog content.

     

    It will no longer be safe to start a blog and invite others to register their raunchy, caustic and even abusive comments on an issue while seeking protection behind the disclaimer — views expressed on the blog are that of the writers.

     

    This chilling warning emerged as a Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice P Sathasivam refused to protect a 19-year-old Kerala boy, who had started a community on Orkut against Shiv Sena, from protection against summons received from a Maharashtra court on a criminal case filed against him.

     

    Petitioner Ajith D had started a community on Orkut against Shiv Sena. In this community, there were several posts and discussions by anonymous persons who alleged that Shiv Sena was trying to divide the country on region and caste basis.

     

    Reacting to these posts, the Shiv Sena youth wing’s state secretary registered a criminal complaint at Thane police station in August 2008 based on which FIR was registered against Ajith under Sections 506 and 295A pertaining to hurting public sentiment.

     

    After getting anticipatory bail from Kerala HC, Ajith moved the Supreme Court through counsel Jogy Scaria seeking quashing of the criminal complaint on the ground that the blog contents were restricted to communication within the community and did not have defamation value. He also pleaded that there was threat to his life if he appeared in a Maharashtra court.

     

    A computer science student, Ajith pleaded that the comments made on the blog were mere exercise of their fundamental right to freedom of expression and speech and could not be treated as an offence by police.

     

    Unimpressed, the Bench said, “We cannot quash criminal proceedings. You are a computer student and you know how many people access internet portals. Hence, if someone files a criminal action on the basis of the content, then you will have to face the case. You have to go before the court and explain your conduct.”

    ----------

    Supreme Court on Liability of Bloggers

     

    While I still don’t have a copy of the order/ judgment, there have been news reports about the Supreme Court holding that a person who starts a blog/ community page cannot claim that it was a community page and not meant for public consumption. I will update this the moment I get hold of the order, but just wanted to flag this for the moment, because of the serious implications that it can have. While bloggers and web content have always been subject to the same rules that determine other forms of publication, there are a number of issues and questions involved in the liability of online content, including whether the author of a blog can be held liable for comments / posts by others.

     

    This for instance could be dependent on interpretation of ‘publishes’ in Sec. 499 of the IPC.

     

    The petition was for quashing the criminal proceedings against him, and this is very common in defamation cases. When someone files a defamation case to harass you, one of the remedies is to approach the high court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure where the complaint can be quashed if there is no prima facie case.

     

    The principles, relevant to our purpose are:

     

    (i) A complaint can be quashed where the allegations made in the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out the case alleged against the accused.

     

    (ii) A complaint may also be quashed where it is a clear abuse of the process of the court, as when the criminal proceeding is found to have been initiated with malafides/malice for wreaking vengeance or to cause harm, or where the allegations are absurd and inherently improbable.

     

    (iii) The power to quash shall not, however, be used to stifle or scuttle a legitimate prosecution. The power should be used sparingly and with abundant caution.

    (iv) The complaint is not required to verbatim reproduce the legal ingredients of the offence alleged. If the necessary factual foundation is laid in the complaint, merely on the ground that a few ingredients have not been stated in detail, the proceedings should not be quashed. Quashing of the complaint is warranted only where the complaint is so bereft of even the basic facts which are absolutely necessary for making out the offence.

     

    So in a case of defamation, they will go into questions of whether or not a prima facie case exists under Sec. 499.

     

    The DNA reports that the order holds that he can be liable for comments by others, but we will need to see the order before we can say this is conclusive.

    http://kafila.org/2009/02/24/supreme-court-on-liability-of-bloggers/ 


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • Dear Mr. Sultan Shahin 

     

    I have gone through legalities involved and liabilities of a blogger so painstakingly researched by you, I have this suggestion, keep up the good work, you never know when it might come handy. I could not understand this fact though? Are you accusing me of running a Blog with blasphemous comments and articles? Gentleman I am not, On the contrary you are. Please do some more research and enlighten us so that we could use your legal expertise about the law of the land against any person who indulges in Blasphemy amounting to hurting sentiments of a large community despite repeated request for not indulging in such activity. Please do add to my little knowledge of IPC / CRPC that govern both you and me as a citizen of India. You lift up a Blasphemous article from a book published in Pakistan by some Firozsons Pvt. Ltd  publications authored by one Juhi Shahin and reproduce it on your website ,  when people protested  and asked you to remove it,  you taunt and threaten with your incomplete research of the IT act 2000 and its amendments and add-ons . Your intentions are not at all honorable Mr Shahin.

    You are advised once again, to remove the article of Niyaz Fatehpuri from your website NewageIslam.com before the matter goes out of your hands and mine as well, and show some respect for people’s sentiments if not to Islam, its Prophet and the Quran.

     

    Do not  get hyper as there is nothing personal about all this.

     

    Regards 

     

    S A F RIZVI


    By SAF RIZVI -



  • Dear Mr Shahin,

     Thanks for your reply.

    First of all, the question of salvation with you quoting Amir Mughal does not arise at all if the realm is of the debate.  As an editor of this site you owe an explanation on Niyaz Fatehpuri stand  whether you endorse his views on Prophet Muhammad and on Quran or not.  So a common visitor like me can be enlightened with your `rationality and guidance'.

     

    No one is acting like Khudai Faujdar; it is rather you who is  always acting like a self imposed  moral policeman of Islam, asking Ulemas to declare Islamic verses as obsolete and for a crime of a band of terrorists wants everything to be altered. And now even questioning the Prophethood of Muhammad (SAW) and Quran as a divine revelation  You know well that terrorist follow no religion except a particular sect.

     

    Only after reading your post I have come to know that Ms Juhi Shahin is your daughter. I don’t know what wisdom of Mr Niyaz Fatehpuri you are talking about as Amir Mughal says quoting his grandson that he repented on his belief on his death bed. If this Mualana Niyaz Fatehpuri whom you take as a symbol of reforms repented on his own follies how can he be a figure of reverence for Muslims and how can his ideology work and take Mullah by the horn.  Please explain as I am loss and out of words to understand your tall claims on this man who in his lifetime repented on his own idiotic work

    To quote Amir Mughal

    his grandson told me that when Allama Niaz about to die he repented from his belief. May Allah grant him peace and forgive him, Amen.

    When an ordinary mortal like Mughal is seeking forgiveness for him, how can you claim his tall stature?  I am sure your daughter must have done you proud with this `great work’ but that in no way alludes that Niyaz Fatehpuri and his so called work was great. It is bizarre to say the least.

    I have no intention of reading in detail about this man neither do have any interest on this mountain of lunacy. For what should one read this man who attacks the core of our belief and whatever I could  read from the site this man Niyaz is confined to the dustbin and will remain there forever.

    I do appreciate your concern on censorship but I still maintain you are making mountain out of molehill on that post by Sayeeda Kaneez and the language you use as thieves does not qualify to you being the editor.  Your characterization of people who have come out in support of Sayeeda kaneez on sectarian basis is  simply outrageous and reflects your narrow mindset.

    I would still maintain that article and comment is too different thing.  I confess that at so many times I have referred to issues including of the Muslim meet in Saudi Arabia in my reply to Mughal Saheb straight from the internet.   Yes if I wrote a separate article for  your site under my byline, then surely I should be  held accountable. You must admit that your site requires  visitors to mention their name

    You are raising such a hullabaloo on this matter like a child after Jamshed Basha was caught red handed.  This is not the least one expected from you  He wrote the article on the main web page of your site and in his name.  Your intent is clear here.

    Yes for using foul languages and crossing the bound of civility, Sayeeda kaneez or others should be kicked off the site  I had endorsed this view earlier but on the plagiarism issue, I have my reservation as you are going out of context just because Basha was caught red handed.

    It also does not look appropriate for the editor of this site which makes tall claim even against the verses of Quran to talk in sectarian manner; visitor to the site should do but not you. You will lose your credibility which in fact you have.

    Last but not the least,  Niyaz Fatehpuri is an extension of what you wrote about abrogation of verses of Quran.  So please don’t give moral platitudes as people can and do read between the lines.


    By MERAJ ZIYA -



  • /10/2009 1:46:12 AM meraj ziya

    My dear Sarkar saheb.

    I have read your post with great amusement.  You compliment Mr Amir Mughal for having discovered Niyaz Fatehpuri grandson exists and by this masterly stroke deflected the debate.

    Mind it Sarkar Haider saheb it is Mr Mughal who has said on this site that the debate should go on and why should one deflect the debate.  With my understanding this Niyaz Fatehpuri holds a view which contradicts our faith and believes.  So I have as much right to defend that our Holy Prophet was a messenger of Allah and that the Holy Quran is a divine revelation as anyone who says the contrary.   It is totally immaterial whether the post belong to a  Sunnis, Shias or even Wahabis

     

    Even the editor of this site says it is important to recite Kalima to become a Muslim and Kalima affirms that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.

     

    Why deflect the debate as you proudly mention of Mughal discovery.  Let us settle the issue for which the article was posted notwithstanding  someone has painstakingly taken a research. No one is trying to tell researchers what they ought to do but everyone has a right to disagree and place things in right perspective as what he or she feels it right.  This is the essence of debate.

     

    When the editor writes that certain verses of Quran needs to be abrogated, it hits the core belief of Muslims.  Should they keep quiet just because one man thinks that way?  The allusion remains the same that Quran verses were relevant for certain period of time and hence outlived their utility. This is canard as I see it. Niyaz Fatehpuri is just an extension of that thinking Mr Sarkar 

    The Jihadi verses as Mr Shahin say can led to exploitation there are innumerable words in Quran which guides humanity to peace, harmony goodness and contentment.  Why not take this aspect?

     

    No one is interested if the site lives or dies on its own, it is the issues raised in the site that needs correction by right minded people and in a more vocal manner.

    DEAR MERAJ SAHAB My Answer is  = I agree with you.

    Aamir deflecting the debate by his master stroke = " usne woh shakh hi kaat di jispe fatehpuri ideology ka aashiyaana tha"-  once Niyaz Fatehpuri repents to Allah on his death bed ( as per reports of one of his grandson Salman then ....Do I need to clarify more?...

    YA RAB NA WO SAMJHE HAIN NA SAMJHENGE MERI BAAT,

    DE AUR SA DIL UNKO ! JO NA DE MUJHKO ZUBAN AUR...!

    ***************************

    Dear Syeeda sahiba walaikumassalam..I haven't changed a bit but try to call an spade a spade. You are a very important commentator on this site and I thought it was my duty to make the editor see the facts as they really are...In my humble opinion you have never claimed the authorship of those ordinarily posted comments therefore accusing you of theft is probably not justified

    At the same time a debate I feel is just a debate and one should not make haste in calling names to the people ( in any case human beings are not supposed to judge in matters of faith ). I am an ardent believer that there is probably no hope of salvation of any kind without the mercy of almighty ( it is just a favour on creators part, a person's efforts per se are not sufficient to win him/ her salvation. And I believe all roads to salvation go through the Bab ul Ilm and his chosen progeny . But whenever a person believes in Bab ul Ilm also knows that he used to scan 70 generations before chopping off heads of enemies, how come his followers appear so much in haste?.. deserts have tricky appearances where we see water...fact is none exists and where we see sunbaked sand often an oasis exists..( that incidently was how Babul ilm discovered water wells on outskirts of Medina and in his honour the place is still officially named ABYAR ALI..  Islam is a desert entity therfore one should exercise caution before drawing hasty conclusions 

    Wassalam and best wishes to you

     


    By Dr.Sarkar Haider -



  • Wahhabis are more successful but Shias too are killing Muslims inside mosques during prayer. Both use Islam to brainwash their cadre. What can we Muslims do to stop this misuse of Islam by very determined and powerful forces? [Sultan Shahin]

    ==================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    For that cause We decreed for the Children of Israel that whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind, and whoso saveth the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind. Our messengers came unto them of old with clear proofs (of Allah's Sovereignty) , but afterwards lo! many of them became prodigals in the earth. [AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD)  Chapter 5: Verse 32]

    It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that a woman was found killed in one of the battles fought by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He disapproved of the killing of women and children. [Muslim]

    It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children.[Muslim]

    Even in a declared war, certain rules must be followed:

    The Holy Prophet (may peace be upon him) has given clear instructions about the behaviour of the Muslim army. He observed:

    "Set out for Jihad in the name of Allah and for the sake of Allah. Do not lay hands on the old verging on death, on women, children and babes. Do not steal anything from the booty and collect together all that falls to your lot in the battlefield and do good, for Allah loves the virtuous and the pious."

    So great is the respect for humanly feelings in Islam that even the wanton destruction of enemy's crops or property is strictly forbidden. The righteous Caliphs followed closely the teachings of Allah and those of His Apostle in letter and spirit the celebrated address which the first Caliph Abu Bakr (Allah be pleased with him) gave to his army while sending her on the expedition to the Syrian borders is permeated with the noble spirit with which the war in Islam is permitted. He said:

    "Stop, O people, that I may give you ten rules for your guidance in the battlefield. Do not commit treachery or deviate from the right path. You must not mutilate dead bodies. Neither kill a child, nor a woman. nor an aged man. Bring no harm to the trees, nor burn them with fire, especially those which are fruitful. Slay not any of the enemy's flock. save for your food. You are likely to pass by people who have devoted their lives to monastic services; leave them alone"

    It is said that once at the time of conquest, a singing girl was brought to al-Muhajir b. Abu Umayya who had been publicly singing satirical poems about Hadrat Abu Bakr. Muhajir got her hand amputated. When the Caliph heard this news, he was shocked and wrote a letter to Muhajir in the following words:

    "I have learnt that you laid hands on a woman who had hurled abuses on me, and, therefore, got her hand amputated. God has not sought vengeance even in the case of polytheism, which is a great crime. He has not permitted mutilation even with regard to manifest infidelity. Try to be considerate and sympathetic in your attitude towards others in future. Never mutilate, because it is a grave offence. God purified Islam and the Muslims from rashness and excessive wrath. You are well aware of the fact that those enemies fell into the hands of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) who had been recklessly abusing him; who had turned him out of his home; and who fought against him, but he never permitted their mutilation."

    Another letter written by hadrat 'Umar the Second Caliph, which is addressed to Sa'd b. Abu Waqqas, speaks eloquently of the noble spirit with which the Muslims have bear exhorted to take up arms:

    "Always search your minds and hearts and stress upon your men the need of perfect integrity and sincerity in the cause of Allah. There should be no material end before them in laying down their lives. but they abould deem it a means whereby they can please their Lord and entitle them. selves to His favour: such a spirit of selflessness should be inculcated in the minds of those who unfortunately lack it. Be firm in the thick of the battle as Allah helps man according to the perseverance that he shows in the cause of His faith and he would be rewarded in accordance with the spirit of sacrifice which he displays for the sake of the Lord. Be careful that those who have been entrusted to your care receive no harm at your hands and are never deprived of any of their legitimate rights."

    Dear Sultan Sahab

    We should do this:

    WHAT IS GOING ON IN PAKISTAN IS HIRABA [means killing people, robbing their money or raping women by an armed group of people]

    The Punishment for such activities are as under:

    The crime of hiraba is based on the following Quranic verse:

    The punishment for those who wage war [yuharibuna] against God and His Prophet, and perpetrate disorders in the land is: kill or crucify them, or have a hand on one side and a foot on the other cut off or banish them from the land (Quran 5:33).

    Hands and legs to be cut off and their eyes to be branded with heated iron pieces and they were thrown at Al-Harra, and when they asked for water to drink, they were not given water. (Bukhari)

    Hiraba is another hadd crime defined in the Quran. It is variously translated as "forcible taking," "highway robbery," "terrorism," or "waging war against the state."

    Islamic legal scholars have interpreted this crime to be any type of forcible assault upon the people involving some sort of taking of property.74 It differs from ordinary theft in that the Quranic crime of theft (sariqa) is a taking by stealth whereas hiraba is a taking by force (Doi 1984, 250, 254; El-Awa 1982, 7). (Thus, the popular translation as "armed robbery.") Although it is generally assumed to be violent public harassment, many scholars have held that it is not limited to acts committed in public places (Sabiq 1993, 2:447).

    It is in the discussions of the crime of hiraba where the crime of rape appears. A brief review of the traditional descriptions of hiraba reveals that rape is specifically included among its various forms. For example, in Fiqh-us-Sunnah, a modern summary of the primary traditional schools of thought on Islamic law, hiraba is described as: a single person or group of people causing public disruption, killing, forcibly taking property or money, attacking or raping women ("hatk al arad"), killing cattle, or disrupting agriculture (Sabiq 1993, 450). Reports of individual scholars on the subject further confirm the hiraba classification of rape. Al-Dasuqi, for example, a Maliki jurist, held that if a person forced a woman to have sex, their actions would be deemed as committing hiraba (Doi 1984, 253). In addition, the Maliki judge Ibn Arabi, relates a story in which a group was attacked and a woman in their party raped. Responding to the argument that the crime did not constitute hiraba because no money was taken and no weapons used, Ibn Arabi replied indignantly that "hiraba with the private parts" is much worse than a hiraba involving the taking of money, and that anyone would rather be subjected to the latter than the former (Sabiq 1993, 2:450). The famous Spanish Muslim jurist, Ibn Hazm, a follower of the Zahiri school, reportedly had the widest definition of hiraba, defining a hiraba offender as: [O]ne who puts people in fear on the road, whether or not with a weapon, at night or day, in urban areas or in open spaces, in the palace of a caliph or a mosque, with or without accomplices, in the desert or in the village, in a large or small city, with one or more people . . . making people fear that they'll be killed, or have money taken, or be raped ("hatk al arad") . . . whether the attackers are one or many (Sabiq 1993, 2:450)."


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • I have never seen any befitting replies from you even on the issue of abrogation of verses from Holy Quran  a copy of which you keep next to your computer.  [Meraj Ziya]

    ============================

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    I say if you are an Muslim Indian Citizen and have a firm belief on Quran and Hadith as well then go to the RSS/VHP Headquarters and ask for Jizya [applying War Like Verses in Quran and its interpretation in Hadith] and see what happens.

    Here is my view on abrogation of Versed in Holy Quran.

    Courtesy Tafsir Ibn-e-Kathir

    Please refer to:

    (106. Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh (We abrogate) or Nunsiha (cause to be forgotten), We bring a better one or similar to it. Know you not that Allah is Able to do all things) (107. Know you not that it is Allah to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth And besides Allah you have neither any Wali (protector or guardian) nor any helper.) [Soorah Al Baqara (The Cow)]

    The Meaning of Naskh

    Ibn Abi Talhah said that Ibn `Abbas said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "Whatever an Ayah We abrogate.'' Also, Ibn Jurayj said that Mujahid said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "Whatever an Ayah We erase.'' Also, Ibn Abi Najih said that Mujahid said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "We keep the words, but change the meaning.'' He related these words to the companions of `Abdullah bin Mas`ud. Ibn Abi Hatim said that similar statements were mentioned by Abu Al-`Aliyah and Muhammad bin Ka`b Al-Qurazi. Also As-Suddi said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "We erase it.'' Further, Ibn Abi Hatim said that it means, "Erase and raise it, such as erasing the following wordings (from the Qur'an), `The married adulterer and the married adulteress: stone them to death,' and, `If the son of Adam had two valleys of gold, he would seek a third.'''

    Ibn Jarir stated that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "Whatever ruling we repeal in an Ayah by making the allowed unlawful and the unlawful allowed.'' The Nasakh only occurs with commandments, prohibitions, permissions, and so forth. As for stories, they do not undergo Nasakh. The word, `Nasakh' literally means, `to copy a book'. The meaning of Nasakh in the case of commandments is removing the commandment and replacing it by another. And whether the Nasakh involves the wordings, the ruling or both, it is still called Nasakh.

    Allah said next,

    (or Nunsiha (cause it to be forgotten)). `Ali bin Abi Talhah said that Ibn `Abbas said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh or Nunsiha) means, "Whatever Ayah We repeal or uphold without change.'' Also, Mujahid said that the companions of Ibn Mas`ud (who read this word Nansa'ha) said that it means, "We uphold its wording and change its ruling.'' Further, `Ubayd bin `Umayr, Mujahid and `Ata' said, `Nansa'ha' means, "We delay it (i.e., do not abrogate it).'' Further, `Atiyyah Al-`Awfi said that the Ayah means, "We delay repealing it.'' This is the same Tafsir provided by As-Suddi and Ar-Rabi` bin Anas. `Abdur-Razzaq said that Ma`mar said that Qatadah said about Allah's statement,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten) "Allah made His Prophet forget what He willed and He abrogated what He will.''Allah's said,

    (We bring a better one or similar to it), better, relates to the benefit provided for the one it addresses, as reported from `Ali bin Abi Talhah that Ibn `Abbas said,

    (We bring a better one) means, "We bring forth a more beneficial ruling, that is also easier for you.'' Also, As-Suddi said that,

    (We bring a better one or similar to it) means, "We bring forth a better Ayah, or similar to that which was repealed.'' Qatadah also said that,

    (We bring a better one or similar to it) means, "We replace it by an Ayah more facilitating, permitting, commanding, or prohibiting. ''

    Naskh occurs even though the Jews deny it

    Allah said,

    (Know you not that Allah is Able to do all things Know you not that it is Allah to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth And besides Allah you have neither any Wali (protector or guardian) nor any helper).

    Allah directed His servants to the fact that He alone is the Owner of His creatures and that He does with them as He wills. Indeed, His is the supreme authority and all creation is His, and just as He created them as He wills, He brings happiness to whom He wills, misery to whom He wills, health to whom He wills and ailment to whom He wills. He also brings success to whom He wills and failure to whom He wills. He judges between His servants as He wills, allows what He wills and disallows what He wills. He decides what He wills, there is no opponent for His judgment, and no one can question Him about what He does, while they shall be questioned. He tests His servants and their obedience to His Messengers by the Naskh. He commands a matter containing a benefit which He knows of, and then He out of His wisdom, prohibits it. Hence, perfect obedience is realized by adhering to His commands, following His Messengers, believing in what ever they convey, implementing their commands and avoiding what they prohibit.

    The statements of Allah here contain tremendous benefit, prove that the Jews are disbelievers and refute their claim that Naskh does not occur, may Allah curse the Jews. In ignorance and arrogance they claimed that the sound mind stipulates that Naskh does not occur. Some of them falsely claimed that there are divine texts that dismiss the possibility that Naskh occurred.

    Imam Abu Ja`far bin Jarir said, "The Ayah means, `Do you not know, O Muhammad, that I alone own the heavens and the earth and that I decide whatever I will in them I forbid whatever I will, change and repeal whatever I will of My previous rulings, whenever I will. I also uphold whatever I will.''

    Ibn Jarir then said, "Although Allah directed His statement indicating His greatness towards His Prophet , He also rejected the lies of the Jews who denied that the rulings of the Torah could undergo Naskh. The Jews also denied the prophethood of Jesus and Muhammad, because of their dislike for what they brought from Allah, such as changing some rulings of the Torah, as Allah commanded. Allah thus proclaimed to the Jews that He owns the heavens and earth and also all authority in them. Further, the subjects in Allah's kingdom are His creation, and they are required to hear and obey His commands and prohibitions. Allah has full authority to command the creation as He wills, forbidding them from what He wills, abrogate what He wills, uphold what He wills, and decide whatever commandments and prohibitions He wills.''
    I (Ibn Kathir) say that the Jews' dismissal of the occurrence of the Naskh is only a case of their disbelief and rebellion. The sound mind does not deny that there could be a Naskh in Allah's commandments, for He decides what He wills, just as He does what He wills. Further, Naskh occurred in previous Books and Law. For instance, Allah allowed Adam to marry his daughters to his sons and then later forbade this practice. Allah also allowed Nuh to eat from all kinds of animals after they left the ark, then prohibited eating some types of foods. Further, marrying two sisters to one man was allowed for Israel and his children, but Allah prohibited this practice later in the Torah. Allah commanded Abraham to slaughter his son, then repealed that command before it was implemented. Also, Allah commanded the Children of Israel to kill those who worshipped the calf and then repealed that command, so that the Children of Israel were not all exterminated. There are many other instances that the Jews admit have occurred, yet they ignore them. Also, it is a well-known fact that their Books foretold about Muhammad and contained the command to follow him. These texts, in their Books, indicate that the Jews were required to follow the Prophet Muhammad and that no good deed would be accepted from them, unless it conformed to Muhammad's Law. The Prophet brought another Book, - the Qur'an -, which is the last revelation from Allah.

    Complete Details Courtesy - Tafsir Ibn-e-Kathir:

     

    Nothing of our revelation (even a single verse) do we abrogate or cause be forgotten, but we bring (in place) one better or the like thereof. Knowest thou not that Allah is Able to do all things? [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 106]

    The Meaning of Naskh       

    Ibn Abi Talhah said that Ibn `Abbas said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "Whatever an Ayah We abrogate.'' Also, Ibn Jurayj said that Mujahid said that,


    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "Whatever an Ayah We erase.'' Also, Ibn Abi Najih said that Mujahid said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "We keep the words, but change the meaning.'' He related these words to the companions of `Abdullah bin Mas`ud. Ibn Abi Hatim said that similar statements were mentioned by Abu Al-`Aliyah and Muhammad bin Ka`b Al-Qurazi. Also As-Suddi said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "We erase it.'' Further, Ibn Abi Hatim said that it means, "Erase and raise it, such as erasing the following wordings (from the Qur'an), `The married adulterer and the married adulteress: stone them to death,' and, `If the son of Adam had two valleys of gold, he would seek a third.'''

    Ibn Jarir stated that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh) means, "Whatever ruling we repeal in an Ayah by making the allowed unlawful and the unlawful allowed.'' The Nasakh only occurs with commandments, prohibitions, permissions, and so forth. As for stories, they do not undergo Nasakh. The word, `Nasakh' literally means, `to copy a book'. The meaning of Nasakh in the case of commandments is removing the commandment and replacing it by another. And whether the Nasakh involves the wordings, the ruling or both, it is still called Nasakh.

    Allah said next,

    (or Nunsiha (cause it to be forgotten)). `Ali bin Abi Talhah said that Ibn `Abbas said that,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do Nansakh or Nunsiha) means, "Whatever Ayah We repeal or uphold without change.'' Also, Mujahid said that the companions of Ibn Mas`ud (who read this word Nansa'ha) said that it means, "We uphold its wording and change its ruling.'' Further, `Ubayd bin `Umayr, Mujahid and `Ata' said, `Nansa'ha' means, "We delay it (i.e., do not abrogate it).'' Further, `Atiyyah Al-`Awfi said that the Ayah means, "We delay repealing it.'' This is the same Tafsir provided by As-Suddi and Ar-Rabi` bin Anas. `Abdur-Razzaq said that Ma`mar said that Qatadah said about Allah's statement,

    (Whatever a verse (revelation) do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten) "Allah made His Prophet forget what He willed and He abrogated what He will.''

    Allah's said,

    (We bring a better one or similar to it), better, relates to the benefit provided for the one it addresses, as reported from `Ali bin Abi Talhah that Ibn `Abbas said,

    (We bring a better one) means, "We bring forth a more beneficial ruling, that is also easier for you.'' Also, As-Suddi said that,

    (We bring a better one or similar to it) means, "We bring forth a better Ayah, or similar to that which was repealed.'' Qatadah also said that,

    (We bring a better one or similar to it) means, "We replace it by an Ayah more facilitating, permitting, commanding, or prohibiting.''

    Naskh occurs even though the Jews deny it       

    Allah said,

    (Know you not that Allah is Able to do all things Know you not that it is Allah to Whom belongs the dominion of the heavens and the earth And besides Allah you have neither any Wali (protector or guardian) nor any helper).

    Allah directed His servants to the fact that He alone is the Owner of His creatures and that He does with them as He wills. Indeed, His is the supreme authority and all creation is His, and just as He created them as He wills, He brings happiness to whom He wills, misery to whom He wills, health to whom He wills and ailment to whom He wills. He also brings success to whom He wills and failure to whom He wills. He judges between His servants as He wills, allows what He wills and disallows what He wills. He decides what He wills, there is no opponent for His judgment, and no one can question Him about what He does, while they shall be questioned. He tests His servants and their obedience to His Messengers by the Naskh. He commands a matter containing a benefit which He knows of, and then He out of His wisdom, prohibits it. Hence, perfect obedience is realized by adhering to His commands, following His Messengers, believing in what ever they convey, implementing their commands and avoiding what they prohibit.

    The statements of Allah here contain tremendous benefit, prove that the Jews are disbelievers and refute their claim that Naskh does not occur, may Allah curse the Jews. In ignorance and arrogance they claimed that the sound mind stipulates that Naskh does not occur. Some of them falsely claimed that there are divine texts that dismiss the possibility that Naskh occurred.

    Imam Abu Ja`far bin Jarir said, "The Ayah means, `Do you not know, O Muhammad, that I alone own the heavens and the earth and that I decide whatever I will in them I forbid whatever I will, change and repeal whatever I will of My previous rulings, whenever I will. I also uphold whatever I will.''

    Ibn Jarir then said, "Although Allah directed His statement indicating His greatness towards His Prophet , He also rejected the lies of the Jews who denied that the rulings of the Torah could undergo Naskh. The Jews also denied the prophethood of Jesus and Muhammad, because of their dislike for what they brought from Allah, such as changing some rulings of the Torah, as Allah commanded. Allah thus proclaimed to the Jews that He owns the heavens and earth and also all authority in them. Further, the subjects in Allah's kingdom are His creation, and they are required to hear and obey His commands and prohibitions. Allah has full authority to command the creation as He wills, forbidding them from what He wills, abrogate what He wills, uphold what He wills, and decide whatever commandments and prohibitions He wills.''

    I (Ibn Kathir) say that the Jews' dismissal of the occurrence of the Naskh is only a case of their disbelief and rebellion. The sound mind does not deny that there could be a Naskh in Allah's commandments, for He decides what He wills, just as He does what He wills. Further, Naskh occurred in previous Books and Law. For instance, Allah allowed Adam to marry his daughters to his sons and then later forbade this practice. Allah also allowed Nuh to eat from all kinds of animals after they left the ark, then prohibited eating some types of foods. Further, marrying two sisters to one man was allowed for Israel and his children, but Allah prohibited this practice later in the Torah. Allah commanded Abraham to slaughter his son, then repealed that command before it was implemented. Also, Allah commanded the Children of Israel to kill those who worshipped the calf and then repealed that command, so that the Children of Israel were not all exterminated. There are
    many other instances that the Jews admit have occurred, yet they ignore them. Also, it is a well-known fact that their Books foretold about Muhammad and contained the command to follow him. These texts, in their Books, indicate that the Jews were required to follow the Prophet Muhammad and that no good deed would be accepted from them, unless it conformed to Muhammad's Law. The Prophet brought another Book, - the Qur'an -, which is the last revelation from Allah.

    (108. Or do you want to ask your Messenger (Muhammad) as Musa (Moses) was asked before (i.e. show us openly our Lord) And he who changes faith for disbelief, verily, he has gone astray from the right way.)

    The Prohibition of Unnecessary Questions

    In this Ayah, Allah forbade the believers from asking the Prophet numerous questions about matters that did not occur yet. Similarly, Allah said,

    (O you who believe! Ask not about things which, if made plain to you, may cause you trouble. But if you ask about them while the Qur'an is being revealed, they will be made plain to you) (5:101).

    This Ayah means, "If you ask about a matter after it is revealed, it shall be duly explained to you.
    Therefore, do not ask about matters that have not occurred yet, for they might become prohibited, due to your questions.'' This is why the Sahih narrated,

    (The greatest criminal among the Muslims is the one who asks if a thing is prohibited, which is not
    prohibited, and it becomes prohibited because of his asking about it.)

    This is why when the Messenger of Allah was asked about a husband who finds another man with his wife; if he exposes the adultery, he will be exposing a major incident; if he is quiet about it, he will be quiet about a major matter. The Messenger of Allah did not like such questions. Later on, Allah revealed the ruling of Mula`anah [Refer to Nur 24:6-9 in the Qur'an]. The Two Sahihs recorded that Al-Mughirah bin Shu`bah said that the Messenger of Allah "Forbade saying, `It was said' and `He said,' and wasting money and asking many questions.'' Muslim recorded that the Prophet said,

    (Leave me as I leave you; those before you were only destroyed because of their excessive questioning and disputing with their Prophets. Therefore, when I command you with a matter, adhere to it as much as you can, and when I forbid from something, avoid it.)

    The Prophet only said this after he told the Companions that Allah has ordered them to perform
    Hajj. A man asked, "Every year, O Messenger of Allah'' The Prophet did not answer him, but he repeated his question three times. Then the Prophet said,

    (No. Had I said yes, it would have been ordained, and you would not have been able to implement it.)

    This is why Anas bin Malik said, "We were forbidden from asking the Messenger of Allah about things. So we were delighted when a bedouin man would come and ask him while we listened.''

    Muhammad bin Ishaq said that Muhammad bin Abi Muhammad told him that `Ikrimah or Sa`id said that Ibn `Abbas said that Rafi` bin Huraymilah or Wahb bin Zayd said, "O Muhammad! Bring us a Book sent down from heaven and which we could read, and make some rivers flow for us,
    then we will follow you and believe in you.'' Allah sent down the answer to this challenge,

    (Or do you want to ask your Messenger (Muhammad ) as Musa was asked before (i.e. show us openly our Lord) And he who changes faith for disbelief, verily, he has gone astray from the right way).

    Allah criticized those who ask the Messenger of Allah about a certain matter just for the purpose of being difficult, just as the Children of Israel asked Musa out of stubbornness, rejection and rebellion. Allah said,

    (And he who changes faith for disbelief) meaning, whoever prefers disbelief to faith,

    (verily, he has gone astray from the right way) meaning, he has strayed from the straight path, to the path of ignorance and misguidance. This is the case of those who deviated from accepting the Prophets and obeying them and those who kept asking their Prophets unnecessary questions in defiance and disbelief, just as Allah said,

    (Have you not seen those who have changed the blessings of Allah into disbelief (by denying Prophet Muhammad and his Message of Islam), and caused their people to dwell in the house of destruction Hell, in which they will burn and what an evil place to settle in!) (14:28-29).

    Abu Al-`Aliyah commented, "They exchanged comfort for hardship.''

    ===================================

    Another Explanation:

    Quran says in the following verse:

    “None of Our revelations do We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, but We substitute something better or similar: knowest thou not that Allah hath power over all things?” [AL-BAQARA (THE COW)  2:106]

    A reference to this is also made in chapter 16 verse 101 of Surah Nahl. The Arabic word mentioned is ayat which means ‘signs’ or ‘verses’ and which can also mean ‘revelations’. This verse of the Quran can be interpreted in two different ways:

    a.  The revelations that are abrogated are those revelations that were revealed before the Quran, for example the Torah, the Zaboor and the Injeel.

    Here Allah says that He does not cause the previous revelations to be forgotten but He substitutes them with something better or similar, indicating that the Torah, the Zaboor and the Injeel were substituted by the Quran.

    b. If we consider that the Arabic word ayat in the above verse refers to the verses of the Quran, and not previous revelations, then it indicates that none of the verses of the Quran are abrogated by Allah but substituted with something better or similar. This means that certain verses of the Quran, that were revealed earlier were substituted by verses that were revealed later. I agree with both the interpretations.

    Many Muslims and non-Muslims misunderstand the second interpretation to mean that some of the earlier verses of the Quran were abrogated and no longer hold true for us today, as they have been replaced by the later verses of the Quran or the abrogating verses. This group of people even wrongly believe that these verses contradict each other.

    Let us analyze a few such examples.

    2. Produce a recital like the Quran / 10 Surahs / 1 Surah:

    Some pagan Arabs alleged that the Quran was forged by Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]. Allah  challenges these Arabs in the following verse of Surah Al-Isra:

    “Say: If the whole of Mankind and Jinns were together to produce the like of this Quran they could not produce the like thereof, even if they backed up each other with help and support.” [AL-ISRA (ISRA', THE NIGHT JOURNEY, CHILDREN OF ISRAEL) 17:88]

    Later the challenge was made easy in the following verse of Surah Al-Hud:

    Or they may say, “He forged it.” Say, “Bring ye then ten Surahs forged, like unto it, and call (to your aid) whomsover ye can, other than Allah, if ye speak the truth!’.” [HUD (HUD) 11:13]

    It was made easier in the following verse of Surah Yunus:

    “Or do they say, “He forged it”? Say: “Bring then a Surah like unto it, and call (to your aid) anyone you can, besides Allah, if it be ye speak the truth!’.” [YUNUS (JONAH) 10:38]

    Finally in Surah Al-Baqarah, Allah further simplified the challenge:

    And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Surah like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (if there are any) besides Allah if your (doubts) are true.

    But if ye cannot - and of a surety ye cannot - then fear the Fire whose fuel is Men and Stones - which is prepared for those who reject faith”. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) 2:23-24]

    Thus Allah made the challenges progressively easier. The progressively revealed verses of the Quran first challenged the pagans to produce a book like the Quran, then challenged them to produce ten Surahs (chapters) like those in the Quran, then one Surah and finally it challenges them to produce one Surah somewhat similar (mim mislihi) to the Quranic Surahs. This does not mean that the later verses that were revealed i.e. of Surah Baqarah chapter 2 verses 23 and 24 contradict the earlier three verses. Contradiction implies mentioning two things that cannot be possible simultaneously, or cannot take place simultaneously.

    The earlier verses of the Quran i.e. the abrogated verses are still the word of God and the information contained in it is true to this day. For instance the challenge to produce a recital like the Quran stands to this day. Similarly the challenge to produce ten Surahs and one Surah exactly like the Quran also holds true and the last challenge of producing one surah somewhat similar to the Quran also holds true. It does not contradict the earlier challenges, but this is the easiest of all the challenges posed by the Quran. If the last challenge cannot be fulfilled, the question of anyone fulfilling the other three more difficult challenges does not arise.

    Gradual prohibition of Khimr [Liquor and Narcotics]


    Another example of such verses is that related to gradual prohibition of intoxicants. The first revelation of the Quran to deal with intoxicants was the following verse from Surah Baqarah:

    “They ask thee concerning wine and gambling say: ‘In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit’.” [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) 2:219]

    The next verse to be revealed regarding intoxicants is the following verse from Surah Nisa:

    “O ye who believe! approach not prayers with a mind befogged, until ye can understand all that ye say” [AN-NISA (WOMEN) 4:43]

    The last verse to be revealed regarding intoxicants was the following verse from Surah Al-Maidah:

    “O ye who believe! intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination of Satan’s handiwork; eschew such (abomination), that ye may prosper.” [AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD)5:90]

    The Quran was revealed over a period of 22½ years. Many reforms that were brought about in the society were gradual. This was to facilitate the adoption of new laws by the people. An abrupt change in society always leads to rebellion and anarchy.

    The prohibition of intoxicants was revealed in three stages. The first revelation only mentioned that in the intoxicants there is great sin and some profit but the sin is greater than the profit. The next revelation prohibited praying in an intoxicated state, indicating that one should not consume intoxicants during the day, since a Muslim has to pray five times a day. This verse does state that when one is not praying at night one is allowed to consume intoxicants. It means one may have or one may not have. The Quran does not comment on it. If this verse had mentioned that one is allowed to have intoxicants while not praying then there would have been a contradiction. Allah chose words appropriately. Finally the total prohibition of intoxicants at all times was revealed in Surah Maidah chapter 5 verse 90.

    This clearly indicates that the three verses do not contradict each other. Had they been contradicting, it would not have been possible to follow all the three verses simultaneously. Since a Muslim is expected to follow each and every verse of the Quran, only by following the last verse i.e. of Surah Maidah (5:90), he simultaneously agrees and follows the previous two verses.

    4. Quran does not contain any contradictions

    The theory of abrogation does not imply that there is a contradiction in the Quran, since it is possible to follow all the verses of the Quran at the same time.

    If there is a contradiction in the Quran, then it cannot be the word of Allah.

    “Do they not consider the Quran (with care)? Had it been from other than Allah, they would surely have found therein much discrepancy (contradictions).” [AN-NISA (WOMEN) 4:82]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

    It would help us all a great deal and probably help those gentlemanly visitors stay back who are fearful of proliferating Khudai Faujdaars and Khjudai Hawaldaars on the site, if people like Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima, but not just her, others of her ilk too, were to ponder over the implications of the following post by Mr. Aamir Mughal and take it in the right spirit. None of us has been deputized by God to look after the spiritual health of other souls. It would be enough if we were to take care of ourselves. There is no point in behaving like politicians bent on proving the other wrong or downsizings an opponent.

    We Muslims are going through a very difficult phase of our history. In the name of our religion and our Holy Quran and the history of what our beloved Prophet Mohammad did in a very difficult situation, there are people claiming to be Muslims who are creating mayhem in the world, killing Muslims and non-Muslims alike, all on the self-proclaimed authority of the Quran. So one Muslim - anyone who claims to say the kalmia is a Muslim, don’t ask for any further credentials – comes up with an idea that we abrogate those verses of the Quran which ask us to kill Kafirs, etc., the so-called Jihadi verses, as they no longer apply to us in any case. We are no longer living in the same situation and are not likely to.

    Now this idea is not acceptable to you. Fine! Come up with a better idea.

    The issue is not the abrogation of the verses or their declaration as obsolete. The issue is how to tackle these marauders who are brainwashing our youths into becoming killing machines and suicidal zombies killing Muslims inside mosques during prayers and killing others everywhere, giving our religion a bad name too in the process. Pakistani mosques have become a proxy battlefield between Saudi and Iranian versions of Islam. Wahhabis are more successful but Shias too are killing Muslims inside mosques during prayer. Both use Islam to brainwash their cadre. What can we Muslims do to stop this misuse of Islam by very determined and powerful forces? This is the real question. Let us ponder over that instead of looking for ways to disparage each other.

    I hope the readers concerned will ponder over Mr. Mughal’s following post and say goodbye to their predilection for playing Khudai Hawaldars and Faujdaars.

     ------------------------------

    3/10/2009 12:13:59 AM

    Aamir Mughal

    Amir Moghul Bhaijan salaamz

     

    You mean to say, your stand on issues of faith in Islam is determined by what I feel and say about you? How can you be so silly Amir Moghul bhaijan…You should freely speak about your faith with conviction irrespective of what other have to say, be it me or be it any  friend or foe. [Sayyeda]

    -----------------------

     

    Dear Ms Sayyeda,

     

    Please read the previous pages wherein I tried to refute Late. Allama Neyaz Fatehpuri's views and ideology with the references of Quran and Hadith [Dr Sarkar and Traveller have mentioned and not only them but Sultan Sahab as well]. Regarding speaking freely about faith one has to be careful on this website where in the presence of Deputy Allah Mian [i.e. You] who hold the lease and certificate of Kafir [Infidel], Momin [Muslim], Jahannumi [Infernal] and Jannati [Successful] and not only this certificate but also hold magnifying glass to check our Filthy Bloodline [as per Ms.Sayyeda] and doubtful status [whether those who differ with Ms. Sayyeda's view, are Legitimate or Illegitimate].

     

    Ms Sayyeda Kaneez in the light of her own statement

     

    "QUOTE"

    12/19/2008 9:43:41 AM                           Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima 

     Janab Hasan Iqbal  sahab  salaamun alaikum

     Both Amir moghul and Jamsed Basha are cheats and born from bad blood, Amir Moghul will stoop down to any level to defend his crossbreed ancestors, Janab Hasan sahab , ye Amir Moghul aur Jamshed Basha ‘KUTTEY ki sab se Ghatia Nasal ke log hain’

    "UNQUOTE"


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • "Mr. Sultan Shahin Editor NewageIslam.com

    "I ask you not to reproduce any of my previous posts without my written permission in your own messages to prove your point of view, Nowhere in your terms and condition it is mentioned that the posts of individuals become the property of NewageIslam.com and If you argue this case then you have no moral or legal right to edit the original messages. I believe you would abstain from reproducing my Posts in future unless allowed by the undersigned. ... I sincerely hope you would maintain the dignity of Journalism and the post of Editor. "

    "SAF RIZVI"

    --------------------------

    I hope Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima and her band of supporters for free and unquestioned copy-right violations have read the comment of their erstwhile supporter Mr. SAF RIZVI who is probably ashamed of his earlier stance and does not want his comments reproduced. According to her this team includes formidable names of honourable and civilised intellectuals and also some tigers who cannot open their foul mouths without abusing somebody and calling them unprintable names. These are the following in the words of Sayyeda kaneez: "Mr. Hasan Iqbal, Mr Kabir and then again Mr Rahmat kabir, Mr Meraj Ziya, Mr Zohair Khan  and his colleagues or relatives (Zuber, Hammad, Salim, Erum, Farhana, Rizwan and  Zuhair) and of course the Two tigers Janab Tabrez Ali /Alam of jaunpur and Janab Mohtaram Aslam khan Barailvi sahib."

    I don't understand why this list does not include either Mr. Traveller or Dr. Sarkar Haider, both of whom have extended unconditional support to free and untrammelled copyright violation in the comment section. Mr. Traveller, it must be pointed out, had some reservations about Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez not having pointed out that the article – the first of the two in question – was not hers when there were demands on the site that her post was so good and useful it should be posted on the  front page of the main site. To his credit he realised that if I had accepted the suggestion made by two readers the article would have gone under her name and at least at that point she should have said that this was not her article and she had merely copy-pasted it from some other site and did not remember from where and whose article it was, though that was not difficult to find out.

     It would be interesting to see what all these gentlemen have to say to Mr. SAF RIZVI's above-mentioned comments which are part of his letter originally posted below on this thread.

    If comments made by somebody on the same website sometime ago cannot be reproduced by the editor of the site as an illustration in his comments to buttress his arguments, with full reference, according to Mr. RIZVI, without his express permission, what case is there for people like Syyeda Kaneez reproducing entire articles as part of their comments from other sites and written by other authors without even mentioning that this article was written by somebody else. The unfortunate thing is that perhaps bound by his sectarian loyalty, (I would love to be proven wrong on this point) even Mr. SAF RIZI, who is so pious a believer in the Holy Quran’s teachings of piety., and so  touchy about his own comments, just comments, mind you, not well-researched original articles, being reproduced as a part of a comment on the same site, will not reprimand his co-sectarian for what must be according to his light abominable thievery calling for legal action on the part of the writer or the publisher.

    If you have not read this request made by Mr. SAF RIZVI to the editor of the site carefully yet, please do so again and again and again. It is very very instructive. It will open your eyes to new avenues. Even the Supreme Court has now said that bloggers are responsible for what appears as comment even in unmonitored sites.

    I hope Mr. SAF RIZVI won't mind my asking readers to read his letter more carefully . I hope he would not feel the need to bring any legal action against www.NewAgeIslam.com  for that. I am only quoting part of his recent comment, not using his letter as my own. After all he has just written it now and won’t be feeling ashamed of it already; he would probably do that later as is his wont.

    Interested people will also find this instructive:

    From Times of India

     

    A 19-year-old blogger’s case could forever change the ground rules of blogging. Bloggers may no longer express their uninhibited views on everything under the sun, for the Supreme Court said they may face libel and even prosecution for the blog content.

     

    It will no longer be safe to start a blog and invite others to register their raunchy, caustic and even abusive comments on an issue while seeking protection behind the disclaimer — views expressed on the blog are that of the writers.

     

    This chilling warning emerged as a Bench comprising Chief Justice K G Balakrishnan and Justice P Sathasivam refused to protect a 19-year-old Kerala boy, who had started a community on Orkut against Shiv Sena, from protection against summons received from a Maharashtra court on a criminal case filed against him.

     

    Petitioner Ajith D had started a community on Orkut against Shiv Sena. In this community, there were several posts and discussions by anonymous persons who alleged that Shiv Sena was trying to divide the country on region and caste basis.

     

    Reacting to these posts, the Shiv Sena youth wing’s state secretary registered a criminal complaint at Thane police station in August 2008 based on which FIR was registered against Ajith under Sections 506 and 295A pertaining to hurting public sentiment.

     

    After getting anticipatory bail from Kerala HC, Ajith moved the Supreme Court through counsel Jogy Scaria seeking quashing of the criminal complaint on the ground that the blog contents were restricted to communication within the community and did not have defamation value. He also pleaded that there was threat to his life if he appeared in a Maharashtra court.

     

    A computer science student, Ajith pleaded that the comments made on the blog were mere exercise of their fundamental right to freedom of expression and speech and could not be treated as an offence by police.

     

    Unimpressed, the Bench said, “We cannot quash criminal proceedings. You are a computer student and you know how many people access internet portals. Hence, if someone files a criminal action on the basis of the content, then you will have to face the case. You have to go before the court and explain your conduct.”

    ----------

    Supreme Court on Liability of Bloggers

     

    While I still don’t have a copy of the order/ judgment, there have been news reports about the Supreme Court holding that a person who starts a blog/ community page cannot claim that it was a community page and not meant for public consumption. I will update this the moment I get hold of the order, but just wanted to flag this for the moment, because of the serious implications that it can have. While bloggers and web content have always been subject to the same rules that determine other forms of publication, there are a number of issues and questions involved in the liability of online content, including whether the author of a blog can be held liable for comments / posts by others.

     

    This for instance could be dependent on interpretation of ‘publishes’ in Sec. 499 of the IPC.

     

    The petition was for quashing the criminal proceedings against him, and this is very common in defamation cases. When someone files a defamation case to harass you, one of the remedies is to approach the high court under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure where the complaint can be quashed if there is no prima facie case.

     

    The principles, relevant to our purpose are:

     

    (i) A complaint can be quashed where the allegations made in the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety, do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out the case alleged against the accused.

     

    (ii) A complaint may also be quashed where it is a clear abuse of the process of the court, as when the criminal proceeding is found to have been initiated with malafides/malice for wreaking vengeance or to cause harm, or where the allegations are absurd and inherently improbable.

     

    (iii) The power to quash shall not, however, be used to stifle or scuttle a legitimate prosecution. The power should be used sparingly and with abundant caution.

    (iv) The complaint is not required to verbatim reproduce the legal ingredients of the offence alleged. If the necessary factual foundation is laid in the complaint, merely on the ground that a few ingredients have not been stated in detail, the proceedings should not be quashed. Quashing of the complaint is warranted only where the complaint is so bereft of even the basic facts which are absolutely necessary for making out the offence.

     

    So in a case of defamation, they will go into questions of whether or not a prima facie case exists under Sec. 499.

     

    The DNA reports that the order holds that he can be liable for comments by others, but we will need to see the order before we can say this is conclusive.

    http://kafila.org/2009/02/24/supreme-court-on-liability-of-bloggers/


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • Regarding speaking freely about faith one has to be careful on this website where in the presence of Deputy Allah Mian [i.e. You`Amir Mughal on Sayeeda Kaneez'

     

    Dear Mughal Saheb,

    What do you have to say on your views?.  You have quoted so many verses on knowing from the heart which in English was just  an idiom. You went to the extent of saying this is kufr

      But attributing something to Allah and making such mundane  and inane remark on Allah Subnahu is shirk and kufr and blasphemy. I dont have to tell you this.  You say you recite Kalima (sunni or Shia) which spell  there is no god except Allah so where has the Deputy come from.  Dont make fun at the cost of Creator of heaven and Hell.  By referring Deputy Allah Mian  you have also questioned the concept of tawheed.

    I am also surprised with Traveler who jumped and shreiked Bravo Aamir as if you  both have formed a mutual admiration club

     I wanted to end my debate  with you but this matter jolted me

    "Go through Ms. Juhi Shahin's article [read minutely every paragraph of Late. Neyaz Fatehpuri] and place Quran, Hadith and History books near your computer table and start giving befitting replies and that's what I do." Amir mughal 

    Do exactlty the same and see what Quran and Hadith (not of Abdul ibn Wahab or  al saud) say on attribution to Allah and revert back to me please.

    I have never seen any befitting replies from you even on the issue of abrogation of verses from Holy Quran  a copy of which you keep next to your computer.  


    By MERAJ ZIYA -



  • Dear Mughal Saheb,

    In the core of your heart you believe what Niyaz Fatehpuri says. [Meraj Ziya]

    =============================

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    Please do read what your write because how come you know as to what is in my heart and that claim of yours is itself Kufr [Disbelief], Allah says..

    inna Allaha AAaleemun bithati alssudoori

    Allah knoweth well the secrets of your hearts. [AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD) Chapter 5 - Verse 7]

    Qul in tukhfoo ma fee sudoorikum aw tubdoohu yaAAlamhu Allahu wayaAAlamu ma fee alssamawati wama fee alardi waAllahu AAala kulli shayin qadeerun

    Say: "Whether ye hide what is in your hearts or reveal it, Allah knows it all [AL-E-IMRAN (THE FAMILY OF 'IMRAN, THE HOUSE OF 'IMRAN) Chapter 3 - Verse 29]

    YaAAlamu ma fee alssamawati waalardi wayaAAlamu ma tusirroona wama tuAAlinoona waAllahu AAaleemun bithati alssudoori

    He knows what is in the heavens and on earth; and He knows what ye conceal and what ye reveal: yea, Allah knows well the (secrets) of (all) hearts. [AT-TAGHABUN (MUTUAL DISILLUSION, HAGGLING) Chapter 64 - Verse 4]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Mughal Saheb,

    As I have said my apprehension about you is totally correct. In the core of your heart you believe what Niyaz Fatehpuri says. This was evident with the post that I read this morning Before you, the Ummayads led by Muawiya and his son lecherous yazeed believed the same about our Holy Prophet. 

    Forget Shia or Sunni Kalima they are unison on one issue that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah”.  This you agree  There is no debate on the issue and you prove by quoting the photocopy.   This is what I have been saying. Niyaz Fatehpuri and Juhi Shahin have attacked this very essence of kalima and hence this resentment.  What else is the debate.

     At least one expects some intelligence from you but you jump on all issues making fool of yourself  all the time  I am sorry you have thoroughly disappointed me once again with your narrow mindset

    You have a habit  of deflecting the issue because it hurts one group of people who have been destroying all remnants of Holy Prophet like Jannatul Baqi, his ancestral house and everything related to Holy Prophet Mughal Saheb, Islam has survived 1400 years with the basic believe that There is no god except Allah and  Muhammad is his messenger and it will survive till eternity, whatever you and your masters in Saudi Arabia do and what crap this mountain of lunacy called Niyaz Fatehpuri writes

    I end my debate with you on this issue


    By meraj ziya -



  • My dear Sarkar saheb.

    I have read your post with great amusement.  You compliment Mr Amir Mughal for having discovered Niyaz Fatehpuri grandson exists and by this masterly stroke deflected the debate.

    Mind it Sarkar Haider saheb it is Mr Mughal who has said on this site that the debate should go on and why should one deflect the debate.  With my understanding this Niyaz Fatehpuri holds a view which contradicts our faith and believes.  So I have as much right to defend that our Holy Prophet was a messenger of Allah and that the Holy Quran is a divine revelation as anyone who says the contrary.   It is totally immaterial whether the post belong to a  Sunnis, Shias or even Wahabis

     

    Even the editor of this site says it is important to recite Kalima to become a Muslim and Kalima affirms that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.

     

    Why deflect the debate as you proudly mention of Mughal discovery.  Let us settle the issue for which the article was posted notwithstanding  someone has painstakingly taken a research. No one is trying to tell researchers what they ought to do but everyone has a right to disagree and place things in right perspective as what he or she feels it right.  This is the essence of debate.

     

    When the editor writes that certain verses of Quran needs to be abrogated, it hits the core belief of Muslims.  Should they keep quiet just because one man thinks that way?  The allusion remains the same that Quran verses were relevant for certain period of time and hence outlived their utility. This is canard as I see it. Niyaz Fatehpuri is just an extension of that thinking Mr Sarkar 

    The Jihadi verses as Mr Shahin say can led to exploitation there are innumerable words in Quran which guides humanity to peace, harmony goodness and contentment.  Why not take this aspect?

     

    No one is interested if the site lives or dies on its own, it is the issues raised in the site that needs correction by right minded people and in a more vocal manner.

     


    By meraj ziya -



  • BRAVO AAMIR.... !!!!!

    Could not be described better than this ( Few words and full discription of our good old Syyeda)


    By traveler -



  • Amir Moghul Bhaijan salaamz

     

    You mean to say, your stand on issues of faith in Islam is determined by what I feel and say about you? How can you be so silly Amir Moghul bhaijan…You should freely speak about your faith with conviction irrespective of what other have to say, be it me or be it any  friend or foe. [Sayyeda]

    =========================

     

    Dear Ms Sayyeda,

     

    Please read the previous pages wherein I tried to refute Late. Allama Neyaz Fatehpuri's views and ideology with the references of Quran and Hadith [Dr Sarkar and Traveller have mentioned and not only them but Sultan Sahab as well]. Regarding speaking freely about faith one has to be careful on this website where in the presence of Deputy Allah Mian [i.e. You] who hold the lease and certificate of Kafir [Infidel], Momin [Muslim], Jahannumi [Infernal] and Jannati [Successful] and not only this certificate but also hold magnifying glass to check our Filthy Bloodline [as per Ms.Sayyeda] and doubtful status [whether those who differ with Ms. Sayyeda's view, are Legitimate or Illegitimate].

     

    Ms Sayyeda Kaneez in the light of her own statement

     

    "QUOTE"

    12/19/2008 9:43:41 AM                           Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima 

     Janab Hasan Iqbal  sahab  salaamun alaikum

     Both Amir moghul and Jamsed Basha are cheats and born from bad blood, Amir Moghul will stoop down to any level to defend his crossbreed ancestors, Janab Hasan sahab , ye Amir Moghul aur Jamshed Basha ‘KUTTEY ki sab se Ghatia Nasal ke log hain’

    "UNQUOTE"


    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

    It was here I was sure that on issue like Niyaz Fatehpuri article that was posted on this site you would have taken the lead from the front.  But sorry I was thoroughly disappointed with the post that I read this morning by you. Mughal Saheb [Meraj Ziya]

     

    ==========================================

     

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

     

    If you have read my very early post on Allama Neyaz Fatehpuri. Dr Sarkar has referred this post of mine

     

    3/5/2009 7:53:42 PM                                                                                   Aamir Mughal

     

    I think the discussants on this page are forgetting that we are supposed to be discussing Allama Niaz Fatehpuri’s ideas [Sultan Shahin]

    =======================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

     

    Grandson of Allama Niaz Fatehpuri is a very dear friend of mine and lives in Karachi and is in Publishing Business/Book Shop. I have read the famous book 'Mann O Yazdan' by Niaz Fatehpuri and that book is not for weak hearted "Muslims". Another fact is that Najis [Filth] Mawlana Mawdudi [Founder of Jamat-e-Islami] had been Secretary of Allama Niaz Fatehpuri [goodluck for Mawdudi and badluck for Niaz Fatehpuri]. Basically Niaz Fatehpuri is one of the Notorious Hadith Rejector but his grandson told me that when Allama Niaz about to die he repented from his belief. May Allah grant him peace and forgive him, Amen.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • How would I be able to stand with all followers of Islam on the matter of Neyaz Fatehpuri when Respected and Honourable Ms Sayyeda Kaneez has declared, read in her own words;  (Amir Moghul)

    Amir Moghul Bhaijan salaamz

    You mean to say, your stand on issues of faith in Islam is determined by what I feel and say about you?

    How can you be so silly Amir Moghul bhaijan…You should freely speak about your faith with conviction irrespective of what other have to say, be it me or be it any  friend or foe.


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Dr. Sarkar haider  please accept my salaam… of course if you really exist… other wise let it be.  What has become of you and  your erstwhile advocacy of humanity and faith?   All the good things you have been posting earlier was  only lies and a  façade?  Your last post is your real identity then? Should I update my data or you want to give it another try and come back saner?


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Dear Mughal Saheb,

    Thanks a lot for your prompt reply.  As the site does not open beyond one section I was not able to read your earlier comments.  What I read today was your post on Quran and it appeared you were justifying Niyaz Fatehpuri views on our Prophet ad the Holy Quran much the same way as Zakir Naik supports terrorist " All Muslims should be terrorist”.

    I have said I may have differences with you but there are issues which concerns all of us.  In no matter our debate has personal prejudices.  I have admired you for your humility and often for your back ground sourcing of material.

    Regarding Tabrez Ali and Kaneez Sayeeda, I would like to join issues with you that debate has to be within the norms of civilized society.  We are debating and finding answers to many queries but we are not each other enemies No way.  

    If you recall I was the first one to take a serious view of the post by Tabrez Ali and later of Aslam Khan Bareilvi and wrote a note to the editor. I still demand that people who use such filthy language need be kicked off the site including Kaneez Sayeeda for using the language which you have posted above

    On the current issue, as Sultan Shahin says` Freedom of expression, however, is not license to abuse and mock people and steal stuff from other publications’ But Mr Shahin has forgotten that the article he posted  was mocking  people of the stature of our Holy Prophet and our Holy Book the Quran.  Is this the freedom of expression, Mr Sultan Shahin defines that hurts and challenges the sentiment and believes of billion of Muslims

    It was here I was sure that on issue like Niyaz Fatehpuri article that was posted on this site you would have taken the lead from the front.  But sorry I was thoroughly disappointed with the post that I read this morning by you. Mughal Saheb

     


    By MERAJ ZIYA -



  • Dear Mr. Sarkar Haider   ??

    Having read your long winding summary of who said what, I am still at loss as to what actually you wanted to say? Would you make your stand clear (for the record) on which side you are and what prompted you to come out from your slumber and Support an exposed Enemy of  Islam Mr. Sultan Shahin who did not leave any stone unturned to commit GROSS BLASPHEMY by asking to abrogate and render obsolete certain verses from the holy QURAN at an earlier occasion, and now this Nonsense of Niyaz Fatehpuri. It is also important to note that this book of Juhi Shahin is published in Pakistan a country already fighting a loosing battle against the insurgents and Talibans and going through its worst state of affairs since the country came into being. I believe such a book would be banned in India and would not see the light of the day. Thanks to the level headed and peace loving population of India.

    ***************************************************

    Mr. Sultan Shahin Editor NewageIslam.com

    I ask you not to reproduce any of my previous posts without my written permission in your own messages to prove your point of view, Nowhere in your terms and condition it is mentioned that the posts of individuals become the property of NewageIslam.com and If you argue this case then you have no moral or legal right to edit the original messages. I believe you would abstain from reproducing my Posts in future unless allowed by the undersigned. I have absolutely lost all interest in your hate spreading Blasphemous site ever since you asked to abrogate the verses of Holy Quran I sincerely hope you would maintain the dignity of Journalism and the post of Editor.

    SAF RIZVI


    By SAF RIZVI -



  • CONFUSION seems to be the present Mantra.. to blow things out of proportion does not help anyone except manipulators.  please all brothers and sisters abstain from mud slinging and all of us come out of the delucions  of persecution and grandeose.. hum sab bahut chhote hain "quran says".. and walk humbly !! if you walk with risen head remember you are not going to surpass the mountains and if you choose to stamp the earth with your force you can never tear it....

    Editor tries to see theft when strictly speaking none has taken place...

    someone thinks Aamir Mughal is supporting the NIYAZ FATEHPURI's stand whereas in fact the poor chap is trying his level best to do otherwise ( it was Aamir Mughal's revelation that a grandson of late maulana fatehpuri exists..and with his single masterly stroke he had deflected the entire debate).

    Someone is accusing TRAVELER of calling AVERAGE MUSLIM"s MINDSET " PROFANE" and asks for his clarification whereas to the best of my ability to make out i see just the opposite ( Profanity is addressed to Maulana's views and to those mindsets who try to support such outrageous thoughts "read editor of the site"

    One lady leaves no stone unturned to make things appear HYSTERIONIC as if sky is just about to fall on everybody's head , she never forgets to mention her superior race from all the julahas in the world at the same time she is teaching a poor traveler that there are no grades among muslims!  whereas infact the entire universe seems to be graded rightly or wrongly ( ref. to grades of IMAAN, Heaven, Hell.. infact Quran innumerable times compares among believers saying " AND DO YOU THINK THEY CAN EVER BE CALLED EQUALS"? like for example when comparing those who performed Hijrat (migration to Medina) and those who did not..

    she further advices the poor chap not to TRAVEL otherwise he is likely to gather SHIRK..intresting thought indeed... I always thought travelling made any individual RICHER

    Dear editor don't you rember it was a woman who seduced Adam and ensured his doom? was it really necessary to fall for her tactics..

    The entire muslim ummah seems devided among sunnis/shias/wahabis/ etc. and this seems to serve them at least one purpose " THEY HAVE A GROUP TO FALL BACK ON IN TIMES OF CRISIS".. I have begun to think that probably ancient Hindu and Buddist sages were wrong in assuming the forms of a lone treveler seeking....seeking.... and more seeking .... 

    the followers of AHLUL BAIT suddenly appear so unforgiving that they seem to have started a compaign to close down the website itself ( THINK OUR WAY OR ELSE YOU WON'T EXIST TO THINK)...intresting indeed!!!  why they appear to be JUST THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN which is carrying intolerant Wahabiyat on one side?..

    Someone even tries to define the way a research ought to be undertaken... it does not matter what be the outcome of any study as long as requirements of theses are met the work is enough to get the reseracher a Ph.D. and to a plain mind this may appear ridiculous that how black and white both can enable you to earn Ph.D. but this is precisely the edifice on which entire humanity has progressed in terms of statistics we call it NULL HYPOTHESES .

    Someone is bent upon putting the controversial article on the main page as the opening face of the website....for him probably number of comments matter more than respecting the wishes of majority readers, doesn't matter if no more than latest two pages could be opened by the visitor ( some website hiccup i guess)

    I won't bore the readers anymore by writing further but before I close I request all the respected regulars and esteemed visitors to please come out of this chaos where confusion rules supreme so much so that Aamir Mughal and Traveler appear on the opposite front where infact they fight by our side...


    By Dr.Sarkar Haider -



  • Dear Ziya Saheb,

    I am glad you have at least taken note of the issue of Sayyeda Kaneez lifting full-length well-researched articles from other sites and putting them in her comments without any reference to the fact that this had been lifted from elsewhere. Also, she did not mention this fact when her supporters on the site started demanding that one of two such articles be put on the front page as a main article as they were very well-written and served a good cause. Also, even when the first one was discovered by one reader to have been taken from elsewhere and she was asked if the other one too had been lifted, she remained completely silence, even though was continuing to post her comments on the site mocking other visitors and abusing them. Now, with the full-throated support of her sect, she keeps mocking serious visitors on the site, some of whom have been put off from visiting or at least contributing to the site.

    So you will realise that this is a serious matter for me and I have to tackle it. What makes it more problematic is my own firm belief in even a brazen, shameless thief’s right to express herself, though not to use other writer’s and other publication’s material without reference and also not to make fun of serious interlocutors on the site. It would be easiest for me to blacklist her or to turn the site itself into a monitored one, to save myself from all this trouble. But I would like to continue with the present experiment of giving full freedom to the site’s commentators and even allowing them to edit their own stuff to direct our attention to some key points they may want to.

    Freedom of expression, however, is not license to abuse and mock people and steal stuff from other publications.

    Your point seems to be Ziya Saheb that it is okay to steal things and basically do whatever one likes in the comment section, regardless of the parameters set by general ethics, law of the land or the editor of the site.

    I disagree. Let me see if some other readers too want to express themselves in the matter.

    As for Niaz Fatehpuri, I will probably discuss him in another post or respond to some of the posts here if I feel like joining issues with some discussants and also can find time from managing the site. That is too vast a subject. He is a historical figure greatly revered by thinking Muslims including those who do not agree with him on a range of issues. He doesn’t need me to defend him. He has weathered many a storm. My daughter Juhi Shahin has done a great job of introducing him to the English-speaking world at a time when his wisdom is required most. We are engaged in a mortal combat with the fundamentalists of all hues, as was Fatehpuri Saheb in his time in early and middle of the 20th century. This madrasa-trained intellectual stands for so many things on so many issues that it would require several PhD theses to encompass that.  

     In the meantime, you are free to voice your opinion about the issues Fatehpuri Saheb has raised as mentioned in the second chapter of this book or you go to any reputed library and read back issues of Nigaar. Fatehpuri fought with thousands of fatwah-mongers of all hues. Almost every sect thought he was the other. Apparently because he was a Muslim blessed by God with the ability to think and the courage and confidence in his scholarship to express his thoughts! From 1920s to 1966, when he made his transition, he faced a host of Mullahs and Maulvis who were no less obscurantist and fundamentalist then than they are today. The atmosphere then was no less toxic, though the Mullahs had not started killing each other then in the mosques, of all places, as they do today.

    There are so many articles on this site and so many views expressed in the articles I post that I simply couldn’t be expected to have an opinion on all of them. You may have noticed that I post articles written by Shias, Sunnis, Wahhabis, Fundamentalists, Obscurantists and liberal people as well. These are just starting points for discussion. To my mid free and open debate alone offers hope. We just have to rethink Islam. We just have to open the doors of Ijtihad. We just have to take the Mullah by his horns, even though he too is welcome to express his views on www.NewAgeIslam.com  . You are free to make your point, but not to try and force other people to engage with you. They too are free to do or not do that. The primary rule of freedom of expression is to respect other people’s freedom too. You are no Khudai faujdaar or Hawaldaar, ziya Saheb. As Mr. Aamir mughal advised the self-proclaimed guardian of everybody’s faith on this site Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima a.k.a. Hamraazz, you should be worrying about your own salvation while putting forward your points of view on the issues at stake.


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • To. Editor Newageislam.com Mr. Sultan Shahin

    You are requested to remove the Blasphemous article of Niyaz fatehpuri having the Article Id #1221 on your site NewageIslam.com  in the interest of Islam as this article has the potential to disturb peace and stir an agitation similar to the one that caused Taslima Nasrin to go in hybernation. IF you are Man of peace and true follower of Islam you are Most humbly requested to remove the article at your earliest and nip this brewing controversy in the bud...and Oblige us  all peace loving Muslims.

    this Email May be treated as a formal Request for all purposes.

     Regards

     Sayyeda Kaneez


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Irrespective of my difference with you on many issues, I thought and was convinced at least you will stand with all followers of Islam on this matter.  [Meraj Ziya]

    ===================================

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    How would I be able to stand with all followers of Islam on the matter of Neyaz Fatehpuri when Respected and Honourable Ms Sayyeda Kaneez has declared, read in her own words;

    "QUOTE"

    12/19/2008 9:43:41 AM                                                     Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima 

     Janab Hasan Iqbal  sahab  salaamun alaikum

     Both Amir moghul and Jamsed Basha are cheats and born from bad blood, Amir Moghul will stoop down to any level to defend his crossbreed ancestors, Janab Hasan sahab , ye Amir Moghul aur Jamshed Basha ‘KUTTEY ki sab se Ghatia Nasal ke log hain’

    "UNQUOTE"

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    You and anybody else can rip apart Neyaz Fatehpuri's Ideas and Theory into pieces through  Quran and Hadith not by banning and using bad language. I have tried my best [as per my humble and poor knowledge] at least in 4 of my message. Go through Ms. Juhi Shahin's article [read minutely every paragraph of Late. Neyaz Fatehpuri] and place Quran, Hadith and History books near your computer table and start giving befitting replies and that's what I do.

    Reagrds.

     

     


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • janab Meraj Ziya sb. adaab arz

    Meri samajh me nahi aata ki aap jaisa taleem yaafta insaan  Iss bewakoof  AAMIE MUGAL se kisi bhi tarah ki guftugu kyon karta hai  Iss insaan ko pataa hee nahi kab ye kya bakwaas karega kuch bhi  jaane kahan se laa laa ke yahan chaapta rahta hai Pakistani neem Pagal hai ye issey iske haal pe chord den ehsaan hoga apka ham sab pe. Aur kya aap sab ko nahi  lagta hai ki iss websit newageislam  ke khilaaf kaanuni salah leney aur Isse ban karane ka waqt aa gaya hai ye Islam Ke khilaaf kaam karne ke liye banayee gayee hai warna Iska editor niyaz Fatehpri ka artcle kyon yahan chapta aur ham sab ke israar ke baad bhi nahi hata raha hai. lanat hai sultan shahin aur juhi Shahin tum dono iblis ki nasl se ho.


    By ASLAM KHAN BARAILVI -



  • There can be no freedom of expression on issues like the one Niyaz Fatehpuri views.  Mr Shahin the editor of this site says that Kalima is sufficient to declare one a Muslim.  What does Kalima say? [Meraj Ziya]

    =============================

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    Which Kalima? The Sunni Kalima or Shia Kalima?

    Kalima of Islam is:

    La Ila Ha Il Lal La Hu Mohammad Dur Rasulullah.

    THERE IS NO GOD BUT ALLAH , MOHAMMAD (PEACE BE ON HIM) IS HIS MESSENGER.

    Shia Kalima is:

    Tahfa Namaaz Jafariya, page 10




    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Viz Niyaz Fathehpuri (I am sure he is already burning in hell/Burzak) and all those who share and support his Blasphemy. [Sayyeda Kaneez]

    ===============================

     

    Dear Ms Sayyeda,

     

    Beware, who you call Infernal [Jahanumi] because:

     

    On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: When Allah decreed the Creation He pledged Himself by writing in His book which is laid down with Him: My mercy prevails over my wrath. [Sahih Muslim, Sahih Bukhari, Nasa'i and Ibn Majah]

    On the authority of Abu Mas'ud al-Ansari (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (may the blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: A man from among those who were before you was called to account. Nothing in the way of good was found for him except that he used to have dealings with people and, being well-to-do, he would order his servants to let off the man in straitened circumstances [from repaying his debt]. He (the Prophet p.b.u.h) said that Allah said: We are worthier than you of that (of being so generous). Let him off. [Sahih Muslim, Sahih Bukhari and Nasa'i]

    Ms Sayyeda and those other [Kaafir Manufacturers and Lease Holders of Hell] on this website should read this Hadith.

    On the authority of Jundub (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) related: A man said: By Allah, Allah will not forgive So-and-so. At this Allah the Almighty said: Who is he who swears by Me that I will not forgive So-and-so? Verily I have forgiven So-and-so and have nullified your [own good] deeds (1) (or as he said [it]). (1) A similar Hadith, which is given by [Sunnan Abu Dawud], indicates that the person referred to was a goldly man whose previous good deeds were brought to nought through presuming to declare that Allah would not forgive someone's bad deeds. [Sahih Muslim]

     

    On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), who said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: A man sinned greatly against himself, and when death came to him he charged his sons, saying: When I have died, burn me, then crush me and scatter [my ashes] into the sea, for, by Allah, if my Lord takes possession of me, He will punish me in a manner in which He has punished no one [else]. So they did that to him. Then He said to the earth: Produce what you have taken-and there he was! And He said to him: What induced you to do what you did? He said: Being afraid of You, O my Lord (or he said: Being frightened of You) and because of that He forgave him. [Sahih Muslim, Bukhari, Nasa'i and Ibn Majah].

     

    On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Prophet (PBUH), from among the things he reports from his Lord (mighty and sublime be He), is that he said: A servant [of Allah's] committed a sin and said: O Allah, forgive me my sin. And He (glorified and exalted be He) said: My servant has committed a sin and has known that he has a Lord who forgives sins and punishes for them. Then he sinned again and said: O Lord, forgive me my sin. And He (glorified and exalted be He) said: My servant has committed a sin and has known that he has a Lord who forgives sins and punishes for them. Then he sinned again and said: O Lord, forgive me my sin. And He (glorified and exalted be He) said: My servant has committed a sin and has known that he has a Lord who forgives sins and punishes for sins. Do what you wish, for I have forgiven you. [Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari]

     

    On the authority of Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) say: Allah the Almighty said: O son of Adam, so long as you call upon Me and ask of Me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds of the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I would forgive you. O son of Adam, were you to come to Me with sins nearly as great as the earth and were you then to face Me, ascribing no partner to Me, I would bring you forgiveness nearly as great at it. [Tirmidhi and Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal]

     


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Where did I support Niaz Fatehpuri's view? Please provide evidence. I have written three posts challenging Niaz Fatehpuri's Thoughts and Ideology and that I did with Quran and Hadith while differing with Ms Juhi Shahin and Mr Sultan Shahin as well. My support wasn't not for Fatehpuri but Freedom of Expression of this website so that Fatehpuri's ideas and thoughts could be criticized and discussed openly through Quran and Hadith. Dear Meraj, mere chating slogan of Kaafir Kaafir wont do until and unless you beat these Ideologues on their own ground. Amir Mughal

     

    Dear Mughal Saheb.

    If you catch the ear by other end it means same.  Please read your post where you criticized those opposing Niyaz Fatehpuri book and Juhi Shahin worthless article and then by deflecting the issue on Quran and your lengthy platitudes. Was there any need?   (I am unable to open your post otherwise I would have quoted your exact words)

     Mughal Saheb it means the same because in your scheme of thing you had defended Niyaz Fatehpuri.  There can be no freedom of expression on issues like the one Niyaz Fatehpuri views.  Mr Shahin the editor of this site says that Kalima is sufficient to declare one a Muslim.  What does Kalima say? 

     Shahin Saheb also agrees that he believes in Allah, Muhammad and Quran. And Juhi Shahin post attacks that very basic belief of Muslims and yet he is silent and defends Fatehpuri. You know that the national flag of Saudi Arabia which follows the same brand of Islam that Niyaz Fatehpuri (he was bred at Nadwa, Lucknow) carries the Kalima which says Muhammad is Messenger of Allah.

    You desperately tried to bring a sectarian difference. Show me one Quran in a Shia mosque/home which is different from the one owned by a Sunni.  If Quran remains the same, then rest of the issue remains irrelevant.  But you supported Niyaz ostensibly by raising the matter  and browbeating a non issue

    The debate is simple,  If Muhammad was messenger of Allah and that Quran was a divine revelation and Mr Shahin is yet to reply.  Did you ask him to clarify his stand on the issue?.  Mr Mughal don’t play with words.  You read your post which I had replied.  Have the courage and conviction.  Yes there are many who have raised the voice against Fatehpuri and don’t give me this theory of freedom of expression.  Irrespective of my difference with you on many issues, I thought and was convinced at least you will stand with all followers of Islam on this matter. 

     


    By meraj ziya -



  • The way Mr. Mughal came out in support of Niyaz Fatehpuri article asking me to allow debate on the issue proves his scant regard on the issues which we have raised.  He  earlier said dead are dead on the issue of wasilah and in reply I quoted several verses from Holy Quran saying those who died in the way of Allah are not dead.  He remained silent. [Meraj Ziya]

    =========================

    Dear Hasan Sahab,

    Where did I support Niaz Fatehpuri's view? Please provide evidence. I have written three posts challenging Niaz Fatehpuri's Thoughts and Ideology and that I did with Quran and Hadith while differing with Ms Juhi Shahin and Mr Sultan Shahin as well. My support wasn't not for Fatehpuri but Freedom of Expression of this website so that Fatehpuri's ideas and thoughts could be criticized and discussed openly through Quran and Hadith. Dear Meraj, mere chating slogan of Kaafir Kaafir wont do until and unless you beat these Ideologues on their own ground.

    Regarding my silence on your "He  earlier said dead are dead on the issue of wasilah and in reply I quoted several verses from Holy Quran saying those who died in the way of Allah are not dead", please do tell the readers and members of this website that you had received replies and there was no silence on any of your statement.

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    Search option is now available on www.newageislam.com , therefore dont lie:

    =====================================================

    Mughal,

    I hate to call you by that word so no affront.  I just quoted a verse

    The Qur'an says:

    "And say not of those who are slain in the Way of God: 'They are dead.' Nay, they are living, Though you perceive it not." (Qur'an 2:154)

    and,

    "Think not of those who are slain in God's way as dead. Nay they live, finding their sustenance in the Presence of their Lord...."

    Other passages can be found in 3:157-171, 22:58 and integrated into numerous other verses of the Qur'an.

    and you did not reply to it.  Sorry, you are too boring. [Meraj Ziya]

    =============================

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    If you would have read my earlier posts on the Quranic Verses you quoted then wouldn't have raised the question above. By the way I have explained the context [Shaan-e-Nazool] and background of all the verses you quoted. Context and the background of 22:58 is as under:

    Those who fled their homes for the cause of Allah and then were slain or died, Allah verily will provide for them a good provision. Lo! Allah, He verily is Best of all who make provision. [AL-HAJJ (THE PILGRIMAGE) Chapter 22 - Verse 58]

    Waallatheena hajaroo fee sabeeli Allahi thumma qutiloo aw matoo layarzuqannahumu Allahu rizqan hasanan wainna Allaha lahuwa khayru alrraziqeena

    Context and Details of the Verse above:

    Allah tells us that those who migrate for the sake of Allah, seeking to earn His pleasure and that which is with Him, leaving behind their homelands, families and friends, leaving their countries for the sake of Allah and His Messenger to support His religion, then they are killed, i.e., in Jihad, or they die, i.e., they pass away without being involved in fighting, they will have earned an immense reward. As Allah says:

    (And whosoever leaves his home as an emigrant unto Allah and His Messenger, and death overtakes him, his reward is then surely incumbent upon Allah) ?4:100?surely, Allah will provide a good provision for them.) means, He will reward them from His bounty and provision in Paradise with that which will bring them joy.

    (And verily, it is Allah Who indeed is the Best of those who make provision. Truly, He will make them enter an entrance with which they shall be well-pleased,) This means Paradise, as Allah says elsewhere:

    (Then, if he be of those brought near (to Allah), rest and provision, and a Garden of Delights.) ?56:88-89?. Allah tells us that He will grant him rest and provision and a Garden of Delights, as He tells us here:

    (surely, Allah will provide a good provision for them.) Then He says:

    (Truly, He will make them enter an entrance with which they shall be well-pleased, and verily, Allah indeed is All-Knowing,) meaning, He is All-Knowing about those who migrate and strive in Jihad for His sake and who deserve that (reward).

    (Most Forbearing,) means, He forgives and overlooks their sins, and He accepts as expiation for their sins, their migration (Hijrah) and their putting their trust in Him. Concerning those who are killed for the sake of Allah, whether they are Muhajirs (migrants) or otherwise, they are alive with their Lord and are being provided for, as Allah says:

    (Think not of those as dead who are killed in the way of Allah. Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, and they have provision) ?3:169?. There are many Hadiths on this topic, as stated previously. With regard to those who die for the sake of Allah, whether they are emigrants or not. This Ayah and the Sahih Hadiths guarantee that they will be well provided for and that Allah will show them kindness. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Shurahbil bin As-Simt said: "We spent a long time besieging a stronghold in the land of the Romans. Salman Al-Farisi, may Allah be pleased with him, passed by me and said, `I heard the Messenger of Allah say:

    (Whoever dies guarding the borders of Islam, Allah will give him a reward like that reward (of martyr) and will provide for him and keep him safe from trials. Recite, if you wish: (Those who emigrated in the cause of Allah and after that were killed or died, surely, Allah will provide a good provision for them. And verily, it is Allah Who indeed is the Best of those who make provision. Truly, He will make them enter an entrance with which they shall be well-pleased, and verily, Allah indeed is All-Knowing, Most Forbearing))'' He also recorded that `Abdur-Rahman bin Jahdam Al-Khawlani was with Fadalah bin `Ubayd when they accompanied with two funerals, at (an island of) sea one of whom had been struck by a catapult, and the other had passed away. Fadalah bin `Ubayd sat by the grave of the man who had passed away and someone said to him, "Are you neglecting the martyr and not sitting by his grave'' He said, "I would not mind which of these two graves Allah would resurrect me from, for Allah says:

    (Those who emigrated in the cause of Allah and after that were killed or died, surely, Allah will provide a good provision for them.)'' And he recited these two Ayat, then said, "What should I seek, O you servant, if I were to enter an entrance to His pleasure, and be provided good provisions By Allah, I would not mind which of these two graves Allah would resurrect me from.''

    (That is so. And whoever has retaliated with the like of that which he was made to suffer....) Muqatil bin Hayan and Ibn Jurayj mentioned that this was revealed about a skirmish in which the Companions encountered some of the idolators. The Muslims urged them not to fight during the Sacred Months, but the idolators insisted on fighting and initiated the aggression. So the Muslims fought them and Allah granted them victory.(Verily, Allah indeed is Oft-Pardoning, Oft-Forgiving.)

    [Courtesy: Tafsir Ibn Kathir]

    =====================

    Muighal saheb,

    For your understanding if you can and dont see the world thru the tainted wahabi glass 

    The Qur'an says:

    "And say not of those who are slain in the Way of God: 'They are dead.' Nay, they are living, Though you perceive it not." (Qur'an 2:154)

    and,

    "Think not of those who are slain in God's way as dead. Nay they live, finding their sustenance in the Presence of their Lord...."

    Other passages can be found in 3:157-171, 22:58 and integrated into numerous other verses of the Qur'an. [Meraj Ziya]

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    Dead mean dead.

    Have they not seen how many generations We destroyed before them, which indeed returned not unto them; [YA-SEEN (YA-SEEN) Chapter 36 - Verse 31]

    Nobody can help what to talk of Dead. Those who are dead cannot do anything for the living from their Graves, Tombs, Shrines..

    Shall I take (other) gods in place of Him when, if the Beneficent should wish me any harm, their intercession will avail me naught, nor can they save? [[YA-SEEN (YA-SEEN) Chapter 36 - Verse 23]

    Please tell me where in the verses it is 'INSTRUCTED' to seek the help of those who are slained in the way of Allah, and that too after their death and burial in the graveyard.

    Background and Context of the Quranic Verse mentioned by you.

    And call not those who are slain in the way of Allah "dead." Nay, they are living, only ye perceive not. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 154]

    Wala taqooloo liman yuqtalu fee sabeeli Allahi amwatun bal ahyaon walakin la tashAAuroona

    Allah's statement:

    (And say not of those who are killed in the way of Allah, "They are dead.'' Nay, they are living,) indicates that the martyrs are alive and receiving their sustenance.

    Muslim reported in his Sahih:

    (The souls of the martyrs are inside green birds and move about in Paradise wherever they wish. Then, they take refuge in lamps that are hanging under the Throne (of Allah). Your Lord looked at them and asked them, `What do you wish for' They said, `What more could we wish for while You have favored us with what You have not favored any other of your creation' He repeated the question again. When they realize that they will be asked (until they answer), they said, `We wish that You send us back to the earthly life, so that we fight in Your cause until we are killed in Your cause again,' (because of what they enjoy of the rewards of martyrdom). The Lord then said, `I have written that they will not be returned to it (earthly life) again.)

    Imam Ahmad reported that `Abdur-Rahman bin Ka`b bin Malik narrated from his father that Allah's Messenger said:

    (The believer's soul is a bird that feeds on the trees of Paradise until Allah sends it back to its body when the person is resurrected.)

    This Hadith includes all the believers in its general meaning. Thus, the fact that the Qur'an mentions the martyrs in particular in the above Ayah serves to honor, glorify and favor them (although the other believers share the rewards they enjoy).

    =============================

    Other passages can be found in 3:157-171[Meraj Ziya]

    ===

    Background and Context of the Quranic Verse mentioned by you:

    And what though ye be slain in Allah's way or die therein? Surely pardon from Allah and mercy are better than all that they amass. [AL-E-IMRAN (THE FAMILY OF 'IMRAN, THE HOUSE OF 'IMRAN) Chapter 3 - Verse 157]

    Walain qutiltum fee sabeeli Allahi aw muttum lamaghfiratun mina Allahi warahmatun khayrun mimma yajmaAAoona

    Indicating that death and martyrdom in Allah's cause are a means of earning Allah's mercy, forgiveness and pleasure. This, indeed, is better than remaining in this life with its short lived delights. Furthermore, whoever dies or is killed will return to Allah, the Exalted and Most Honored, and He will reward him if he has done good deeds, or will punish him for his evil deeds.

    ===========================

    Other passages can be found in 3:157-171[Meraj Ziya]

    Background and Context of the Quranic Verse mentioned by you:

    They rejoice because of favour from Allah and kindness, and that Allah wasteth not the wage of the believers. [[AL-E-IMRAN (THE FAMILY OF 'IMRAN, THE HOUSE OF 'IMRAN) Chapter 3 - Verse 171]

    Yastabshiroona biniAAmatin mina Allahi wafadlin waanna Allaha la yudeeAAu ajra almumineena

    Detailed Background:

    Allah states that even though the martyrs were killed in this life, their souls are alive and receiving provisions in the Dwelling of Everlasting Life. In his Sahih, Muslim recorded that Masruq said, "We asked `Abdullah about this Ayah, (Think not of those as dead who are killed in the way of Allah. Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, and they have provision.)

    He said, `We asked the Messenger of Allah the same question and he said,

    (Their souls are inside green birds that have lamps, which are hanging below the Throne (of Allah), and they wander about in Paradise wherever they wish. Then they return to those lamps. Allah looks at them and says, `Do you wish for anything' They say, `What more could we wish for, while we go wherever we wish in Paradise' Allah asked them this question thrice, and when they realize that He will keep asking them until they give an answer, they say, `O Lord! We wish that our souls be returned to our bodies so that we are killed in Your cause again.' Allah knew that they did not have any other wish, so they were left.)''' There are several other similar narrations from Anas and Abu Sa`id.

    Imam Ahmad recorded that Anas said that the Messenger of Allah said,

    (No soul that has a good standing with Allah and dies would wish to go back to the life of this world, except for the martyr. He would like to be returned to this life so that he could be martyred again, for he tastes the honor achieved from martyrdom.) Muslim collected this Hadith

    In addition, Imam Ahmad recorded that, Ibn `Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah said,

    (When your brothers were killed in Uhud, Allah placed their souls inside green birds that tend to the rivers of Paradise and eat from its fruits. They then return to golden lamps hanging in the shade of the Throne. When they tasted the delight of their food, drink and dwelling, they said, `We wish that our brothers knew what Allah gave us so that they will not abandon Jihad or warfare.' Allah said, `I will convey the news for you.') Allah revealed these and the following Ayat,

    (Think not of those as dead who are killed in the way of Allah. Nay, they are alive, with their Lord, and they have provision.)

    Qatadah, Ar-Rabi` and Ad-Dahhak said that these Ayat were revealed about the martyrs of Uhud.

    Abu Bakr Ibn Marduwyah recorded that Jabir bin `Abdullah said, "The Messenger of Allah looked at me one day and said, `O Jabir! Why do I see you sad' I said, `O Messenger of Allah! My father was martyred and left behind debts and children.' He said,

    (Should I tell you that Allah never spoke to anyone except from behind a veil However, He spoke to your father directly. He said, `Ask Me and I will give you.' He said, `I ask that I am returned to life so that I am killed in Your cause again.' The Lord, Exalted He be, said, `I have spoken the word that they shall not be returned back to it (this life). ' He said, `O Lord! Then convey the news to those I left behind.') Allah revealed,

    (Think not of those as dead who are killed in the way of Allah...)''

    Imam Ahmad recorded that Ibn `Abbas said that the Messenger of Allah said,

    (The martyrs convene at the shore of a river close to the door of Paradise, in a green tent, where their provisions are brought to them from Paradise day and night.)

    Ahmad and Ibn Jarir collected this Hadith, which has a good chain of narration. It appears that the martyrs are of different types, some of them wander in Paradise, and some remain close to this river by the door of Paradise. It is also possible that the river is where all the souls of the martyrs convene and where they are provided with their provision day and night, and Allah knows best. UImam Ahmad narrated a Hadith that contains good news for every believer that his soul will be wandering in Paradise, as well, eating from its fruits, enjoying its delights and happiness and tasting the honor that Allah has prepared in it for him. This Hadith has a unique, authentic chain of narration that includes three of the Four Imams. Imam Ahmad narrated this Hadith from Muhammad bin Idris Ash-Shafi`i who narrated it from Malik bin Anas Al-Asbuhi, from Az-Zuhri, from `Abdur-Rahman bin Ka`b bin Malik that his father said that the Messenger of Allah said,

    (The soul of the believer becomes a bird that feeds on the trees of Paradise, until Allah sends him back to his body when He resurrects him.)

    This Hadith states that the souls of the believers are in the shape of a bird in Paradise. As for the souls of martyrs, they are inside green birds, like the stars to the rest of the believing souls. We ask Allah the Most Generous that He makes us firm on the faith.

    Allah's statement,

    (They rejoice in what Allah has bestowed upon them) indicates that the martyrs who were killed in Allah's cause are alive with Allah, delighted because of the bounty and happiness they are enjoying. They are also awaiting their brethren, who will die in Allah's cause after them, for they will be meeting them soon. These martyrs do not have fear about the future or sorrow for what they left behind. We ask Allah to grant us Paradise. The Two Sahihs record from Anas, the story of the seventy Ansar Companions who were murdered at Bir Ma`unah in one night. In this Hadith, Anas reported that the Prophet used to supplicate to Allah in Qunut in prayer against those who killed them. Anas said, "A part of the Qur'an was revealed about them, but was later abrogated, `Convey to our people that we met Allah and He was pleased with us and made us pleased.'''

    Allah said next,

    (They rejoice in a grace and a bounty from Allah, and that Allah will not waste the reward of the believers) ?3:171?.

    Muhammad bin Ishaq commented, "They were delighted and pleased because of Allah's promise that was fulfilled for them, and for the tremendous rewards they earned.'' `Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam said, "This Ayah encompasses all the believers, martyrs and otherwise. Rarely does Allah mention a bounty and a reward that He granted to the Prophets, without following that with what He has granted the believers after them.''

    [Courtesy: Tafsir Ibn-e-Kathir]

    ===================

    Amir Saheb.

    Why do you get so agitated.  I have shown you the graves of all whom you quoted [Meraj Ziya]

    =====================

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    Nobody deny the lofty status of Prophets [PBUT], their Companions [May Allah be pleased with all of them] and Walis - Saints [May Allah have mercy on their souls] but please do tell all of us as to what those who are buried in these graves {even the Prophet Mohammad - PBUH] can give after their death and please tell us in the light of Quranic Verse below from a Quran which was transmitted to us when Holy Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] was alive:

    Those unto whom they cry beside Allah created naught, but are themselves created. (They are) dead, not living. And they know not when they will be raised. [AN-NAHL (THE BEE) Chapter 16 Verse 20 and 21]

    Lo! thou canst not make the dead to hear, nor canst thou make the deaf to hear the call when they have turned to flee; [AL-NAML (THE ANT, THE ANTS) Chapter 27 Verse 80]

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    If you talk of "Beloved Islam" then the belief that dead Awliya  - Saints can fulfil one’s needs or help at times of distress, and calling upon them for aid. Allah says: 

    Thy Lord hath decreed, that ye worship none save Him [AL-ISRA (ISRA', THE NIGHT JOURNEY, CHILDREN OF ISRAEL) Chapter 17 - Verse 23]

    Similarly, people call upon dead Prophets, righteous people and others to intercede for them or to rescue them from some calamity, but Allah says

    Is not He (best) Who answereth the wronged one when he crieth unto Him and removeth the evil, and hath made you viceroys of the earth? Is there any Allah beside Allah? Little do they reflect! [AL-NAML (THE ANT, THE ANTS) Chapter 27 - Verse 62]

    Some of them call the names of a Sufi Sheiks or Alleged Walis - Saints when they stand up, or sit down, or stumble, or encounter problems or distress, so they might say “O Muhammad!” - Yaa Mohammad or  or O Ali -  Yaa Ali or - O Hussein - Yaa Hussein  or O Jeelaani - Yaa Geelani - Yaa Ghaus Paak or call upon  Yaa Sayyidah Zaynab but Allah says:

    Verily those whom you call upon besides Allaah are slaves like you [AL-ARAF (THE HEIGHTS) Chapter 7 - Verse 194]

    Some of those who worship graves walk around them as if in Tawaaf, and acknowledge their corner , or touch them, kiss them, wipe their faces with their dust, prostrate towards them when they see them, or stand before them in fear and humility, praying for whatever they need of healing from some disease, or for a child, or for help with some difficulty. Sometimes they call upon the occupant of the grave, saying “O my master, I have come to you from far away, so do not let me down.” But Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] said: “Whoever dies calling on someone else as a rival to Allaah, will enter Hell.” [Bukhari - same Bukhari whose alleged Tomb was shown by Mr Meraj].

    Some of them shave their heads at the graves, and some have books with titles like The Rituals of Pilgrimage to Shrines, shrines referring to graves or tombs of Wali - Saints. Some of them believe that the Saints are running the affairs of the universe and that they have the power to benefit or harm but Allah says:

    If Allah afflicteth thee with some hurt, there is none who can remove it save Him; and if He desireth good for thee, there is none who can repel His bounty. He striketh with it whom He will of his bondmen. He is the Forgiving, the Merciful. [YUNUS (JONAH) Chapter 10 - Verse 107]

    It is also Shirk - polytheism to make a vow to any other than Allah, as is done by those who vow to bring candles or lights for the occupants of the graves.

    REGARDING Shirk - Polytheism :

    Lo! Allah forgiveth not that a partner should be ascribed unto Him. He forgiveth (all) save that to whom He will. Whoso ascribeth partners to Allah, he hath indeed invented a tremendous sin. [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 48]

    And (remember) when Luqman said unto his son, when he was exhorting him: O my dear son! Ascribe no partners unto Allah. Lo! to ascribe partners (unto Him) is a tremendous wrong [LUQMAN (LUQMAN) Chapter 31 - Verse 13]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Shahin Saheb,

    This is not what one can expect from a learned and well defined journalist and editor of this site. Your reply above exhibits your narrow end approach and does not qualify to your stature.  Speaking in terms of Shias and Sunnis and thieves is unbecoming of a person who claims to provide a platform for healthy debate

    There is no defence of Sayeeda or Basha.  You are misleading the issue. Jamshed Basha posted an article presumably written by someone else and named it after him and you USED THAT ARTICLE IN THE MAIN PAGES OF YOUR SITE.  This was plagiarism I appreciated your efforts in putting the issue in right perspective.

    Sayeeda post was just a comment and neither had you posted it as an article, if I am right.  Your site requirement makes it imperative to name the person who comments. Yes if you have used the article and had she written to you to use that as her article, then she should be condemned.  Comments can be an agreement or disagreement of thoughts but cannot be an article.

    There are so many copy and paste that runs in the comment column All of your visitors do so.  Internet has provided this facility.  Hundreds of Mughal comments are cut and paste and so have been my reply.

    You are blowing the issue out of proportion by bringing Shias and Sunnis issue just because Basha was caught red handed.  There is no tribal bonding. You must get your basics right and differentiate between article and comment. Please don’t treat comment as an article/ I DON’T HAVE TO INFORM YOU THIS YOU MUST BE KNOWING IT BETTER THAN I DO

    I AWAIT FOR YOUR REPLY ON NIYAZ FATEHPURI


    By MERAJ ZIYA -



  • from    Ayesha Ali <ayesha_nazi@yahoo.com>

    reply-to            ayesha_nazi@yahoo.com

    to         Sultan Shahin <Editor@@newageislaml.com>

    date     9 March 2009 13:37

    subject Re: Mainstream Islam needs to condemn Jihadism more clearly , NewAgeIslam.Com - 23 Feb, 2009

     u mother f*****................ jihad is in our nerves..................

     tell me who r u? r u muslim..christian or hindu?

     we cannot leave jihad as it is in our religion.............................. u understand u b***** hindus are killing muslims..hindus have occupied kashmir..christians have occupied afghanistan...and iraq.........u non-muslims are grabbing everything from muslims and u still want us to leave jihad........ go to hell u mother f*****s


    By Ayesha Ali -



  • Apparently our Shia brothers will not see a theft as a theft. For them a thief is a Shia or a Sunni first. A Shia thief does not deserve any retribution and doesn’t even need to apologise while non-Shia thieves have to be exposed and banned. Also, the tribal unity among Shias is far greater and their solidarity far stronger than I could have imagined. It transcends their moral sense of giving credit to the original author of an article when one is using his or her stuff. Shia moral outrage, at least among Shia commentators on this site, is reserved for non-Shias alone.

    However, I must continue to do my job of asking readers who post comments or send me articles for publication to credit the original author and publication whenever they lift some material from other sites or other sources. I would like to continue the present mode of keeping the site non-monitored so that readers can post their comments as and when they want without any hindrance. Making it monitored would defeat the very purpose of open debate that NewAgeIslam.com aspires to. But I may have to if the situation does not improve and readers continue to post full-fledged articles as part of their comment without even saying that they have picked it up from somewhere else. In fact that is not enough and proper credit should always be given to both writers and publications, even if you are quoting a sentence or two, not to speak of lifting whole articles without even mentioning they belong to someone else as happened in the present case of Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez’s post.

    Similarly despite my request some commentators continue to abuse the facility of editing provided on this forum. One can understand people's sense of self-importance and their need to attract attention. But this can be done without using too much colour and very large fonts that New Age Islam has to continuously keep reducing and changing in a variety of ways. One word in colour or bold, as done in this paragraph, is enough to attract attention to a whole paragraph or sentence. Please be moderate. Again, I will have to accept my webmaster's persistent demand for removing this facility unless readers moderate their quest for attention soon. We can neither afford the additional weight that this gives to the page, nor have enough resources to keep editing every post to reduce its size and change its colour and shape. Also, please don't leave empty spaces in your post.

    For me every reader and particularly a commentator on this site is valuable. The site is for them. It is a facility for free discussion on any subject exercising the minds of Muslims and occasionally non-Muslims too if it concerns Muslims or Islam. Please use the facilities provided with discretion, so that it can continue in its present form.

    Sultan Shahin

    ---

    P.S. I am reproducing below some comments relevant to the debate on merits of plagiarism that has been taking place on this site for some time. I am no longer doing so in the hope that our Shia brothers and sisters will see reason and be able to transcend their tribal bonding in order to uphold a moral stand they had rightly taken earlier and indeed even deal with a legal question, now that Supreme court of India has made publishers of websites responsible even for what appears in the readers’ comments section on un-monitored sites like this one. But this will nevertheless provide new visitors to the site some idea of the background in which I made the effort to remind my Shia interlocutors to keep their moral outrage over theft of published material above sectarian loyalties.

    ------------------------------

    2/9/2009 10:01:19 AM                                   Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez 

     Bravo!! Janab Hasan Iqbal  sahab    salaamunalaikum’

     You have done,  really a commendable job there!  By exposing a Thief and even cornering a hypocrite like SULTAN SHAHIN to accept his mistake, as there was no alternative left. Such is the fate of falsehood and concoction,  Jamshed Basha is the Newage version of Abu Huraira,  Now all good Muslims should focus their attention on the concoction and false representation of facts by the biggest cheat in the Islamic history the one of many....Abu Huraira.

    Ps:  ha ha ha ha ha 'Only those who are on HAQ will have the last laugh.' this is ordained by non other than the Almighty ALLAH the Rahman and Raheem himself.

     ----

    2/10/2009 1:38:44 PM                                       traveler 

    Basha has been expelled from BAZM for his KLEPTOMANIAC tendencies, we all have witnessed something extremely RARE... PIRATE BEING CAUGHT IN THE ACT ITSELF ( all thanks to Hasan sahab) we saw history being made and chaos/ confusion was at it's peak when the site turned into a real life Cofeehouse with all it's buzzing, curiously Basha sahib instead of introspecting seems to go on displaying his ignorance ( now Under Ayatollah Khomeini's article) some Dr. Khan has given him a piece of advice already I too second Dr. Khan's views.

    Here Let us stop for a while and think over the quick pace of developments in last two days ..

    and i request all sincere readers to kindly comeup with their independent conclusions (that is the only way to appreciate the outcome of any effort on part of the editor and debate participants, take note of the things agreed upon by majority and move forward)

     ---

    /10/2009 1:12:56 AM                                          HASAN IQBAL 

     I am sorry for having had to inform the editor and the readers about the 'originality' of the article, but since I had already read this article earlier, I would have been unfair to the original author, which you surprisingly didnot deem important enough despite your journalistic background, if I had not given him the necessary credit. I hope you would appreciate that there was nothing personal and no intent at 'character assassination'.

    May I request you to clarify whether 'your myth' is restricted to the 12th Imam of the Shias or the 'Mahdi' of Ummate-Muslemeen, as well as many non-muslims, as many other religions also hold the belief in the awaited one.

    I shall be more than happy to comment and let you and the readers know our faith and views on the 'awaited one' once you have clarified your belief.

    Regards,

    Hasan I Alvi

     -----

    2/10/2009 12:19:58 AM                                           HASAN IQBAL 

    Dear Mr. Sultan Shahin,

    Thanks for your reply and for clarifying your stand vis-à-vis the article. While Mr. Jamsheed Basha in his 'apology' has refrained from admitting that over two third of the article that he has attributed to himself has actually been lifted from another website and it appears unlikely that he has going to resubmit the article, as you have requested, with necessary credits to the original author and as you have stated, and rightly so, that taking the article off from this website would deprive the readers of the debate that it has generated, may I suggest to you, that in keeping with the journalistic ethics and in order to be fair to the original author of the article you may prefix the article with your comments giving necessary credit to Abu Muhammad Al-Afriqi and put the issue to rest.

    Regards,

    Hasan Iqbal

     -------

    /9/2009 8:23:27 PM                                                           SAF RIZVI 

    Hi Jamsheed !!

    Long time eh! So you have graduated to a full-fledged thief and concoctor as your archenemy Mrs. Kaneez puts it, and this is one of those rare occasions when I fully agree with her, it really gives me real pain that a person like yourself can stoop down to such low levels, all for cheap publicity? If only you have paid heed to my earlier warnings about not trying to spread the venom of hatred among Muslims, you would not have faced this Insult as you have faced today, Now as you have always regarded me as your guide I have something to tell you, You can turn this extremely bad situation in your favour , by just being fair, here you have one life time opportunity to make good,  all the wrongs that you have done in the past towards Islam, and towards the Family of the Prophet Pbuh,  by siding with their most blatant enemies both past and present, this is your chance Jamsheed! This is your chance to stand up like a man and accept that you have made yourself look like an ASS, you do not have to apologise to any of us here, just accept your wrong done to your own profession/hobby  (Journalism) and more importantly seek pardon from ALLAH talah for your wrong representation of facts about the progeny of the Prophet Pbuh,  and your glorifying the Yazeed Lanati in your previous posts. Remember the holy Quran says that all Muslims are brothers and of course (sisters too, Kaneez are you listening?) it is not right for any of us to spread hatred and malice among our own people or among humanity as a whole,  by our word or deed. I can only wish that you see the good advice in my post, and shun your ego, come forward and accept your wrong deed, because until now I have always regarded you as a Beautiful waste and always wished that people with your capability should speak only the truth and nothing else. I hope persistent sanity prevails over you, so that you can make the best use of your writing abilities, which is presently at its lowest.

    ----------

    12/19/2008 9:43:41 AM                                                     Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima 

     Janab Hasan Iqbal  sahab  salaamun alaikum

     Both Amir moghul and Jamsed Basha are cheats and born from bad blood,  this has been proved by their hatred for the progeny of the Prophet pubh and their all praises for the Kuffaars,  disguised as Muslims viz. the three caliphs,  Muawia and his clan. Amir Moghul will stoop down to any level to defend his crossbreed ancestors, now he is referring to children to be that of Prophet pbuh who never were his children, Prophet Pbuh had only One Daughter Janabe Sayyeda Fatima Zahra had there not been Hazrat Ali Ibn-e-Abutalib Alaihisssalam,  there would have been no match for her in the entire UNIVERSE.

    Janab Hasan sahab , ye Amir Moghul aur Jamshed Basha ‘KUTTEY ki sab se Ghatia Nasal ke log hain’ (please excuse my language but they understand only this)  You just can’t talk sense into them,  all they deserve is a kick in their butts ,  as the devil himself has put a curtain of JEHALAT before their eyes,  they would not see the truth and even if they see it, they do not have the purity of faith to openly accept it, so there is no point explaining to them and wasting time that can be well spent in sending LANAT on them and their ancestors, the hidden enemies of AHLULBAIT.

    ---

    2/9/2009 8:44:08 AM                                     Sultan Shahin 

    Dear Dr. S. Riaz Mehdi

    Thanks very much indeed for your compliments. May God bless you!

    The venom in the debates on NewAgeIslam.com has surprised me as much as it has shocked you. This is merely indicative of the venom in the community. Our sojourn in the land of pointlessness. It probably explains why we are gradually becoming irrelevant to the world, even as it tries hard to destroy us and our faith by using people from within us.

    Most Muslims clearly prefer to fight it out with one another than think constructively on any issue of universal concern to the community even in these critical times. You may have noticed that several articles posted on our site that deal with issues vital to us in present times go virtually uncommented and un-debated, though of course, they too are read, as I know from a system embedded in the website. A large number of Muslims prefer to live in the 7th century and debate the issues of those days, even fight those wars again and again, knowing full well that it is simply impossible to know the facts of that history when it is so difficult to know what is going on even today in this electronic media age.

    Sectarianism among Muslims has turned bloody and should be an area of great concern to all Muslims, as it is to you. Only a couple of days ago a Jahannumi “Jihadi” , presumably a Sunni, killed scores of our Shia brothers in a mosque in Pakistan. This has become a regular event now, at least in Pakistan. Both Sunni-Wahhabi Saudi Arabia and Shia Iran are funding murderous groups of Sunnis and Shias respectively to further this trend, while the Pakistani state is unable to control this proxy warfare on its land.  We in India are more fortunate in having some sensible clerics, particularly among Shias, who have not allowed Shia-Sunni differences to degenerate into warfare.

    It would be suicidal for the Muslim community to promote sectarian prejudices. New Age Islam would never do that. My views on the subject, with all their inadequacies, are available on the site:

    The Shia-Sunni divide: How real and how deep? Can we move towards genuine unity?

    http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=857

    However, real unity cannot be achieved on the basis of ignorance of each others’ faith. The only way to learn is not to avoid controversial issues, but to discuss them threadbare, and of course in a civilized fashion.  Unfortunately some of our discussants are more interested in discovering a person’s DNA and genetic history or real identity and sex and age than in the substantive issues arising out of what he or she may be saying.

    Discussions and debates are invaluable. That is what this site is essentially for. Already within a few hours of debate on the issue raised by Mr. Jamsheed Basha, it has become clear that there is far more unity among Shias and Sunnis on the issue of Imamat than one would have thought possible in the atmosphere of blood-letting prevalent today. Sunnis would in fact appear to be as sensitive about discussing the issue as are the Shias. It also appears - from the discussion SO FAR - that neither group thinks that there is any reality behind the claims of continuing or disappearing Imamat and that it is indeed nothing more than a myth. 

    The guilty beating around the bush also seems to show that both Sunni and Shia believers in the disappeared Imam are aware that generating and sustaining and propagating myths are against the spirit of Islam. The Prophet (peace be upon him) had stubbornly refused to create cheap miracles to satisfy the Meccans who hasd set this as a condition for embracing Islam. He gave our faith a firm footing in reason and logic. Islam’s greatest claim to fame is its historicity and rationality. The Shiites apparently felt the need to invent Imams, even make them disappear, to justify and give an ideological veneer to their political separation with the family of Abu Jahal, and other inveterate enemies of Islam, who had captured Islamic faith and Islamic state, after killing the family of the Prophet in the most dastardly fashion. But in doing so they too seem to have distorted Islam as much as did the Yazidis. They took Islam in a different direction, a direction that Hazrat Ali or Imam Husain would not have wanted to be taken. Islam stood for perfect equality of human beings, except on grounds of piety. Making it a property (Jageer) of either Abu Jahal or Hazrat Ali would be denigrating it. Islam’s USP, on the basis of which the world flocked to it and still does, is its pronouncement of perfect equality between all human beings.

    Another related question that arises from this discussion is: Can faith be completely and totally rational? My understanding of the spirit of Islam is that faith need not be irrational, though it may need to go beyond reason. Faith may transcend reason and rationality; but it should not contradict logic and common sense.

    Let us try and go beyond the Sunni and Shia distortions of our Faith, reach out to the original Islam and see how its spirit can guide us in the present age.

    Sultan Shahin


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • Traveller

    No one knows you are Mr/Mrs/miss or something else so I cannot address you humbly.

     You use the word as profane for the minset of the average Muslims.  I would just like to ask you do you believe that Muhammad was Allah's messenger (in case you are Muslim) or not and that Quran was a divine revelation or Muhammad own words. The debate is just simple

    The issue of profanity or Muslim mindset does not arise.  In case you have some mew theories/ideas that  Muhammad and Quran can be summed up in other way do enlighten us.  This is a simple question.  If Muhammad is not the messenger and Quran not a divine revelation, then why believe in the Kalima which ironically Editor Sultan Shahin believes as a symbol of becoming a Muslim.  By the way he also believes in Allah and Muhammad and Quran. (Read his reply to mr Hasan Iqbal)

    So please do enlighten us as Mr Shahin has conveniently chosen silence as his weapon on this wretched Niyaz Fatehpuri and Mughal as usual deflecting issues.


    By MERAJ ZIYA -



  • @ Traveler alias we all know who….

     

    Since you have paved the way for Mr. Sultan Shahin  to make an easy exit with his tail between legs…would you also please explain your term ‘ORDINARY / AVERAGE  MUSLIM?

    In my understanding of Islam there is nothing like degraded, ordinary, average, special or VIP Muslim……either you are a Muslim or you not a Muslim…either your are a practicing and pious Muslim or may be you are not a regular in your Islamic duties,  but once in a while you are ashamed of your neglect and ask Allah swt for forgiveness…you are still a Muslim. BUT.. Anyone like the devilish Niyaz Fatehpuri (May his soul burn in hell and his supporters join him) ceased to be a Muslim that very moment he doubted the Authenticity of the Holy Quran. Research is good but only when it is done without prejudice and with the sole intention of benefit of mankind, and at the end of the thesis the researcher should either stand by the subject in total  or totally reject it….Now where is the acceptance or rejection of this half baked researcher called JUHI SHAHINE? And where is the Acceptance or rejection of this man Sultan Shaheen ?? IF you accept the views of Niyaz Fatehpuri lanati then you are rejected from Islam and if you reject the bull of Fathepuri, you cleansed the filth and safeguarded your membership of the elite club of true Muslims.

     

    PS: You are advised not to travel too much and that too without a valid ticket…. a Rolling stones gathers a lot of ‘SHIRK’ you know!!

      

    V. Imp.: Dear Mohtaram Aslam khan sahib and janab Tabrez ali sahib…. Sultan Shaheen has removed your messages without any reason; May I request you both to post your original messages again…. Remember me in your prayers please….Allah Hafiz..


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • @ Dear All readers…Salamunalaikum

    I can well visualize the blackened face of Sultan Shahin

    (Editor) and his sleep deprived beaten soul. But believe me Brothers and sisters this is not my doing I only raised my feeble  voice against a wrong done and it became a Roar of a Lion of ‘Imaan’  by valuable support of true Muslims who visit this site namely Mr. Hasan Iqbal, Mr Kabir and then again Mr Rahmat kabir, Mr Meraj Ziya Mr Zohair Khan  and his colleagues or relatives (Zuber, Hammad, Salim, Erum, Farhana, Rizwan and  Zuhair) and of course the Two tigers Janab Tabrez Ali /Alam of jaunpur and Janab Mohtaram Aslam khan barailvi sahib and last but not the least The will of Almighty Allah swt as he has ordained  Zillat for the likes of Sultan Shaheen  and  all those who believe in falsehood and propagate the same.

    I once again take this opportunity to extend my sincere thanks to all the above mentioned distinguished people and also those who share their same view, but could not post their comments due to some constraint. May Allah swt shower his choicest of blessings upon you all and Allah swt’s   curse fall heavily upon the enemies of Islam. Viz Niyaz Fathehpuri (I am sure he is already burning in hell/Burzak) and all those who share and support his Blasphemy.  'ameen'

     best regards

     

    Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  •  Dear Editor Mr Shahin

    I read your reply to Mr Hasan Iqbal and was amazed to see the tone and tenor of your reply.  It does not behove of a person of your stature to say a thief is a thief or thieves do what thieves do. It smacked of your personal prejudices and bias against our sister Sayeeda Kaneez or whatever she is. 

    Yes I did follow the debate on what Mr Iqbal mentioned about Basha.  What I read so far is that Sayeeda kaneez wrote a post which was carried in comments and not as an article like Basha work was.  So where is the debate.  So many times I exchanged views with my friend and enemy called Amir Mughal where I quoted/ replied from various sites without mentioning the link.  Because first it was not an article for new Age Islam and we were debating. 

    In case Sayeeda kaneez so called post was used by you as main article in the new Age Islam she must apologise and if it was carried in the comments format then the debate and your reply was totally unwarranted.  I stand in support of Mrs. /Ms Sayeeda in case her views were published only in the comment format.  It is ridiculous to compare her with  Basha which was used by you as an` article’ in the main website with that of Sayeeda.

     I still await your clarification/views on Niyaz Fatehpuri nonsensical and idiotic work.

     


    By meraj ziya -



  • John Lester aka the GEMSMAKER!" johnlesterakathegemsmaker@gmail.com


    So called "Christians and Jews" (I put it quotes because many are false professors and many more are weak believers who seldom

    read and understand their own Scriptures) are ALMOST UNIVERSALLY IGNORANT of the FACT that their own Bible makes
    QUITE PLAIN that

    MR GOD OF THE BIBLE has a UNILATERAL DEFENSE TREATY WITH ARABS AND MUSLIMS, and WHOMSOEVER

    DECLARES WAR ON ARABS AND MUSLIMS HAS JUSTDECLARED WAR ON MR GOD OF THE BIBLE.

    Don't believe me.
    Read and believe your own Bible.
    In Genesis, God UNILATERALLY approaches Abraham and says to Abraham,
    I WILL DEFEND YOU and bless those that bless you AND YOUR POSTERITY and CURSE those that CURSE YOU *and your

    POSTERITY.*

    Ishamel is the first born son of Abraham. The blessing of Messiah (Jesus Christ) does NOT come thru his line (instead, it came thru

    the line of the Jews thru the second born, Isaac) but that does NOT mean that the Arabs and the Jews are NOT blessed! And NOT

    protected by MR GOD! Indeed, they are, with the FULL BLESSINGS and PROTECTIONS given by God to Abraham and ALL

    OF HIS POSTERITY, not just Isaac, line of the Jews. Different blessings, including one line producing the
    Messiah (Isaac), and one line not (Ishamel), but FULL BLESSINGS AND FULL PROTECTION nevertheless.

    How was that covenant SIGNED?!
    In BLOOD!
    What was the TOKEN of that COVENANT between MR GOD and Father Abraham? CIRCUMCISION!
    Who ELSE other than Abraham the 99-100 year old man and his 8-day old second born baby Isaac WAS CIRCUMCISED ON

    THAT VERY SAME DAY?!
    The 13-year old FIRST BORN ISHMAEL!
    The Jewish and Christian Bibles ALL ATTEST TO THIS SAME FACT!
    MR GOD UNILATERALLY ENTERED INTO A DEFENSE TREATY WITH FATHER ABRAHAM.

    THIS DEFENSE TREATY INCLUDED *ALL* OF ABRAHAM'S CHILDREN. THIS DEFENSE TREATY WAS SIGNED IN

    BLOOD.
    THIS DEFENSE TREATY WAS "SIGNED" THRU THE COVENANT OF CIRCUMCISON. ABRAHAM WAS

    CIRCUMCISED. ROUGHLY 100 YEAR OLD MAN.
    HIS SECOND BORN SON ISSAC WHO WAS 8 DAYS OLD WAS CIRCUMCISED ACCORDING
    TO YOUR KING JAMES BIBLE.
    BUT ABRAHAM'S 13 YEAR OLD SON ISHMAEL, PROGENITOR OF THE ARABS AND THE
    MUSLIM RELIGION WAS ALSO CIRCUMCISED THAT DAY.
    When those who are NOT of the lineage of FATHER ABRAHAM attack ANY of
    Father Abraham's Children, be it Jews or MUSLIMS, that party is
    OPENING DECLARING WAR ON MR GOD OF THE BIBLE because
    MR GOD OF THE BIBLE said he would PROTECT AND DEFEND ALL OF THE CHILDREN OF FATHER
    ABRAHAM.
    And ACCORDING TO YOUR KING JAMES BIBLE,
    MR GOD OF THE BIBLE has a BLOOD COVENANT IN THE CIRCUMCISED PENIS FLESH OF ISHMAEL
    father of the ARABS AND THE MUSLIMS,
    AND MR GOD OF THE BIBLE, WHO CANNOT GO BACK ON HIS WORD,
    IMMEDIATELY BECOMES YOUR WARLIKE ENEMY if YOU LAY A HAND ON THE ARABS AND THE MUSLIM

    NATIONS. Period.
    THAT IS WHAT MR GOD SAYS RATHER PLAINLY IN YOUR KING JAMES BIBLE.

    Now, this may not agree with what the REPUBLICAN PARTY SAYS, but who the HELL ever said that they, a BUNCH OF

    STUPID POLITICIANS, ever had half a clue of what GOD'S WORD SAYS IN THE FIRST PLACE ANYWAYS?!

    Now, I said all that to say this, many people misunderstand what the holy Qu'ran actually says about Christians and Jews and

    PEOPLE OF THE BOOK.

    The Qu'ran overall is quite complementary, for the most part, of Jews and Christians and PEOPLE OF THE BOOK.
    It does warn Muslims against FALSE PROFESSING Christians and Jews. Well, SO THE FREAKIN' WHAT!

    THE BIBLE WARNS THE PLANET against FALSE PROFESSING Christians and Jews! They can be some of the nastiest and

    most ruthless people on EARTH.
    Just like FALSE PROFESSING MUSLIMS can be some of the nastiest and ruthless and most evil people on earth.

    The holy Qu'ran is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT when it WARNS to be VERY CAREFUL AROUND JEWS.
    And here's why...

    ...most JEWS on this planet DO NOT BELIEVE IN GOD. They are, as a nation, BACKSLIDDEN, FAR FROM GOD, SECULAR,

    HUMANISTIC,
    ATHEISTS by and large! Liberal, operating under an atheistic assumption, and prone to all kinds of evil in the moral and spiritual

    sphere.
    AND THE BIBLE PROPHESIED THAT IT WOULD BE SO! WHY?! Because, as a nation, they have REJECTED GOD!

    AND BROUGHT DOWN UPON THEIR OWN HEADS SEVERE PUNISHMENT because of their rejection, as a nation, of God.

    Unto whom much is given, MUCH IS REQUIRED, and frankly, just like the LDS Mormons, THE JEWS HAVE TOTALLY

    BLOWN IT!
    Nevertheless, the Scripture says that the JEWS WILL BE SAVED (in the end) because of MR GOD'S COVENANT WITH

    FATHER ABRAHAM

    aka The Promises Made Unto The Fathers (Abraham, Isaac and Jacob). And Ishmael too.  When the Jews and the Muslims fight, I

    say, STAY OUT OF THAT FAMILY SQUABBLE
    and just try to help Abraham's Children get along as best as possible. When you attack Arabs and Muslims, however, and you enter

    their holy lands, and you establish military bases upon their holy lands, and when you occupy their countries and cause near sectarian

    civil wars where hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians are slaughtered,
    WHEN YOU AMERICA ARE DAMNED TO HELL BY GOD FOR SLAUGHERING 50,000,000+ BABIES SINCE 1973 IN ROE

    V WADE

    and God looks down upon the Muslim nations where INFANTICIDE IS PROHIBITED BY LAW (in obedience to the WORD OF

    GOD, Scripture, including the BIBLE and the holy Qu'ran, and Mormon Scripture too)

    JUST WHO DO YOU THINK, FROM GOD'S PERSPECTIVE, he considers the RIGHTEOUS NATION?!

    The INFANTICIDE NATION, the WHORE MONGERING NATION where 25% of our TEENAGE girls already have SEXUALLY

    TRANSMITTED DISEASE, the nation that is TRYING ITS BEST TO OUT DO Sodom and Gomorrah?
    WOE, WOE, WOE! to you America!
    YOU HAVE DECLARED WAR ON MR GOD OF THE BIBLE AND YOUR JUDGMENT DRAWETH
    NIGH!

    Patriarchally yours,
    John Lester


    By John Lester aka the GEMSMAKER!" -



  • I can see that the debate has turned in to MAHABHARAT and NEWAGEISLAM in to Krukshetra with the controversial article on Niyaz Fatehpuri.

    Dear Editor if the purpose of posting this was to generate a debate then you are already successful in your intent that was the First objective and I feel it is served well in your site's favour, now coming to the second objective which should be to ultimately draw a conclusion of the whole thing and any visitor on this site can unmistakably see that the majority of visiting muslims here ( irrespective of their ideological schools) are demanding removal of this blasphemous article and as an editor I think you should review your stand of contesting in favour of Niyazpuri. I would not go to so much length to mention you or juhi as salman rushdie or Tasleema nasreen as some commentators here have suggested because I feel a resercher is just a researcher and unless he or she travels across permissible and at times forbidden territories he or she can not possibly be called an honest resercher but this is just an academic definition only and therefore the discussion remains purely academic

     Meraj Ziya is right " one can not sail in two boats"

    Regarding Syyeda I again reiterate my previously held view that she is just an ordinary commentator and no one in that capacity is supposed to write sources of her comments ( we all keep commenting on "n" number of websites and none of us quotes source of our thoughts unless offcourse some of us is writing a seriously aimed article ( say for publication)- Yes I too rember she has often opened her posts by writing POSTED FOR GOOD MUSLIMS ON THIS SITE ( it is evident that her purpose was just to share something she found worth sharing, not seeking credit for being the author of the subject)..therefore I again say that there can not be any valid comparision between the case of Mr. Basha and Mrs. Syyeda because this would amount to comparing an apple with an orange,

      I think this is time when the editor should sumup the debate and let the ashes of Mr. Fatehpuri rest with peace ( let god decide his comfort level because for an average muslim the very concept of delinking divinity of prophet and quranic origin is blasphemous and equals to desecrating the basic institution of Islam- When things are viewed from this angle the only term I can coin for such subject and mindset is PROFANE)

      Your site has been a very active platform for learning and let it remain that way..I personally don't mind visiting forbidden territories but the intent has to be clear in accordance with INNAMAL AAMAALO BIN NIYA


    By traveler -



  • Muhammed ArslanMir
    Coming back to the Prophet and the Qur’an, his basic hypothesis was that the Prophet must have reached a certain state of mind, resulting in the revelation (wahy). He explained that, unlike his contemporaries, the Prophet was born with an acute discernment of good from evil. A person like him would naturally be upset with the situation in which he found himself. This, according to Fateh{puri@, prompted him to get out of his world, hide in caves and think. His deep thinking would lead him into such a state where he would start producing this message.


    By Muhammed ArslanMir -



  • Beware of New Age Islam Website

    Though sunnis, salafis, deobandis, tablighis etc have lot of differences, we all have common belief in Islam, but the new age Islam is totally against Islam and it is only a website to make Muslims fight each other and insult scholars and make false muslim modernists mislead Muslims away from Islam, Hence we all should condemn this shit website.

    Muhammed Arslan Mir


    By Muhammed ArslanMir -



  •  

    However, Pakistan and Human rights, while having improved, have a long, long ways to go. To wit (and I wonder what they would

    do with me, a man who plainly declares that I am a Christian, a Mormon, a Muslim and a Jew):
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Pakistan


    By John Lester aka the GEMSMAKER -



  • In the end, the Fundamentalists will WIN. I've read the back of the book. All the prophets are Fundamentalists. Allah is a Fundamentalist. Scripture is Scripture.

     

    As Jesus said: Thus it is WRITTEN. I like this part of your article: And this was what made the language of the Qur’an so different from that of h{adi@th.[iii]

     

    >>>Because the Qur'an was spoken by an Angel (Gabriel). The hadiths ARE written by mere men, and thus contain both Truth and Error. The Qur'an, however, spoken by an Angel, Messenger of Allah, contains no error and is nothing but Truth. All Scripture is

    Truth.

     

    When he writes nonsense like "social evil of polygamy" it tells me that he knows nothing of our Patriarchal God and His Patriarchal Scripture. “Let there be no compulsion in religion” (Qur’an 2:256),

     

    So-called Christians and Jews that decry Islam as a "violent" religion ignore (or do not know of) this verse in the Qur'an. And they forget that the Bible is 100x more of a violent book that the Qur'an. But both books are Scripture. Back to the write:

     

    I still believe that different Prophets were sent to different people and Allah only wants to test us as to how we respond to them and believe in them as different paths to the same destination and how we conduct ourselves in our lives.

     

    Well, you should believe that, if you are truly a Muslim. The Qur'an plainly says that God sends Messengers to Each Community.

     

    PY, JL

     


    By John Lester aka the GEMSMAKER -



  • Mr. Amir Mughal,

    As said earlier, you always try to deflect the issues.  Now your statement on Quran after Maulana Abul Kalam Azad.

    By quoting this post on Quran you have tend to justify what Niyaz Fatehpuri wrote in his book and in an article by Juhi Shahin.  My apprehension about you is true. It is now apparent that you fully endorse this view of Fatehpuri and his stand on our Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and Holy Quran and so you don’t believe in Kalima as Fatehpuri does'nt recognise Muhammad (SAW) as messenger of Allah 

     Initially you have also asked Muslims to debate on the issue instead of condemning the article.

    I find it too taxing to read your post but I advise you to please visit any of the Shia mosques secretly, there are many in Pakistan and see the Quran.  Show me one Quraan which is different than what all sects of Islam follows. Show me one Mughal.  It is irrelevant to speak on the issue and what people wrote.  Majority of Holy Quran used by Shias in India at their home, mosques and gifted during marriages are printed and published by Sunnis.

    Now that your stand on the Fatehpuri issue is clear and that you have come out in stout defence of this wretched man, I await Mar Shahin views which is not forthcoming

     


    By MERAJ ZIYA -



  •  Allah and Mohammad and Quran are enough for me. For me the Kalima is the only criterion for being a Muslim and saying it is enough as I do not claim to know anybody’s intention. Islam is a simple religion, easily understandable even to the meanest intelligence, though, of course, intellectuals would find deeper meanings in it and do. But all interpretations are to me valid as long as made sincerely and since I cannot judge anybody’s sincerity I have to take people at their word. However, I cannot help abhorring such obnoxious display of sectarianism and tribalism. -  Sultan Shahin

    ------------------

    What Kalima are you talking about and what Allah and Muhammad (SAW) and the Holy Quran you are mentioning.  Please elucidate.

       If you believe in Kalima, you believe that Muhammad was Allah's messenger but Niyaz Fatehpuri doesn’t and so does that Juhi Shahin.  You say you believe in Quran and yet you follow Fatehpuri who says this was not a divine revelation but work of our Holy Prophet.  You cannot sail on two boats Mr. Shahin

    You have still not clarified you stand on this satanic post of Juhi Shahin and Niyaz Fatehpuri idiotic non sense.  Any Muslims who recites Kalima and believes in it would have come out in strong opposition to the charade of this mountain of lunacy called Niyaz Fatehpuri than to call him as thinker and a reformist.  Even the headlines of this article given by you are obnoxious to say the least.

    Mr. Shahin your reply is awaited   


    By meraj ziya -



  • Mr. Shahin,

    This is amazing that the core issues often raised in the site are usually deflected.  Take the case of Amir Mughal now he comes with a theory of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, veteran freedom fighter.  Maulana Azad may have belonged to the Salafi or whatsoever sect you may call him but he was never a radical and extremist but hard core `secular’  This explains why he did not go to Pakistan and his foresight in not doing so has been prophetic seeing the state of affair in our terror infested neighbour.

    The ugly face of Wahabism is in the form of extreme `extremism' which followers of Abdul ibn Wahab indulged in the demolition of Jannatul Baqi and removing all history associated with our Holy Prophet (SAW) and early days of Islam. Other ugly face of Wahabism is the rise of terrorism, since the 1980"s and Mr. Shahin I have written earlier quoting one Ali Abbas post in an article published on Zakir Naik article which says that not all wahabis are terrorist but all terrorists are wahabis.

    The way Mr. Mughal came out in support of Niyaz Fatehpuri article asking me to allow debate on the issue proves his scant regard on the issues which we have raised.  He  earlier said dead are dead on the issue of wasilah and in reply I quoted several verses from Holy Quran saying those who died in the way of Allah are not dead.  He remained silent. 

    Mughal justifies everything that is anti Islam and he has kept quiet why King Faisal Museum is preserved including his wash room in Riyadh (Saudi Arabia) and so is the Dirriyah Fort which was later the abode of Abdel Aziz.  Everything related to Saud and his families are preserved and everything related to Our Holy Prophet including his house (converted into library) residence of Hazrat Amina (RA) (mother of our Prophet SAW) and other top figure of Islam has been razed to the ground.  And yet this man called Mughal justifies every crime which Saud and his family have done. And then he makes cosmetic remarks to read his blogs which I always say is too boring 

    The core issue here is Fatehpuri book and we need clarification from you whether you endorse this view on our Holy Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and on the Holy Quran.  This is the main issue. If yes, be clear and explain why and if no immediately tender an apology and remove the blasphemous article and that ugly  wretched face from this site.  This is the least we can request


    By MERAJ ZIYA -



  • Editor newageIslam  Mr. Sultan Shahin

     

    What is happening on your site and what has become of you whom I though to be a good Muslim trying to do his bit for the betterment of Muslims.

     

    I am really confused Mr. Sultan Shahin with your actually advocating the Nonsense of Niyaz Fatehpur and pointing accusing fingers at valued writers who grace this site with their valued comments.

     

    You are trying to imply by your parrot like repetitions that you are the only one who is right and so many people who are educated and well versed in tenets of Islam are not worth the salt. This is a trait of a fool Mr. Shahin   you should behave in a  dignified manner and must not forget you are the  face of your site so stop behaving like a road side cheapster and start behaving like a seasoned journalist which you claim you are,  if you are not ready to listen to genuine requests of people who visit your site and accept your follies then you should resign as Editor and make way for someone more decent and educated and above all more well versed in matters of Islam, one who behaves like a Journalist and not like somebody  who is on prowl for revenge from some lady who stood by what is right. This is ridiculous

    Mr. Sultan Shahin, first you upload an article which is Blasphemous to hilt and degrading the status of the Prophet the amount of nonsense in the article is enough to book you and your site, yet you have the audacity to actually argue with people who oppose it. Are you a Muslim Mr. Sultan Shahin? If you are, then you should remove this article of Fatehpuri immediately. As regard to Juhi Shahin she is another Taslima Nasreen in the making and god willing she will meet the same resistance from believers and do not forget Allah Talah has promised to settle the score.


    By Rahmat kabir -



  • Amir Moghul

    You most of the time behave like an ill mannered child who is always like MAI BHI HUN,  MAI BHI HUN Types Arey yaar atleast try to understand the subject under discussion then post your comments so that we read it and benefit from that and not just ignore it as irrelevant.


    By Sultan ali-Siddiqui -



  • Dear Mr. Hasan Iqbal

    I am glad you are still with us and well aware of the goings on.  But you have apparently changed a lot. Mr. Iqbal, a thief is a thief. She is not a Shia or a Sunni or a Muslim or a Hindu. You are not going to get your salvation on the Day of Judgement by being sectarian and selective in your moral judgement. You strongly recommended to me that “Mrs. Syyeda Kaneez  Saheba’s post on Wisal of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and Shahadat of Imam Hasan (AS) “be “displayed more prominently so as to extend its reach to a wider audience.”  (Actual letter reproduced below.) Now I don’t see any doubt in your mind whether this was “Mrs. Syyeda Kaneez  Saheba’s post”. Had I accepted your strong recommendation who would I have given the authorship of that post? Not to you? Surely. Or to Mr. Shamshad Ansari Sahab who was the first to recommend the same and has now repented doing that. Obviously the authorship of that post belonged to Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima. If she is not a deliberate thief, even at that stage she would have informed us that it was actually not her post, though she has as usual forgotten who and where she lifted it from. But she didn’t do that. It was Mr. Ansari who discovered the theft and informed us of that and repented recommending its more prominent publication on the front page. You have still not done that, Mr. Iqbal. Do you still think “Mrs. Syyeda Kaneez  Saheba’s post” be “displayed more prominently so as to extend its reach to a wider audience.”

    Then I asked Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima that if the other similarly valuable article she had posted also did not belong to her and had been lifted from somewhere else, she should let us know so that credit can be given where it belongs.  (All these posts are available on this post itself and can be verified if you just go below.)

    She still did not respond, though she practically lives on the site and was very active in making fun of all the serious people who visit this site and leave a comment or a question. She even made fun in the meantime of a Mr. Sharma who had asked an innocuous question apparently hoping to be enlightened by the Muslim intellectuals on the site, though he had asked it from his own point of view to which he is as much entitled as any one of us, whether we agree with him or not. Mr. Sharma was not in the least disrespectful of Islam or anything like that. He may have sounded like an agnostic, but that is entirely his business. He was made fun of by this so-called lady. But while she had time to make fun of others she would not inform us that even the second post of hers had been lifted from somewhere else. She did not remember, of course, as she explains and doesn’t care and just believes in sharing with others whatever good article she finds anywhere without telling people that this article belongs to some one else. That’s just her style as we are informed and that is acceptable to the Shia readers of this site.

    Fine, but she could have at least told us, especially when she had been specifically asked to do so, that this article too had been lifted from somewhere else. But she again didn’t. Like you in the earlier case Mr. Ansari was kind enough to do some research again and find out the source of her other post as well. Even after all this, she has not spoken a word of remorse and continues to show others the correct road to heaven. Does the road to heaven go through thievery and brazen shamelessness when caught red-handed?

    Your defence and that of another correspondent on the site, perhaps Mr. Traveler, is that since she lifted articles and posted them as part of a comment, she is not guilty and the person who lifted parts of an article and made it a par t of his own article without due attribution to the original source was guilty. I don’t think any fair minded person would buy this ridiculous argument. Anything you post under your name you are claiming to be your own. It is absurd to say as Sayyeda Kaneez has done in her defence that everything I post should be deemed to belong to others unless I specifically claim some of them as my own and since I did not make any claim that this was mine so you should have understood that this was not mine. What kind of nonsense is that and what kind of tribal unity it would take for intelligent and once morally superior people like you to buy that.

    I am not so much worried about her. Thieves would do what thieves do. Some do feel embarrassment, express remorse and apologize, but most try to brazen it out as Sayyeda is trying to do. But what I am surprised at is people like you, a whole bevy of them, who had made life difficult for this site until Mr. Basha apologized or his post was removed. The excuse was a strong sense of morality as expressed in the comments available on the site.  I am reproducing a couple of them here to refresh your memory. Now comment section has been incorporated in the search engine for the site and you can search your own comments too more easily and remind yourself of the high moral horse you were riding when the case concerned a non-Shia.

    I am talking of Shia and non-Shia. Am I being sectarian? I must tell you I absolutely abhor sectarianism. I am a Muslim and that is enough. Did Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) belong to any sect? No. So, why should I? Allah and Mohammad and Quran are enough for me. For me the Kalima is the only criterion for being a Muslim and saying it is enough as I do not claim to know anybody’s intention. Islam is a simple religion, easily understandable even to the meanest intelligence, though, of course, intellectuals would find deeper meanings in it and do. But all interpretations are to me valid as long as made sincerely and since I cannot judge anybody’s sincerity I have to take people at their word. However, I cannot help abhorring such obnoxious display of sectarianism and tribalism.

    Do please read some of your previous posts Mr. Iqbal, some cited below and more on the site, and tell me where that sense of moral outrage is that you trumpeted then. At least think about it in your own mind.

    Best

    Sultan Shahin

    --------------

    2/25/2009 11:56:06 PM            HASAN IQBAL

    Janab Sultan Shahin Sb,

    I strongly second Mr. Shamshad Ansari's suggestion to place Mohtarma Sayyeda Kaneez Saheba's post on Wisal of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and Shahadat of Imam Hasan (AS) more prominently so as to extend its reach to a wider audience. Also, it would only be fair to God and his last Prophet to place the pictorial link of the Holy Quran on top.

    Regards,

    Hasan Iqbal

    ---

    /10/2009 1:12:56 AM               HASAN IQBAL

     I am sorry for having had to inform the editor and the readers about the 'originality' of the article, but since I had already read this article earlier, I would have been unfair to the original author, which you surprisingly didnot deem important enough despite your journalistic background, if I had not given him the necessary credit. I hope you would appreciate that there was nothing personal and no intent at 'character assassination'.

    May I request you to clarify whether 'your myth' is restricted to the 12th Imam of the Shias or the 'Mahdi' of Ummate-Muslemeen, as well as many non-muslims, as many other religions also hold the belief in the awaited one.

    I shall be more than happy to comment and let you and the readers know our faith and views on the 'awaited one' once you have clarified your belief.

    Regards,

    Hasan I Alvi

    ---

    2/8/2009 6:47:14 AM           HASAN IQBAL

    Mr. Sultan Shahin,

    The contents of the above article which Mr. Jamsheed Basha has attributed to himself, have been picked up from an article on the website www.ansar.org. The original article posted on the website under the link http://www.ansar.org/english/myth.html is written by Abu Muhammad al-Afriqi  under the title "The Myth of the Shiah Mahdi" and is being reproduced below. You would notice that the entire theme of the article and most of the paragraphs and sentences have been shamelessly copied by Mr. Basha from the original article word by word.

    While the blame lies completely on Mr. Jamsheed Basha for stealing the theme and contents from someone else's article and calling it as his own, you are at the same time expected to exercise discretion and carry out necessary checks to ensure that articles mailed to you, as their own,  are the original work of the senders and not copied or stolen from other sources.

    A word of confirmation from you of having taken note of the above would be appreciated.

    Regards,

    Hasan Iqbal

    ---

    2/9/2009 10:01:19 AM                Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez

     Bravo!! Janab Hasan Iqbal  sahab        salaamunalaikum’

    You have done,  really a commendable job there!  By exposing a Thief and even cornering a hypocrite like SULTAN SHAHEEN to accept his mistake, as there was no alternative left. Such is the fate of falsehood and concoction,  Jamshed Basha is the Newage version of Abu Huraira,  Now all good Muslims should focus their attention on the concoction and false representation of facts by the biggest cheat in the Islamic history the one of many....Abu Huraira.

    Ps:  ha ha ha ha ha 'Only those who are on HAQ will have the last laugh.' this is ordained by non other than the Almighty ALLAH the Rahman and Raheem himself.

    ---

    2/9/2009 8:20:55 AM                    Sultan Shahin

     Thanks very much indeed Janab HASAN IQBAL Sahab, for your alertness and such painstaking research. Mr. Jamsheed Basha does seem to have lifted entire paragraphs from another article without proper attribution to the original writer. This is neither good research nor good journalism. While both researchers and journalists use material from elsewhere proper attribution is the rule that must be followed. Indeed, attribution also serves to add to the credibility of one’s write-up, especially in articles that are bound to raise controversy, as it tells readers that the writer has not concocted these facts himself and there are others also who are saying the same thing and testifying to these facts.

    I would have taken this article off the site except for the fact that this would also deprive the site of valuable comments from readers like you and others. I would therefore request Mr. Basha to quickly resubmit the text with proper ascription wherever required. I would have no option but to take the article off the site otherwise. Authors should understand that while editors cannot but treat stuff submitted to them on faith, they do have the option to blacklist authors who are found by alert readers, many of whom are specialists in that field,  to have used material without proper acknowledgment to the original.

    In this case I find – to the extent I could see and do correct me if I am wrong – that Abu Muhammad Al-Afriqi too has not quoted any sources for his facts. Let us hope he too has not lifted these facts from some authentic source without attribution but his write-up is based on original research.

    Anyway, Mr. Hasan Iqbal, now that you have established that Mr. Basha has not concocted these facts, though he has undoubtedly caused great embarrassment to the site by omitting to quote his sources, and presenting them as his own research, I hope you or some other reader will seek to enlighten us on the authenticity of imams who are first made to appear and then to disappear.

    The questions before us today are the following: What purpose does this institution of hidden imam serve? Does this institution have any basis in the Holy Quran or is it just a concoction like many ahaadeeth. And why do we need hidden imams so much, as we already have the Holy Quran and the Sunnah of a Prophet (PBUH) to follow. If the illiterate Bedouins of Arabia of 1400 years ago could understand and follow the Quran and the instructions of Rasoolullah, why can’t we just do the same, though of course, seeking guidance from these sources in the context of our own Age, and be good Muslims. Why do we need to be Shia or Sunni or Wahhabi and whatever? Why can’t we be just Muslims?

    Sultan Shahin

    ---

    /9/2009 12:22:18 AM              HASAN IQBAL

     Janab Shahin Sb,

    I am sorry to say that Mr. Basha's claim that "the article is written in his own language and that the contents do not resemble any piece of article available anywhere" is completely false for the simple reason that on a closer analysis it is crystal clear that about 75% of the contents are straight away copied word by word, sentence by sentence and paragraph by paragraph from the original article written by Abu Muhammad Al-Afriqi.

    I would have appreciated if Mr. Basha had honestly admitted (which would have been excusable) that most of the contents had been taken from the original article in reference with opening remarks by him, instead of blatantly lying that the article is his own.

    Your defence of Mr. Basha in this matter by your statement that the article is indeed written in Mr. Basha’s own language, where even a 5th grade student on comparing the two articles would easily be able to comprehend that Mr. Basha's article is a stolen one, raises questions on your integrity. As a responsible editor you were expected to politely advise Mr. Basha to refrain from such a practice in future and as a corrective measure you could have alongside Mr. Basha also given the credit to the author of the original article by prefixing necessary remarks. That would have only strengthened the credibility of the website, as well as yours.

    In case you are still unsure of the extent to which the contents of Mr. Basha's article are copied word by word from the original article and also for the benefit of the readers, the entire text of Mr. Basha's article is being reproduced here under once again with all the copied texts highlighted in red. Should you still maintain that the article is indeed written in Mr. Basha's own language, one would be forced to interpret that while you were editing the article, 75% of its language, by sheer miracle, got changed word by word to that of another article available on another website.

    Once you have clarified your position I shall indeed comment, not "on the authencity of the facts mentioned" (as you have hoped) but on the reasons why such articles full of lies are written and promoted by those with vested interests.

    Wassalam,

    Hasan Iqbal

     (Full text of Mr. Jamsheed Basha's above article reproduced hereunder with the stolen paragraphs highlighted in red)  

    -------------------

    2/8/2009 9:57:15 AM                  Haji Anwaar siddiqui

    dear editor, hasan iqbal has manifested good amount of watchfulness by bringing out the ORIGINAL MAHDI ARTICLE  by ABU MOHAMMAD AL- AFRIQI, Here one more observation catching eye of the reader is Jamshed Basha too is ABU MOHAMMAD JAMSHED BASHA.. could this co-incidence should have encouraged later to use former's subject material on interchangeable basis??.. i'm just guessing only... no !! it doesn't convince...?.. actually i was trying to figure out any way by which our regular / thoughtful contributor Mr. Jamshed Bassha be absolved of the shameful charge of stealing someone else's article..because afterall he is singlehandedly responsible for changing the destiny of muslims by influencing the lawmakers of the country/ or even the world .. what he probably needs to be reminded is that such an act is a punishable crime under the copyright act and then he himself will have to become GHAYAB.. do we regard this calamity as the first curse befallen on our learned scholor jamshed basha from the providence of the Mahdi?..

    Mr. Sultan Shahin you too reduce your stature by unsuccesfully trying to defend Jamshed Basha..you really had no need to go that far..no wonder your site is represented mostly by CUT-PASTE gup-shup than serious debates ... kindly ask jamshed basha to apologize the readers and the original author and stop shameful persistence in stating " IT WAS AN OUTCOME OF DEEP STUDY".. does not he have shame... IN CLAIMING HIMSELF A JOURNALIST? most commentors here although do not claim their scholorship/ journalistic credentials but still produce original thoughts.. and a LEARNED SCHOLOR stealing entire articles like babies...

    thanks hasan iqbal for exposing these thieves, no wonder they will support only thieves of islam as per their inherent makeup.. salvation is a distant dream for many like these

    " DOES THIS TIMELY INCIDENCE OF STEALING AND WRONG CLAIMS TO OWNERSHIP THROWS ANY LIGHT ON THE WAY HADEETHS HAVE BEEN MANIPULATED MR. MUGHAL?..THIS AUTOMATICALLY PUTS JAMSHED BASHA IN THE RANKS OF ABU- HURAIRA (? RA)IF THIS IS THE STATE OF AFFAIR IN 21ST CENTURY , THE AGE OF INFORMATION...THAT TOO BY SOMEONE CLAIMING HIMSELF "JOURNALIST" IMAGINE THE CHAOS AND ADULTERATION IN THE TIMES OF HADEETH REPRODUCTION... that is why friends the authentic sources of faith are QURAN and AHL UL BAIT ( both protected by God Himself


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • In your response to Mr. Sayedda Kaneez's and Mr. Mehraj Ziya's comments questioning your stand, instead of clarifying your position vis-a-vis the article, you have out of your hatred towards a particular sect of Islam, childishly raised the question of Ahlulbait in the Quran and referred to an earlier article on the 12th Imam. If Juhi Shahin has gone out of her mind so as to write a book on a man who dared to question the basic tenets of Islam, instead of reprimanding her if she happens to be related to you in any way, you have chosen to promote her book and Fatehpuri's nonsense. [Hasan Iqbal]

    ==============================

    Dear Editor,

      

    Why condemn only Ms. Juhi Shahin, Mr Sultan Shahin about posting an article on an alleged Atheist Questioning the Basic Tenets of Islam????

     

    What about this?

     

    QURAN AS PER SHIA SCHOLARS.

    Nuri Tibiris, one of the most renowned Shi'ite scholars and mujtahids, wrote a book against the present Quran. The book is entitled: 'Faslul Khitab Fi Tahreefi-Kitabi Rabbil Arbaab' (The Final Verdict on the Distortion of the Book of the Lord of Lords).

    The Shiites assert that the existing Quran must have been altered, since there is no reference to any of their strayed beliefs in it. One of the first to explicitly state this view was Mirza Hussein Muhammad Taqiy al-Noori al-Tabrasi (d. 1320 AH) in his book The Final Verdict on the Distortion of the Book of the Lord of Lords. [Faslul Khitab Fi Tahreefi-Kitabi Rabbil Arbaab].

    Original Quran will not come into view till the manifestation of Imam Mehdi (SHIAs 12th Imam) (Na’uzubillah). [Anwaar-ul-Na' umania, Vol 2, Pg 360 - Published Iran]

    Collectors of Quran eliminated virtues of Prophet’s progeny from Surah Al-Ahzab which was about to the length of Surah Al-Bakrah.[Haq- ul-Yaqeen, Pg 66 - Published Iran]

    The Munafiqeen (i.e. Sahaba) took very much out of Quran (took out the verses). (Ihtijaj-e-tibri, page #382).

    When Imaam Mehdi comes he will bring with him the real and original Quran. (Ahsan-ul-maqaal, page #336, safdar Husain najfi).

    The person who says that the present Quran is complete is a liar because the “complete Quran†was compiled by Hazrat Ali. (Fasl-ul-khitaab fee tahreef kitaab rab-ul- arbab, page #4, Noori Tibri).

    "Abu Baseer reported that he said to Imam Ja'far, "O Abu Abdullah (Imam Ja'far as-Sadiq) What is Mus-haf Fatimah?" He replied "It is a Qur'an containing three times what is found in your copy of the Qur'an; yet by Allah, it does not contain even a single letter from your Qur'an. (Al-Kafi vol.1 p.457)

    No one possess complete knowledge of Holy Qur'an except Imams. (Al Kafi, Vol. No. 1, Page No. 228)

    God mentions in the Quran that He revealed Scriptures to the Prophets which they taught and recited to their people.  Some of these Prophets and Scriptures are mentioned in the Quran:

    Say, “We believe in Allah and that which has been sent down to us and that which has been sent down to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, and to the tribes, and that which has been given to Moses and Jesus, and that which has been given to the Prophets from their Lord.  We make no distinction between any of them, and to Him we have submitted (in Islam).” (Quran 2:136)

    “It is He (God) Who has sent down the Book to you with truth, confirming what came before it.  And He sent down the Torah and the Gospel.” (Quran 3:3)

    SHIA'S BELIEF ON QURAN AS PER THEIR AUTHENTIC BOOKS:

    Shiites believe that there was a scripture revealed after the Quran before the death of the Prophet, which they call the ‘Tablet of Fatimah’.  They claim, that in it were the names of all those who were to be their Imams in the future [Al-Kulaini, Al-Kaafi, 1/527-8]

    Important Note: Usool al- Kafi that is a collection narrations and traditions attributed to the Shiite Imams, Ahlul Bayt and the Prophet. Al-Kafi is the MOST reliable Shia Book, as the reliable Shia Scholars said and declared . Its author is Thiqat al-Islam Muhamad Ibn Yaqoob AlKulayni (A VERY reliable Shia Scholar, died in 328 H). Shi'ites scholars believe usool Al-Kafi was presented to the legendary Imam Qaem who liked it and said: "It suffices our Shi'ites" (al-Tharee'ah ela Tasaneef al-Shi'a: Agha Buzurg al-Tahraani; vol.17, p.245)

    Shia directly challenge the authenticity of the Quran by stating that its has not been preserved, and that the Quran today is incomplete, and that the complete version is with their 12th Imam who has been in hiding for the past 900 years in ‘the cave’.  They believe that when he emerges he will bring forth the complete version. [Usul Kafi 1:228, Al-Anwar al-Nu’maniah, 2: 360-2]

    Important Note: Usool al- Kafi that is a collection narrations and traditions attributed to the Shiite Imams, Ahlul Bayt and the Prophet. Al-Kafi is the MOST reliable Shia Book, as the reliable Shia Scholars said and declared . Its author is Thiqat al-Islam Muhamad Ibn Yaqoob AlKulayni (A VERY reliable Shia Scholar, died in 328 H). Shi'ites scholars believe usool Al-Kafi was presented to the legendary Imam Qaem who liked it and said: "It suffices our Shi'ites" (al-Tharee'ah ela Tasaneef al-Shi'a: Agha Buzurg al-Tahraani; vol.17, p.245)

    This, as should be clear to all, is in direct opposition to the teachings of Islam, as God clearly states that the Quran is under the direct protection of God:

    “Verily it is We Who have sent down the Reminder and surely, We will guard it (from corruption)” (Quran 15:9)

    Shiites assert that the existing Quran must have been altered, one of the first to explicitly state this view was Mirza Hussein Muhammad Taqiy al-Noori al-Tabrasi (d. 1320 AH) in his book The Final Verdict on the Distortion of the Book of the Lord of Lords [Faslul Khitab Fi Tahreefi-Kitabi Rabbil Arbaab]

    The Shiites became so extreme in their beliefs, that they even attempted to insert chapters about Ali, may God be pleased with him, in the Quran, since they could not find any clear texts.  One of them is what they called “The Chapter of Succession”. [Original Text is pasted below]

    "UNQUOTE"

    ???? ??????? ????????

    Quote:

    SHIA'S BELIEF ON QURAN AS PER THEIR AUTHENTIC BOOKS:

    Shiites believe that there was a scripture revealed after the Quran before the death of the Prophet, which they call the ‘Tablet of Fatimah’.  They claim, that in it were the names of all those who were to be their Imams in the future [Al-Kulaini, Al-Kaafi, 1/527-8]

    Important Note: Usool al- Kafi that is a collection narrations and traditions attributed to the Shiite Imams, Ahlul Bayt and the Prophet. Al-Kafi is the MOST reliable Shia Book, as the reliable Shia Scholars said and declared . Its author is Thiqat al-Islam Muhamad Ibn Yaqoob AlKulayni (A VERY reliable Shia Scholar, died in 328 H). Shi'ites scholars believe usool Al-Kafi was presented to the legendary Imam Qaem who liked it and said: "It suffices our Shi'ites" (al-Tharee'ah ela Tasaneef al-Shi'a: Agha Buzurg al-Tahraani; vol.17, p.245)

    Shia directly challenge the authenticity of the Quran by stating that its has not been preserved, and that the Quran today is incomplete, and that the complete version is with their 12th Imam who has been in hiding for the past 900 years in ‘the cave’.  They believe that when he emerges he will bring forth the complete version. [Usul Kafi 1:228, Al-Anwar al-Nu’maniah, 2: 360-2] (Aamir Mughal)

    Unquote:

    Would you care to define this latest Shia Sect?

     

    http://www.akhbari.org/English/tq.htm

     

    Evidence of Tehreef (Alterations) in Quran

     

    Wain kuntum fee raybin mimma nazzalna AAala AAabdina fatoo bisooratin min mithlihi wadAAoo shuhadaakum min dooni Allahi in kuntum sadiqeen

     

    2:23 And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true

     

    Tafseer:-In the Book Kaafi it has been narrated to Imam Mohammad Baqir AS that he said that this verse has been revealed in this way on to the Prophet Mohammad SW by the Angel Gibrael,

    Wain kuntum fee raybin mimma nazzalna AAala AAabdina fi Ali ibne Abitalib fatoo bisooratin min mithlihi wadAAoo shuhadaakum min dooni Allahi in kuntum sadiqeen

     

    And if ye are in doubt as to what We have revealed from time to time to Our servant in the context of Ali ibne Abitalib, then produce a Sura like thereunto; and call your witnesses or helpers (If there are any) besides Allah, if your (doubts) are true.

     

    http://www.akhbari.org/English/index.htm

     

    http://www.akhbari.org/urdu/eng_challenge

     

    Shia Imamia ithna ashari

     

    Among the shia sect, what are the differences between Usooli & Akhbari that had led to a discord between them?

    To end this confusion & to unveil the truths under the guidance of Quran & Hadees Saelebabulyaqeen is ready to have a discussion with the head of Majlis e Ulooma & Zakereen Hyderabad Deccan & also with all Usooli Ulemas & mujthaedeens on Saturday the 9th of June 2007 at Alawe Sartauq-e-Mubarak, Darulshifa.

    (Will wait from 8pm till 10pm)

    An Aalim is one who passes his jurisdiction under the guidance of Quran & Hadees but not by means of boycott, using gunda elements, murder, etc. All these things is the proof of helplessness of you people.

    The discussion will be held on the following topics:

    1) Did Rasool-e-Quda(SA) presented among us Quran & Hadees OR Quran – Hadees – Aql – Ijmah.

    2) What is the Law for Shias?

    3) Can Non-Masoom be a Nayab-e-Imam or Imam? Also what is the difference between Nayab-e-Rasool and Nayab-e-Imam?

    4) Any one hadees glorifying a Mujtahid?

    5) Any hadees on doing taqleed of a mujtahid. Who was the first mujtahid? And till he reached the norms of ijtihad, whose taqleed did he do?

    6) Did Rasool-e-Quda(SA) has passed on the Complete Deen or ma’azallah He did not? If he has given the Complete Deen then what’s the meaning of new masa’el?

    7) What is Shia Personal Law? Do Shia Law give permission for this?

    8) What is the basis for differences among fatwas of mujtahedeens? If the fatwa is issued under the guidance of Quran & Hadees then why is their a difference?

    9) Can the person who gives fatwas against Azadari Hussain(AS)-e-Mazloom-e-Karbala and Khooni Matam be called as Shia-e-Ali(AS). For the above type of person, is it correct to perform Isaale sawab, Fateha Khwani or Majlis?

    10) Ali(AS)-an-waliullah is not a part of Azan ¬– Explain this using any hadees as proof.

    All Shia persons please attend and after hearing the discussion decide on the Right & Wrong paths.

    IMP. NOTICE: Employees of Wakf Board, Minister of Minority Affairs Mr. Mohd. Ali Shabbir, Persons of authority in Police force and Akhbari Community are requested to attend the discussion.

     

    NOTICE FROM: Anjuman-e-Alavi Shia Imamia Ithna Ashari (Akhbari) Registered. 22-3-885, Koche Saelebabulilm, Darulshifa, Hyderabad.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

    Mr. Sultan Shahin,

    I can only pity you for posting the above article under the garb of a debate and then standing by it. I was perhaps under the false impression that here was man who through his website was trying to present the true picture of Islam. But you seem to have a different agenda. If Islam could survive against a tyrant like Yazid, the most powerful dictator of his time, the Fatehpuri's of this world are too miniscule compared to that Jahannumi.

    By posting excerpts from a book that seems to be only intended to create chaos and confusion and by an author who carries your surname and in an effort to promote the author and her book by even advertising the name of the publisher Firozsons Pvt Ltd. you have only exposed your real intentions.

    If Juhi Shahin has gone out of her mind so as to write a book on a man who dared to question the basic tenets of Islam, instead of reprimanding her if she happens to be related to you in any way, you have chosen to promote her book and Fatehpuri's nonsense.

    You may have been successful in your intent of generating a debate on Juhi Shahin's book and reviving your website but you have at the same time also earned curses from all lovers of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) for your abetment. Neither Fatehpuri nor Juhi Shahin will come to your rescue on the day of 'Mahshar' but Prophet Muhammad (SAW) surely will, for all true lovers of his and his progeny.

    In your response to Mr. Sayedda Kaneez's and Mr. Mehraj Ziya's comments questioning your stand, instead of clarifying your position vis-a-vis the article, you have out of your hatred towards a particular sect of Islam, childishly raised the question of Ahlulbait in the Quran and referred to an earlier article on the 12th Imam. Which is complete nonsense as Mr. Basha who had originally brought up the topic and then posted a lifted article; himself ran away fro the debate. He is yet to reply to my post despite a reminder.

    Your spitting of venom against a lady, who appears to be a true lover of the Prophet and his progeny, is deplorable to say the least, for there is nothing wrong in her posts. You have repeatedly and wrongly referred to one of Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez's posts as having been lifted from another website, while she had clearly stated that she found it to be worth sharing and was therefore posting the same.

    Why are you scared of a lady who is bold and has the guts to speak out her mind and loudly at that? She has been responsible for generating a lot of interest in this website and bringing in new readers and comments and has been constructively participating in most debates and has single-handedly taken on the Wahabis who have been promoting their radical idealogy.

    Now when she has openly condemned you for posting excerpts from an idiotic book whose venom is worse than that of Satanic Verses and rightly so, you have had the audacity to, instead of appreciating and thanking her for sparing her time for posting her valuable thoughts, threaten her by talking about banning her from this website. That surely is a sign of a coward. You can't be so ill-informed so as not to know that there are hundreds of other and better forums.

    Stop this fitna and tirade against Islam in the name of NewAgeIslam, Mr. Shahin.

     


    By HASAN IQBAL -



  • like Aamir Mughal Sahab, whom some Shia brothers and sisters on WWW.NewAgeIslam.com  consider an extremist right winger Wahhabi [Sultan Shahin]

    ----

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    I dont mind if ms Sayyeda and Meraj Sahab or others Shia declare me Wahabi [I damn care] but sometime I wonder if being a Wahabi is such a big crime then how would Ms. Sayyeda and others would define Late. Abul Kalam Azad [A Leading and Giant Figure of Freedom Movement]?

    People should know that Azad was basically a Salafi i.e. Ahl-e-Hadith [commonly known as Wahhabi]

    If you dont believe me then read his two books.

    1 - Ghubar-e-Khatir [The Dust of Memories: he wrote the book with the help of his memory, I have read the book and have checked the reference and Azad clearly followed Wahabi Ideology]

    2 - Tazkira [Autobiographical Account - written when he was under house arrest and this book was written by Late Azad without any help of supporting books which means he wrote the book with the help of his memory, I have read the book and have checked the reference and Azad clearly followed Wahhabi Ideology]

    Late. Maulana Azad with Late Nehru

    Gandhi, Nehru and Azad

    Dear Sir/Madam,

    I am not even close to the dust of Abul Kalam Azad's feet, but please tell me would you deny the services he rendered for India's Freedom just because Azad was Wahhabi in his Islamic Methodology.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • TO ALL RADERS OF THIS SITE

     

    PLEASE SEEK CLARIFICATION FROM MR SULTAN SHAHIN, HON'BLE EDITOR OF THIS SITE TO CLARIFY HIS STAND ON NIYAZ FATEHPURI AND HIS BLASPHEMOUS UTTERANCES ( FOR ALL OF US MUSLIMS) MENTIONED IN ARTICLE.

    WILL MR SHAHIN RUN A CAMPAIGN ASKING MUSLIMS TO ABANDON SAYING THEIR KALIMA OF SHAHADA BECAUSE  EVERY MUSLIMS PRAYS EVERYDAY SAYING  THERE IS NO GOD EXCEPT ALLAH AND MUHAMMAD IS HIS MEESENGER

    WILL MR SHAHIN REPLY TO HIS VIEWs ON QURAN AND DOES HE ENDORSE THIS STUPID AND LUNATIC VIEW OF NIYAZ FATEHPURI THAT OUR HOLY BOOK WAS NOT A DIVINE REVELATION BUT THE WORK OF OUR HOLY PROPHET.

    DOES MR SHAHIN BELIEVE IN THE CAVES OF HIRA AND WHAT HAPPENED THERE AND THE COMING OF ANGEL GABREIL. 

    IF MR SHAHIN BELIEVES IN THIS THEORY THEN HE MUST NOT USE THE WORD ISLAM IN THE SITE IT CAN BE ANYTHNG LIKE NEW AGE.  The basic pivots of Islam are Prophet Muhammad (SAW) and his family and the Holy Book Quran

    I appeal to all readers to mount pressure on Mr. Shahin to define his stand on the issue so as to expose his hidden agenda.


    By MERAJ ZIYA -



  • Sultan Shahin

    You have completely lost against the steadfastness of Mrs Kaneez. Islam Zindabad. Quran Zindabad. Iman Zindabad.  We really need such steadfast Muslims. Marhaba Mohtarma

    Zuber, Hammad, Salim, Erum, Farhana, Rizwan and Myself Zuhair


    By Zohair Khan Dxb -



  • @ Sultan Shaheen / Editor

     

    You don’t just indulge in HIZIYAN but stoop down to spreading ‘fitna’ among Muslims…. what has Shia / Sunni and other sects got to do with all the blasphemy that you are shamelessly committing and also trying to convince us all that you are a Muslim at the same time…. (FRESH HOT MUSLIM) straight from the hate manufacturing factories in India and neighboring countries.

    I am a Shiite Alhamdo lillah’ but before that, I am a Muslim who has unconditional faith on ALLAH swt, his Messenger Mohammad saww, and his Book the Holy Quran. These are my credentials what are your’s Mr. Sultan Shaheen? Now instead of behaving like an old senile woman who is repetitive and stubborn,  you should do some serious thinking and bring about a reform within your ignorant self,   before trying to teach others the basics of Islam also try and abstain from diverting tactics,  if you have anything original share with us all but don’t be so timid so as to repeat your rigmarole.

     

     

    Ps: My sincere thanks to all those who stood by what is right and supported my stand specially Mr. Kabir for noticing the prejudice of Sultan Shaheen against my messages (so much so that he reduced the font size and changed the color under some or the other pretext). 

     

    Thanks again.


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Dear Editor NewageIslam

    Allow  me to congratulate you that your site is attracting a of lot good comments from various sources, but I am very puzzled , that why have you started talking of sects among Muslims and trying to divert the attention of people from the real subject and the points raised be the firebrand lady participant,  you tell me one Muslim [sect is immaterial here] who actually believes that Naud-billah Quran-e-paak is the product of  elated state of mind of the  most loved Messenger of Allah Talah . This is utter nonsense Mr. Sultan the lady is so very right when she said any one who believes this will not remain a Muslim unless you have  a  new up coming fresh  Jahennami sect in mind.

    regards


    By Rabban U K -



  • My dear Shahin Saheb,

    I dont know who is Mr/Mrs/ ms Juhi Shahin but since the name resembles with that of you let me assumes the author is from your family. I am still not been able to comprehend as why this article/book review of Niyaz Fatehpuri mountain of foolishness found place in the site.You must state clearly if you endorse this view and would you now run a campaing asking Muslim to abandon their Kalima of Shahada.

    As you are the editor, your stand on the issue is critical,.  You cannot wash away your sin by just saying that you have initiated a debate.  Please settle once and for all do you agree with Niyaz Fatehpuri.  Niyaz thought marries with the Abdul ibn Wahab but mind it Mr. Shahin, the national flag of your land Saudi Arabia and your school of thought carry the Kalima and proudly asserts that  There is no god except Allah and Muhammad is his Messenger.,  So please dont play with word Mr. Shahin in the name of debate You must have conviction to say what you preach. We have debated on the site on various issues on Sunnism Shiaism Wahabism and Naikism but at no place was the question of our fountainhead of belief, the Holy Prophet (SAW) raised.

    You must also clarify Mr. Shahin if you agree with Fatehpuri view that Quran was not a divine revelation but the work of our Prophet (SAW)

    My conviction on Wahabism and its anti Islam approach is further confirmed as this man was a product of all these institution like Nadwa which are basically Wahabi school

    In case you agree with this madmen Niyaz Fatehpuri view please rename your site as you have then nothing to do with Islam  Just as I cannot be Indian if dont adhere to the national constitution and its rule of law Mr Shahin please state clearly as your hidden agenda is too obvious.

    I express my thanks to this sister Sayeeda Kaneez ,  I expect a reply on your STAND MR SHAHIN 

     


    By meraj ziya -



  •  

    Dear Editor Sultan Shahin

     

    It is really a matter of shame that in response of Ms Syeda Kaneez’s thought provoking and enlightening message (which I am copying below again as you have deliberately reduced the size of font to make it almost invisible) you could only come up with something you have already posted twice earlier, It is noteworthy that you are a full time Journalist and she is not. I am really surprised and disappointed with you.  I am beginning to understand that Faith developed through unbiased learning and with Blessings of Almighty such as evident in case of Mrs Sayeda Kaneez is the right belief among falsehood, deceit and  greed which is rampant in today’s so called Islam. The traces of anger and contempt in your absurd repetitive post only  proves the facts  that Mrs. Syeda kaneez have already pointed out about you. I have nothing personal with any writer on this forum but Sultan Shahin you have disappointed me and I am sure many others who visit your site, with your lack of basic Islamic understanding and total absence of faith, You may train your guns at me too and discreetly and sarcastically  try to take out your frustration but I don’t care man,   before you do that, try  to think where you have wronged, be a Man, apologize to her, to us and above all to Allah Rahim.

     

    May Allah Rahim have mercy on all of us and show us the right path.

     

    Regards

     

    Kabir

     

    Mrs. Syeda Kaneez’s Post.

     

    3/8/2009 10:55:32 AM                                      Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez 

    Dear all…Muslim Brothers and Sisters

     

    With each passing day the real face of the ringmaster AKA Sultan Shahin is surfacing,  to be seen by one and all as the face of  the enemy of Islam (within Islam) either because of sheer Ignorance and lack of ability to comprehend the divine message of Allah swt or Because of prejudice, enmity, or just plain hatred towards  the impeccable beauty of Islam,  it is nothing surprising …the human race is full of the likes of Sultan Shaheen who lack the basic aesthetic sense to appreciate beauty in its real form, without criticizing ….I am acquainted with the credentials of the Ring Master, but now I know that anger and ego blocks his intelligence so much,  so that he indulges into ‘Wo kya kahte hain….’HIZIYAAN’ (recall... this word from sahi bukhari) bakne lagta hai’…jo bhi inkey ‘box head’ mey aata hai bakne lagtay hain….otherwise he would not have equated a Dustbin called Niyaz Fatehpuri with something as pure and pious as the Masjid-e- Nabawi… this is what he says… .”

     

    "Fatehpuri is a matter of pride for all those Muslims in the sub-continent who have been gifted by God in some measure with the faculty of thinking new, fresh thoughts, the same faculty that God had gifted Rasoolullah with in much greater measure."  (Sultan Shahin)

     

     What kind of fresh thoughts Sultan Shahin is seeking…even the ‘FIRAUN’ had this fresh Idea of declaring himself God… may be this is too fresh to handle or else,  he would have been asking us all to give another chance to FIRAUN too…

     

    Ghangez Khan is too trivial to attract my attention, My question was whether Mr. Amir Moghul Bhaijan is a Fan of the barbaric Ghangez khan?  If yes why?

     

    Sultan Shaheen goes again… read this….

     

    “Mongol who devastated entire societies and countries and raped enough women to be today called the father of something like 10 percent of humanity – correct me if I am wrong (Sultan Shahin)

     

      

    On one hand Mr. Shahin literally begs us all, to think and act like we should,  in the 21st century and on the other hand he believes and propagates this preposterous Idea of 10 percent of humanity as the result of the misdeeds of ‘one man’  called Ghangez Khan…..(we really can’t afford such technology of sperm transfer in the 21st century)

     

    I wonder whether Amir Moghul and his likes are from this 10 percent of humanity……?? May be, that’s one reason, why he proudly displays the nonsense of Ghangez Khan on his blog.

     

      

    No offence intended…really


    By ALTAMASH KABIR, SINGAPORE -



  •  

    I wonder whether Amir Moghul and his likes are from this 10 percent of humanity……?? May be, that’s one reason, why he proudly displays the nonsense of Ghangez Khan on his blog. No offence intended…really [Sayyeda Kaneez]

     

    ================================

    Dear Ms Sayyeda,

     

    If you would note that I named my blog on the name of Chagatai Khan http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/ who was the second son of Genghiz Khan and Mughals who ruled India were the descendants of Chaghtai Clan [Babar's father was from Timur [another Mongol]'s Family and Babar's mother was from Genghiz Khan Family and Babar detested to be called Mongol rather he preferred Turk for himself [Reference Tuzuk-e-Babari by Babar and The Mughal Throne by Abraham Eraly published in India]

     

    I am not responsible [even as per you, Amir Moghul and his likes are from this 10 percent of humanity] for whatever wrong these Mongols did in the past because:

     

    1 - Those are a people who have passed away; theirs is that which they earned and yours that which ye earn. And ye will not be asked of what they used to do. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 141]

     

    2 - That no laden one shall bear another's load, And that man hath only that for which he maketh effort, And that his effort will be seen. And afterward he will be repaid for it with fullest payment;
    [Quran AN-NAJM (THE STAR) Chapter 53: Verse 38 to 41]

    3 - Say: Shall I seek another than Allah for Lord, when He is Lord of all things? Each soul earneth only on its own account, nor doth any laden bear another's load. Then unto your Lord is your return and He will tell you that wherein ye differed. [Quran AL-ANAAM (CATTLE, LIVESTOCK) Chapter 6: Verse 164]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • A reminder of some earlier points that still need to be addressed and some clarifications:

    Mr. Mubashir has still not enlightened us regarding his reaction to the points raised in the write-up Dr. Sarkar Haider had quoted in an earlier comment as a reply to his question whether there is any reference to AHL-E-BAIT in the Holy Quran.
  • We are still nowhere near the answer to the question raised by Mr. Mubashir: WHERE DO WE FIND THE AHL-E-BAIT? I would personally love to seek guidance from them, but where are they? Any address, telephone no., e-mail ID? Do I have to read their books or speeches? If so, which ones? And then how will I be able to understand them if I am not supposed to be capable of understanding the Holy Quran, that came primarily as a first hand guidance for the illiterate, ignorant Bedouins of the desert of Arabia 1400 years ago. How will I then be able to understand the guidance provided by AHL-E-BAIT in their books, if any? Who will guide me to understand their books? And so on.I really don’t understand it when I am told that I, the inheritor of a five-thousand year-old civilisation whose achievements are still unmatched in the world, will not be able to understand a book that had come to provide spiritual and worldly guidance to illiterate dwellers of a desert in the middle of nowhere without any history of any culture or education or knowledge of any sort. I am amazed all the more when I find the book itself does not claim to be a Salman Rushdie’s Satanic Verses-like difficult read. One does, of course, need background knowledge of the history of those times to understand some portions of this book, as it is not an ordinary book, but a collection of guidance that came to us through the voice box of Prophet Mohammad (pbuh) from time to time, as situation demanded.  As that situation no longer prevails and is not likely to, unless of course, we are able to invent a time machine and go back to those times, much of that guidance has lost its relevance, at least in terms of the actual wordage. The spirit that animated that guidance is of course, relevant and must continue to guide us. Some of that guidance does, of course, have universal relevance and has always been part of Islamic religion through times immemorial – from Hazrat Adam A. S. onwards. Some of it is also part of the universal voice of conscience and you don’t even need to believe in God or religion at all to believe in those universal values and try to follow them. It is not without reason, no matter how ironical, that Muslims everywhere receive the support of godless Marxists while face the wrath of the religious people. Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima is right. Space is no problem on the site. Alhamdolillah. But weight of the page is. It should not be raised unnecessarily. We want our pages to open as quickly as possible.  Photos are welcome, but anything taken directly from the net distorts the page. As Sayyeda Saheba has been discovered stealing articles from other sites and posting them as part of her comments without even a mention that they are from elsewhere, she must particularly take care to give references or refrain from posting such articles no matter how good they maybe, particularly if she has even forgotten the fact that they have been copied from somewhere else as she claims she is liable to. I have already apologised for the publication of stolen material to the original writers and publishers on behalf of the site. An apology from Mrs. Sayyeda will also be appreciated by most readers of the site. Of course, people belonging to her sect do not care if the theft is committed by one of their own. Their moral outrage is reserved for theft committed by people belonging to other sects. But there are other readers. Indeed there may even be some Shia brothers and sisters visiting this site blessed with a non-sectarian sense of morality. Thanks Mr. Shamshad Elahee Ansari for giving us the source of Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez Fatima’s earlier write-up on the miracles of Quran. I must apologise to the original researcher whose painstaking work was used in this fashion without due credit. It was taken word for word from: http://www.ummah.net/library/mirquran2/index.html  We publish stories and allow the publication of comments from readers unmonitored. All in good faith. Can I again request readers to please give due credit to the authors and publications from where they occasionally copy some material to illustrate their points. Quotations should be clearly marked and carry the names of author and/publications.

    6.    I cannot help noting the irony of Mr. Ansari writing to me only a few days ago: “Should I request you to remove Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez's post 28th Safar 1430 A.H. -  wisal of Prophet Mohammad(sawaw) and Shahadat of Imam Hasan(a.s.) and publish it on the main page of the site so that the  reader could get an (wider) access to it. Relevant comments must be given proper space and priority. Most of the time, issue is not discussed rather we comment on the comments only.” I wonder if he is now trying to find the source of that write-up as well. That would be only fair to the author and the site from where this too may have been lifted. It would be better, of course, if Mrs. Kaneez gave us the source herself even at this late stage, if that indeed is the case. I am reproducing again at the end of this note the letter of Mr. Ansari along with the original article on the miracles of Quran with proper credit and courtesy to the site concerned for the benefit of those who may have missed it and thus may not be able to understand what all this is about.

    [P.S. Mrs. Kaneez did not give us the source, nor did she even let us know that they were not her own write-up, but Mr. Ansari has been able to unearth the real source in his comments below and also expressed his contrition for recommending that her write-up be published as an article on the front page for wider circulation. She merely claims that any part of her write-up that she does not claim specifically as her own must be considered belonging to some other writer and cut and pasted from some other site. So readers should beware of all material in her write-ups that appear readable and appear to be making sense: they should be assumed to belong to some other writer. The site would be grateful to the readers who look for and unearth the real source, so that references could be made to the original writer and publisher. The reason I am not banning her from the site, as some people are persistently demanding and have even stopped visiting us and commenting in protest, is that she represents a vast number of our co-religionists who dare not think a new thought ever and it is they we have to address and try to reach somehow. In any case, as most of her write-ups don’t make much sense they can be assumed to be her own and assumed tor represent the views of a vast number of Muslims, and not just Shias; Sunnis are no less unthinking. ]

    7.    As already expressed above I reiterate my amazement at the complete lack of moral outrage from the readers who had rightly created such a din in a previous similar situation. The commotion was so great that some readers got convinced that the end of the world was at hand. Is it really so, as some had alleged then, that some people were really only interested in diverting attention from the discussion on the myth or reality of the 12th Imam. And as soon as the matter got cleared up, they all fell silent, as they had nothing to say to prove the reality of the so-called twelfth Imam, although they kept claiming that they had much to say on the issue and were only waiting for the matter of the author not giving proper credit being cleared up.  I must say that we cannot make any headway in any discussion if we just insist on sticking to our own point and refuse to even listen to other viewpoints, indeed use diversionary tactics in the manner of politicians, to avoid debate on issues on which we know we are wrong and yet we have to stick to it till the last breath.  

     Sultan Shahin


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • Dear Mr. Meraj ziya  ….salaamun alaikum’

     

    It really gives me courage and happiness that I am not alone on this forum fighting for what is HAQ and spitting on the face of evil. Thank you,  for the much needed moral support …Allah swt shall Inshallah reward you for siding with what is right . ..I will keep this short, lest we be accused of forming a mutual admiration club…lols…BTW.. have you noticed, how Sultan Shahin reduced the font size of my last post….In his futile attempt to choke the Voice of Haq,   where as at the same time, he has allowed other Wahabis’  on this forum to even upload pictures in their individual posts…so that means space is not the constraint on this site (earlier Sultan Shahin took this excuse)…speaking too much of HAQ is.

     

    Best Regards

     

    Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez .


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Thank you sister Sayeeda kaneez,

     I am happy that sisters like you though I am addressing you for the first time is so well acquainted with Islamic history and covenants.  Amir Mughal I have said is too boring

    I advise you not to interact with people of mediocre intelligence. For fourteen hundreds years people had targeted our Prophet SAW and his family starting from Abu Sufyan, Maui and his lecherous progeny yazeed (All LA) to the scum called Abdul ibn Wahab. Has it ever made any difference.  Not a single second passes in the world when the cries of La Ilaha Illallah Muhammud Rasoolullah does not waft in the air.  Not a single second.  That is the essence of our faith.  Don’t you recall Meccan under Abu Sufyan had called our prophet a magician and a sorcerer?

    Shahin or that lunatic called Niyaz Fatehpuri may compliment each other  but they are fool and  stupid like the cursed Wahabis.  If at all Shahin has the courage ask him to tell Muslims not to recite kalima or shahada ask even the cursed wahabis.  I am surprised as to why people of your intelligence reply you such idiotic and malicious post.

    Shahin agenda is clear the new age Islam is a weapon to mock Islam like Yazeed did and his modern reincarnation that lecher called Zakir Naik indulges.

    The pivot of Islam is our Holy Prophet and Shahin not your idiotic thought or that of lunatic Niyaz 


    By meraj ziya -



  • Dear all…Muslim Brothers and Sisters

     With each passing day the real face of the ringmaster AKA Sultan Shahin is surfacing,  to be seen by one and all as the face of  the enemy of Islam (within Islam) either because of sheer Ignorance and lack of ability to comprehend the divine message of Allah swt or Because of prejudice, enmity, or just plain hatred towards  the impeccable beauty of Islam,  it is nothing surprising …the human race is full of the likes of Sultan Shaheen who lack the basic aesthetic sense to appreciate beauty in its real form, without criticizing ….I am acquainted with the credentials of the Ring Master, but now I know that anger and ego blocks his intelligence so much,  so that he indulges into ‘Wo kya kahte hain….’HIZIYAAN’ (recall... this word from sahi bukhari) bakne lagta hai’…jo bhi inkey ‘box head’ mey aata hai bakne lagtay hain….otherwise he would not have equated a Dustbin called Niyaz Fatehpuri with something as pure and pious as the Masjid-e- Nabawi… this is what he says… .”

    Fatehpuri is a matter of pride for all those Muslims in the sub-continent who have been gifted by God in some measure with the faculty of thinking new, fresh thoughts – the same faculty that God had gifted Rasoolullah with in much greater measure  (Sultan Shahin)

    ------

     What kind of fresh thoughts Sultan Shahin is seeking…even the ‘FIRAUN’ had this fresh Idea of declaring himself God… may be this is too fresh to handle or else,  he would have been asking us all to give another chance to FIRAUN too…

    Ghangez Khan is too trivial to attract my attention, My question was whether Mr. Amir Moghul Bhaijan is a Fan of the barbaric Ghangez khan?  If yes why?

    Sultan Shahin goes again… read this….

    “Mongol who devastated entire societies and countries and raped enough women to be today called the father of something like 10 percent of humanity – correct me if I am wrong” (Sultan Shahin)

     --------

    On one hand Mr. Shahin literally begs us all, to think and act like we should,  in the 21st century and on the other hand he believes and propagates this preposterous Idea of 10 percent of humanity as the result of the misdeeds of ‘one man’  called Ghangez Khan…..(we really can’t afford such technology of sperm transfer in the 21st century)

    I wonder whether Amir Moghul and his likes are from this 10 percent of humanity……?? May be, that’s one reason, why he proudly displays the nonsense of Ghangez Khan on his blog.

     No offence intended…really

    Thank you sister Sayeeda kaneez,

     I am happy that sisters like you though I am addressing you for the first time is so well acquainted with Islamic history and covenants.  Amir Mughal I have said is too boring

    I advise you not to interact with people of mediocre intelligence. For fourteen hundreds years people had targeted our Prophet SAW and his family starting from Abu Sufyan, Maui and his lecherous progeny yazeed (All LA) to the scum called Abdul ibn Wahab. Has it ever made any difference.  Not a single second passes in the world when the cries of La Ilaha Illallah Muhammud Rasoolullah does not waft in the air.  Not a single second.  That is the essence of our faith.  Don’t you recall Meccan under Abu Sufyan had called our prophet a magician and a sorcerer?

    Shahin or that lunatic called Niyaz Fatehpuri may compliment each other  but they are fool and  stupid like the cursed Wahabis.  If at all Shahin has the courage ask him to tell Muslims not to recite kalima or shahada ask even the cursed wahabis.  I am surprised as to why people of your intelligence reply  such idiotic and malicious post.

    Shahin agenda is clear the new age Islam is a weapon to mock Islam like Yazeed did and his modern reincarnation that lecher called Zakir Naik indulges.

    The pivot of Islam is our Holy Prophet and Shahin not your idiotic thought or that of lunatic Niyaz. 


    By meraj ziya -



  • Dear all…Muslim Brothers and Sisters

     

    With each passing day the real face of the ringmaster AKA Sultan Shahin is surfacing,  to be seen by one and all as the face of  the enemy of Islam (within Islam) either because of sheer Ignorance and lack of ability to comprehend the divine message of Allah swt or Because of prejudice, enmity, or just plain hatred towards  the impeccable beauty of Islam,  it is nothing surprising …the human race is full of the likes of Sultan Shaheen who lack the basic aesthetic sense to appreciate beauty in its real form, without criticizing ….I am acquainted with the credentials of the Ring Master, but now I know that anger and ego blocks his intelligence so much,  so that he indulges into ‘Wo kya kahte hain….’HIZIYAAN’ (recall... this word from sahi bukhari) bakne lagta hai’…jo bhi inkey ‘box head’ mey aata hai bakne lagtay hain….otherwise he would not have equated a Dustbin called Niyaz Fatehpuri with something as pure and pious as the Masjid-e- Nabawi… this is what he says… .”

     

    Fatehpuri is a matter of pride for all those Muslims in the sub-continent who have been gifted by God in some measure with the faculty of thinking new, fresh thoughts – the same faculty that God had gifted Rasoolullah with in much greater measure  (Sultan Shahin)

     

     

    What kind of fresh thoughts Sultan Shahin is seeking…even the ‘FIRAUN’ had this fresh Idea of declaring himself God… may be this is too fresh to handle or else,  he would have been asking us all to give another chance to FIRAUN too…

    Ghangez Khan is too trivial to attract my attention, My question was whether Mr. Amir Moghul Bhaijan is a Fan of the barbaric Ghangez khan?  If yes why?

    Sultan Shahin goes again… read this….

     

    “Mongol who devastated entire societies and countries and raped enough women to be today called the father of something like 10 percent of humanity – correct me if I am wrong” (Sultan Shahin)

     

    On one hand Mr. Shahin literally begs us all, to think and act like we should,  in the 21st century and on the other hand he believes and propagates this preposterous Idea of 10 percent of humanity as the result of the misdeeds of ‘one man’  called Ghangez Khan…..(we really can’t afford such technology of sperm transfer in the 21st century)

    I wonder whether Amir Moghul and his likes are from this 10 percent of humanity……?? May be, that’s one reason, why he proudly displays the nonsense of Ghangez Khan on his blog.

     

    No offence intended…really

     


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • People want to understand Muhammad through the Qur’an and Hadith and I want to verify the Qur’an and Hadith through the life of Muhammad. [Niyaz Fatehpuri]

    =========================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

     

    Quran cannot be tempered and Hadith can be verified through matching it with Quran and then Chains of Narrations. Regarding Biography of Mohammad [PBUH], how can one be so sure that LIFE SKETCH of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] is not tempered because it's not Quran. Historian collect everything and one should be very careful when Historian discuss Prophets [PBUT], their Companions [May Allah be pleased with them]

     

    Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari: “I am writing this book as I hear from the narrators. If anything sounds absurd, I should not be blamed or held accountable. The responsibility of all errors or blunders rests squarely on the shoulders of those who have narrated these stories to me.” Tabari's Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) popularly called "Mother of All Histories" is the first ever "History of Islam" written by 'Imam' Tabari (839-923 CE) at the junction of the third and fourth century AH. He died in 310 AH. [Preface of Tareekhil Umam Wal Mulook (The History of Nations and Kings) by Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari.]

     

    Ahmed Bin Hanbal says:Three kinds of books are absolutely unfounded, Maghazi, Malahem and Tafseer.” (The exalted Prophet's Battles, Dreams and Prophecies, and Expositions of the Qur’an). [Ahmed Bin Hanbal as quoted by ibn Rajab al-Hanbali in Dhayl Tabaqat al-Hanabila (Appendage to the Encyclopedia of Hanbali Scholars)]

     

    Hafiz Ibn Kathir says: Had Ibn Jareer Tabari not recorded the strange reports, I would never have done so. [Tafseer Ibn Katheer (Commentary on Quran) and Al Bidaya Wal Nihaya (History - From Start to End)]

     

    Ibn Khaldun says: The Muslim historians have made a mockery of history by filling it with fabrications and senseless lies. (Muqaddama Ibn Khaldun)

     

    Shah Abdul Aziz Dehelvi says: Six pages of Ibn Khaldoon's History have been deliberately removed since the earliest times. These pages had questioned the most critical juncture of Islamic history i.e. the Emirate of Yazeed and the fiction of Karbala. [Even the modern editions admit in the side-notes that those pages have been mysteriously missing from the ancient original book. [Tohfa Ithna Ashri by Shah Abdul Aziz Dehelvi]

     

    Shah Waliullah Dehelvi says: Imam Jalaluddin Sayyuti's Tarikh-ul-Khulafa is the prime example of how our Historians, Muhaddithin and Mufassirin, each has played like Haatib-il-Lail (One who collects firewood at night not knowing which piece is good and which one is bad). [Izalatul Khifa A'N Khilaafatil Khulafaa by Shah Waliullah]

     

    Example is as under:

     

    "QUOTE"

    Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yasar [Birth:85 AH 704 CE Death: 150-153 AH (767)] 

    The earliest is Ibn Ishaq's Sira, his biography of the Prophet. It is also the longest and the most widely quoted. Later historians draw, and in most cases depend on him. [Uyun al-athar, I, 7, Ibn Sayyid al-Nas (d. 734A.H.)

    A contemporary of Ibn Ishaq, Imam Malik [d 179 AH], the jurist, denounces Ibn Ishaq outright as "a liar" and "an impostor" just for transmitting such stories. [`Uyun al-athar, I and ibid, I, 16].

    It must be remembered that historians and authors of the Prophet's biography did not apply the strict rules of the "traditionists". They did not always provide a chain of authorities, each of whom had to be verified as trustworthy and as certain or likely to have transmitted his report directly from his informant, and so on. The attitude towards biographical details and towards the early events of Islam was far less meticulous than their attitude to the Prophet's traditions, or indeed to any material relevant to jurisprudence. The attitude of scholars and historians to Ibn lshaq's version of the stories has been either one of complacency, sometimes mingled with uncertainty, or at least in two important cases, one of condemnatlon and outright rejection.

    The complacent attitude is one of accepting the biography of the Prophet and the stories of the campaigns at they were received by later generations without the meticulous care or the application of the critical criteria which collectors of traditions or jurists employed. It was not necessary to check the veracity of authorities when transmitting or recording parts of the story of the Prophet's life.[Ibn Sayyid al-Nas (op. cit., I, 121)]

    It was not essential to provide a continuous chain of authorities or even to give authorities at all. That is obvious in Ibn Ishaq's Sira. On the other hand reliable authority and a continuous line of transmission were essential when law was the issue. That is why Malik the jurist had no regard for Ibn Ishaq. [Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila - Liar and Liar amongst Liars]

    His contemporary, the early traditionist and jurist Malik, called him unequivocally "a liar" and "an impostor"[Kadhdhab and Dajjal min al-dajajila - Liar and Liar amongst Liars] "who transmits his stories from the Jews".[`Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7 by Ibn Sayyid al-Nas].

    In a later age Ibn Hajar Asqalani further explained the point of Malik's condemnation of Ibn Ishaq. Malik, he said,[Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, IX, 45. See also `Uyun al-athar, I, 16-7] condemned Ibn Ishaq because he made a point of seeking out descendants of the Jews of Medina in order to obtain from them accounts of the Prophet's campaigns as handed down by their forefathers. [ibid.]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Changez khan is a fascinating subject and even more fascinating  is the issue as to why would a really good Muslim intellectual  like Aamir Mughal Sahab, whom some Shia brothers and sisters on NewAgeIslam.com  consider an extremist right winger Wahhabi, want to identify himself with this Kafir Mongol who devastated entire societies and countries and raped enough women to be today called the father of something like 10 percent of humanity – correct me if I am wrong [Sultan Shahin]

    ---

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    I am humble and honoured for your complimentary comment. I am just learning and not at all an intellectual. You are correct to the hilt on the father of something like 10 percent of humanity.

    Genghis Khan's descendant crunches numbers, not heads

    8pc of Asian men - were descended from Genghis Khan

    http://www.independent.ie/national-news/genghis-khans-descendant-crunches-numbers-not-heads-100507.html

    Genghis Khan DNA test attracts hordes of takers

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5379014/

    Taking the Genghis Khan test

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/london/3871159.stm

    Genghis Khan: Father To Millions
    Discovery News ^ | 6-22-2004 | Rossella Lorenzi

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1158027/posts

    June 22, 2004 —Genghis Khan left a legacy shared by 16 million people alive today, according to a book by a Oxford geneticist who identified the Mongol emperor as the most successful alpha male in human history. Posted on Tuesday, June 22, 2004 9:49:06 AM by blam Genghis Khan: Father to Millions? By Rossella Lorenzi, Discovery News

    http://dsc.discovery.com/news/briefs/20040621/gallery/genghis_goto.jpg


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Some comments have been deleted from this thread and a selection of relevant ones saved for being posted with another article. Changez khan is a fascinating subject and even more fascinating  is the issue as to why would a really good Muslim intellectual  like Aamir Mughal Sahab, whom some Shia brothers and sisters on NewAgeIslam.com  consider an extremist right winger Wahhabi, want to identify himself with this Kafir Mongol who devastated entire societies and countries and raped enough women to be today called the father of something like 10 percent of humanity – correct me if I am wrong, as I am writing from memory but the figure given by scientists is certainly quite startling even if it is just five per cent. But the discussion on this subject is out of place here .We are discussing on this thread the quite revolutionary ideas of Allama Niaz Fatehpuri.

    That we have had among us as heroic a thinker as Fatehpuri is a matter of pride for all those Muslims in the sub-continent who have been gifted by God in some measure with the faculty of thinking new, fresh thoughts – the same faculty that God had gifted Rasoolullah with in much greater measure. These people may not necessarily agree with Fatehpuri but they value his ability to think fresh thoughts, question established ideas and have the courage to express them in the face of blood-thirsty Mullahs and blood-sucking Mullahins. Had the Prophet not spent so much time in Ghar-e-Hira and thought new thoughts, and attuned himself to the required changes in religious and moral thought, perhaps we wouldn’t have had Islam today or God would have had to choose some other person in some other time and place to convey his message to humanity.

    Those readers who are not happy discussing Fatehpuri’s ideas may very well argue other issues that are available in plenty on NewAgeIslam.com Changez Khan too will Insha Alah soon be available on this site to be discussed at length.

    Sultan Shahin


    By sultan Shahin -



  • PS: Really nice to see the sign  of life among Muslims..... Thank you Mr. Meraj Ziya, for noticing the filth in the satanic post of Juhi Shahin.

     

    @ All good Muslim brothers and Sisters.

    Many correspondents on this page,  have tried to bring  the discussion back to the satanic post of Juhi Shahin ....Though the subject is really not worth any discussion by dignified Muslims who follow true Islam...I wonder how many of you good people, actually believe, that Neyaz Fathepuri continued to be  a Muslim???? And how ridiculous it is to call him ALLAMA.....do we really need such, so called scholars who missed upon the ABCD of Islam and have the face  to prefix the title of ‘ALLAMA’ ? Are we so disabled that we need a Fatwa from some Tom Dick and harry to tell us,  that Niyaz Fathepuri ceased to be a Muslim ? I think ‘Kalima’  is enough to guide us in such matters, and recognise such hypocrites (apparently Muslims) within Islam.


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • SHAHIN SAHEB,

    WHY POST ARTICLES SO STUPID LIKE THESE.  FOR ME NIYAZ FATEHPURI IS A PARAGON OF IDIOCITY, MUNDANE THOUGHTS WHICH ABOUNDS ONLY IN THE WAHABI SCHOOL.  LIKE  THE CURSED ABDUL IBN WAHAB, THIS IDIOT ALSO RAISES QUESTIONS WHICH ARE WHIMISICAL AND ILLOGICAL.  WHY DID OUR PROPHET HAD TO GO IN THE CAVES JUST TO PONDER ON REFORM AND REFORM FOR WHAT. TO CALL QURAN AS A WORD OF HUMAN IS AS BLASPHEMOUS AS DEMOLITION OF JANNATUL BAQI.  I AM SURPRISED WHY THIS MAN WAS ALLOWED TO WRITE SUCH TRASH IN AOPRESUMABLY ISLAMIC COUNTRY LIKE PAKISTAN.  BUT I AM EQUALLY NOT SUPRISED SEEING THE CONDITION OF WHAT PAKISTAN HAS BECOME TODAY.  

    THE NEW AGE ISLAM SHOULD BE A PLATFORM TO DISCUSS ISLAM AND ITS MODERN APPROACH THAN TO QUESTION ISLAM , OUR PROPHET (SAW) AND OUR HOLY BOOK JUST BECAUSE ONE WAHABI LUNATIC HAS RAISED SOME STUPID QUESTIONS. ALL RELIGION ON THE EARTH CAN BE QUESTIONED WITH STUPID IDEOLOGIES  AND BY STUPID PEOPLE.  MR SHAHIN I AM VERY SURPRISED THATY SUCH ARTICLES ARE BEING POSTED IN THIS SITE.  YOU ARE GIVING FODDER TO PEOPLE LIKE AMIR MUGHAL AND HE SURELY MUST BE JUMPING ON IT.  LIKE ALL MUSLIMS, I TOO JOIN TO TOTALLY REJECT THIS SATANIC POST BY JUHI SHAHEEN AND HER MENTOR  

    YOU ARE GIVING FODDER TO PEOPLE LIKE AMIR MUGHAL AND HE SURELY MUST BE JUMPING ON IT.  LIKE ALL MUSLIMS, I TOO JOIN TO TOTALLY REJECT THIS SATANIC POST BY JUHI SHAHEEN AND HER MENTOR  [Meraj Ziya]

    ==========================

    Dear Meraj Sahab,

    I have a very fundamental difference with Ms Juhi Shahin and Sultan Shahin on Late. Allama Neyaz Fatehpuri but only thing I can do is to express my opinion not to raise demand to remove the post of Ms Juhi Shahin. in my humble opinion this website is doing a great job by discussing controversies in Muslim Societies. Ms Juhi Sultan has every right to express her opinion. Such discussions and such websites are essential for Close Minded Muslim Societies. Not only that this website can also ease tension between India and Pakistan and can bring peole [Hindu and Muslim] closer by initiating people to peole dialogue. I must offer salute to two Indian Expatriates [Prof. Ms Rashmi Sinha and Mr. V Kumar] who initiated and then managed an excellent website after 911 i.e. DialogNow [no more on the web] for 5 years. There were literally very hot exchange of comment [without cursing] between the fellow members and that site was created to establish people to people to dialogue.

    I hope if Sultan Sahab can bring those members of DialogNow on New Age Islam and further improve this website to bring Pakistanis and Indians more closer.

    Keep it up Sultan Sahab.

    Regards


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • SHAHIN SAHEB,

    WHY POST ARTICLES SO STUPID LIKE THESE.  FOR ME NIYAZ FATEHPURI IS A PARAGON OF IDIOCITY, MUNDANE THOUGHTS WHICH ABOUNDS ONLY IN THE WAHABI SCHOOL.  LIKE  THE CURSED ABDUL IBN WAHAB, THIS IDIOT ALSO RAISES QUESTIONS WHICH ARE WHIMISICAL AND ILLOGICAL

    WHY DID OUR PROPHET HAD TO GO IN THE CAVES JUST TO PONDER ON REFORM AND REFORM FOR WHAT. TO CALL QURAN AS A WORD OF HUMAN IS AS BLASPHEMOUS AS DEMOLITION OF JANNATUL BAQI.  I AM SURPRISED WHY THIS MAN WAS ALLOWED TO WRITE SUCH TRASH IN AOPRESUMABLY ISLAMIC COUNTRY LIKE PAKISTAN.  BUT I AM EQUALLY NOT SUPRISED SEEING THE CONDITION OF WHAT PAKISTAN HAS BECOME TODAY.  

    THE NEW AGE ISLAM SHOULD BE A PLATFORM TO DISCUSS ISLAM AND ITS MODERN APPROACH THAN TO QUESTION ISLAM , OUR PROPHET (SAW) AND OUR HOLY BOOK JUST BECAUSE ONE WAHABI LUNATIC HAS RAISED SOME STUPID QUESTIONS. ALL RELIGION ON THE EARTH CAN BE QUESTIONED WITH STUPID IDEOLOGIES  AND BY STUPID PEOPLE.  MR SHAHIN I AM VERY SURPRISED THATY SUCH ARTICLES ARE BEING POSTED IN THIS SITE.  YOU ARE GIVING FODDER TO PEOPLE LIKE AMIR MUGHAL AND HE SURELY MUST BE JUMPING ON IT.  LIKE ALL MUSLIMS, I TOO JOIN TO TOTALLY REJECT THIS SATANIC POST BY JUHI SHAHEEN AND HER MENTOR  

     

     


    By meraj ziya -



  • This fellow may very well have turned a Wahhabi, for the sake of his own survival in today’s Pakistan where non-Wahhabi mosques and worshippers are being bombed within the mosque premises during prayers. [Sultan Shahin]

    ==========================

    Dear Sir, please get your facts corrected and one of the fact is this that majority of Pakistanis are Barelvi Hanafis. An example is as under:

    Since the 'BLESSED' 12 Rabiul Awwal Celebration has almost arrived therefore it is very suitable that three videos must be posted of a Prominent Pakistani Islamic Scholar, Dr Tahirul Quadri who is also "Sheikh Al Islam. My personal choice [if you talk of Music and Dance] would have been any Rave Club or even stirptease, I dont like the cover of Shairah and Deviant Interpretation of Quran and Hadith to idulge in vice. You say that Pakistan is rapidly becoming Talibani or even wrose Wahabi Country, Sir, I say, you should have watched the participation in Tahirul Quadri's congregations in Lahore.

    Dr. Tahir ul Qadri Lovers - Part 1- Music in Islam

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtaXDO64VoQ&feature=related

    'ALLEGED' Sheikh ul Islam Dr Tahir ul Quadri throwing money:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1EJpgDkNi8&feature=related

    NOTE:My personal choice [if you talk of Music and Dance] would have been any Rave Club or even stirptease, I dont like the cover of Shairah and Deviant Interpretation of Quran and Hadith to idulge in such vices rather  i would do such things at my own expense without inserting Islam in every damn thing.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • This fellow may very well have turned a Wahhabi, for the sake of his own survival in today’s Pakistan where non-Wahhabi mosques and worshippers are being bombed within the mosque premises during prayers. [Sultan Shahin]

    ==========================

    Dear Sir, please get your facts corrected and one of the fact is this that majority of Pakistanis are Barelvi Hanafis. An example is as under:

    Since the 'BLESSED' 12 Rabiul Awwal Celebration has almost arrived therefore it is very suitable that three videos must be posted of a Prominent Pakistani Islamic Scholar, Dr Tahirul Quadri who is also "Sheikh Al Islam.

    Tahir Ul Qadri and Dancers

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hMiM6OEoni0

    Dr. Tahir ul Quadri and Non Stop Dreams of seeing Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2ebV-NSUtk

    NOTE: Dr Tahirul Quadri was created by General Ziaul Haq [Afghan Jihad]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Aamir Mughal Sahab, 

    Or maybe the poor chap is just trying to survive in a Talibanised Pakistan. Not everyone can be as brave as Allama Niaz Fatehpuri, even if he happens to be a relative of sorts.  This fellow may very well have turned a Wahhabi, for the sake of his own survival in today’s Pakistan where non-Wahhabi mosques and worshippers are being bombed within the mosque premises during prayers. Some Shias supported by Iran are making feeble attempts to kill a few Wahhabis too but achieving only a rare success once in a while. Sultan Shahin

    =======================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

     

    The real problem in is not Sunni, Shia, Wahabi, Deobandi, Barelvi Mullahs or even Sectarianism as you have implied above  The fact is this that Pakistani Military Establishment [when need arises] even utilize the services of Prostitutes and Pimps so they never even think twice to utilize Deobandis and Wahabis for gain some quick strategic depths. Read Carnegie Endowment Policy Brief on this

     

    Pakistan: The Myth of an Islamist Peril By Frederic Grare Publisher: Carnegie Endowment Policy Brief #45, February 2006

    Click on link for the full text of this Carnegie Paper

    http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/45.grare.final.pdf


    http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/45.grare.final.pdf#search='The%20Myth%20of%20an%20Islamist%20Peril'

     

    http://www.carnegieendowment.org/files/45.grare.final.pdf

     

    The fear of an Islamic threat has been the driving force behind most Western countries’ foreign policies toward Pakistan in recent years. The possibility that violent Islamists will kill President Pervez Musharraf, throw Pakistan into turmoil, take over the country and its nuclear weapons, and escalate regional terrorism has dominated the psychological and political landscape. Such fears have usually led to support of the Pakistani military as the only institution able to contain the danger. But the Islamist threat is neither as great nor as autonomous as many assume. True, Pakistan has experienced more than its share of religious violence, both sectarian and jihadi. But serious law-and-order problems do not mean the fate of the state is at stake. No Islamic organization has ever been in a position to politically or militarily challenge the role of the one and only center of power in Pakistan: the army. On the contrary, the Pakistani Army has used Islamic organizations for its purposes, both at home and abroad. Islamist organizations balance the power of rival mainstream political parties, preserving the army’s role as national arbiter. The army has nurtured and sometimes deployed violent Islamists in Afghanistan (with U.S. support at first), Kashmir, and other hot spots on the subcontinent.

     

    Although the army’s control is solid, the situation is not without risks: a few of the militants have turned against the army because of Pakistan’s “betrayal” of the Taliban and cooperation with the United States in Afghanistan and in the “war on terror.” Moreover, the infrastructure that supports regional sectarian ism and Kashmir-Afghan jihadi activities can be hijacked for international terrorism, as demonstrated by the July 2005 London bomb blasts. The risk of a nuclear conflict between India and Pakistan, triggered by attacks similar to the ones carried out by the terrorist group Lashkar-e-Toiba in Delhi after the October 2005 earthquake, cannot be dismissed either.

     

    Yet evidence is scant that these organizations pose an uncontrollable threat. Also, a Pakistan headed by an Islamist party would not necessarily be unstable. In fact, in the existing power setup, politico-religious organizations have often been used to channel popular resentment in a socially and politically acceptable way, preventing unrest. What the West perceives as a threat to the regime in Pakistan are manifestations of the Pakistani Army’s tactics to maintain political control. The army uses its need for modernist order to justify its continued claim on power and, with The risk of an Islamist takeover in Pakistan is a myth invented by the Pakistani military to consolidate its hold on power.

     

    In fact, religious political parties and militant organizations are manipulated by the Pakistani Army to achieve its own objectives, domestically and abroad.The army, not the Islamists, is the real source of insecurity on the subcontinent. Sustainable security and stability in the region will be achieved only through the restoration of democracy in Pakistan. The West should actively promote the demilitarization of Pakistan’s political life through a mix of political pressure and capacity building. Enlarging the pool of elites and creating alternative centers of power will be essential for developing a working democracy in Pakistan. 

     

    it, a substantial part of state resources. This de facto army monopoly on power is preventing the emergence of a truly democratic, economically sound Pakistan. The Pakistani military is the main source of insecurity on the subcontinent, making it necessary to challenge the common perception and policy in t he international community that stability and security depend on not pressuring military sovereigns such as  Musharraf. Orderly army retrenchment is a necessary but insufficient condition for progress, hence the need for new approaches and alternative policies.

     

    Myth of an Islamic Threat

     

    A distinction should be made between religiously inspired political parties and organizations, and sectarian or jihadi groups. Political parties participate in electoral politics and seek power and influence through democratic means; jihadi groups resort to violence. Links exist between the two: jihadi groups are often (but not always) the fists of political organizations. Notwithstanding occasional mutual reinforcement, politico-religious parties play legitimate roles and will be important to Pakistan’s democratization, but sectarian or jihadi groups behave outside legitimate bounds of any civilized polity.

     

    Politico-Religious Parties: Real but Limited Popular Support

     

    Any analysis of the electoral weight of Pakistan’s religious parties needs to note that, unlike in many Arab states, they do not operate in a political vacuum. No matter how manipulative the Pakistani military has been in its dealings with mainstream political parties, it has been careful not to destroy them. The left-leaning Pakistan People’s Party (PPP) is constrained in its ability to oppose the government, yet it still functions as the single most important political party in the country. The Pakistan Muslim League may have become a puppet organization whose unique raison d’être is to generate support for Musharraf’s policies, yet it occupies a defined political space and prevents the Islamic parties from filling that space. Other organizations play similar roles. When Islamic organizations develop rivalries and compete in elections, they perform according to their perceived capacity to answer voters’ demands. Religious parties have been integrated within the traditional political game, but the competition keeps their appeal and power balanced. Political competition arose naturally as well as at the behest of the army, which recognizes the value of being able to balance multiple forms of opposition. By keeping all parties weak and allowing a plurality of parties to compete, the army insinuates itself as the indispensable arbiter of politics. No objective observer believes that Pakistan’s Islamic parties have a chance to seize power through elections in the foreseeable future. Historically, when the Islamic parties have participated in elections, they have captured between 5 percent and 8 percent of the vote, with the notable exception of 1988 when they reached 12 percent. In the 2002 elections, the alliance of religious parties called the Mutahida Majlis Amal (MMA) collected 11.1 percent of the vote. As impressive and worrying as this total appears to some, the Islamist vote remains limited to slightly more than one-tenth of the electorate despite heavy manipulations in its favor by the state machinery.

     

    Islamism, Stability, and Security

     

    When Islamic parties gain local power usually by political manipulation as in parts of the North-West Frontier Province (NWFP) and Baluchistan, stability and security are no better or worse than in areas controlled by their secular alternatives. When Islamic parties are in opposition, they are used by the regime as a vessel to receive and channel popular dissatisfaction. The religious parties’ low mass appeal makes them less threatening to the military establishment than the more popular PPP. Demonstrations organized by the MMA during the Iraq War, for example, bolstered a Pakistani government caught between popular opinion hostile to the war and the government’s need not to alienate the United States. Most observers in Pakistan believed in 2003 that the Iraq War would unleash a series of protests and terrorist attacks. Preparations were made and security was reinforced, yet, not a single incident occurred. 

     

    Musharraf, representing the dominant army, got the government’s message out, and the leaders of the large Islamist political parties and even key terrorist organizations followed it. Before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Musharraf told a group of businesspeople in Lahore that Pakistan would be the next target of U.S. military punishment if it continued to be perceived as a state supporting terrorism. Pakistan’s possession of nuclear weapons only raised the likelihood of a U.S. strike. It was time for radical groups in Pakistan to lie low and go along with the state’s cooperation with the United States. Qazi Hussein Ahmad, leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, and more radical players such as the Lashkar-e-Toiba, followed along. The remarkable calm showed the sunny side of the patron-client relation ship between the Pakistan state establishment and key Islamist parties and forces.

     

    at least to deny Indian sovereignty over Kashmir, is constant in both the modernist and Islamist discourses. When Islamic parties get close to power, they often adapt their discourse to political realities, and sometimes they just drop Islamic rhetoric. Pakistan’s rapprochement with the United States following September 11, 2001, for instance, was criticized by religious parties on geopolitical grounds, not ideological ones: Islamist parties argued that siding with the United States would alienate China and Iran, more impor tant friends to Pakistan.

     

    Sectarian Violence and Stability

     

    Religious violence, in particular sectarian violence—distinct from religious political parties—is sometimes seen as a more serious source of instability in Pakistan. Sectarian violence is indeed a serious problem with deep social, political, and geopolitical roots. It is a consequence of the 1947 partition of the subcontinent, which deeply affected the demographic balance of some areas in Pakistan. Migrants who went to what is now Pakistan’s Punjab province simply moved from the eastern portion of what had been the united Indian Punjab. The vast majority were Sunni, uneducated, and either serving in the armed forces or working as farm laborers. Many landless laborers started working on the farms of Shia landlords. Their poverty led to deep resentment, and this marginal group, deprived of both resources and political representation, soon became angry.

     

    If conditions on the ground formed the kindling of sectarian violence, General Zia ul-Haq lit the match. Fearful of Shia activism following the 1978–1979 Islamic Revolution in Iran, Zia inflamed Sunni fears and mobilized Sunni militants. With the notable exception of that the Iraq War would unleash a series of protests and terrorist attacks. Preparations were made and security was reinforced, yet, not a single incident occurred.  Musharraf, representing the dominant army, got the government’s message out, and the leaders of the large Islamist political parties and even key terrorist  organizations followed it. Before the U.S. invasion of Iraq, Musharraf told a group of businesspeople in Lahore that Pakistan would be the next target of U.S. military punishment if it continued to be perceived as a state supporting terrorism. Pakistan’s possession of nuclear weapons only raised the likelihood of a U.S. strike. It was time for radical groups in Pakistan to lie low and go along with the state’s cooperation with the United States. Qazi Hussein Ahmad, leader of the Jamaat-e-Islami, and more radical players such as the Lashkar-e-Toiba, followed along. The remarkable calm showed the sunny side of the patron-client relationship between the Pakistan state establishment and key Islamist parties and forces.

     

    An Islamist Army?

     

    The Pakistani Army, which largely controls the major Islamist organizations, could be infiltrated by Islamist actors who could then seize leadership through a coup d’état or regular promotion. Although the military remains opaque, there is so far no evidence that it has been widely infiltrated, much less controlled, by the Islamists. It seems that the army reflects the society: Although Islamists are undoubtedly present, there is no reason to believe that their numbers are significantly greater than in the rest of Pakistani society. Even if the top echelons of the army hierarchy were to be occupied by Islamists, it would be extremely unlikely to change the course of Pakistan’s foreign policy. Islamic parties often provide no more than an Islamic rationalization of existing foreign policies on which a convergence of interests already exists. For example, the Islamic parties provided an Islamic rationale for fighting the Soviets in Afghanistan. The similar quest to control Muslim-majority parts of Kashmir, or By focusing on only Islamist militancy, Western governments confuse the consequence and the cause: The army is the problem.

     

    Nawaz Sharif, all successive Pakistani governments have continued to manipulate sectarian tensions for political purposes. With the support of Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI), the Pakistani government also found in the sectarian organizations the unofficial manpower it required to sustain Pakistan’s interests in the conflicts in Afghanistan and Kashmir. As sectarian conflict has intensified in Pakistan, the army has been accused of hav ing created an Islamic Frankenstein it could no longer control. Yet, careful examination shows that the army, including the ISI directorate, has always been able to maintain violence at an “acceptable” level by dividing groups, generating infighting every time an organization became too important, and sometimes physically eliminating uncontrol lable elements. Azam Tariq, leader of the Lashkar-e-Janghvi, the most lethal sectarian Sunni terrorist organization, was assassinated on October 5, 2003, for example.

     

    The army nevertheless cannot maintain total control. In December 2004, two suicide attackers nearly succeeded in assassinating Musharraf. Some extremely militant groups have become so estranged by the army leadership’s turn to the United States that they are beyond the government’s control. In November 2003, when Musharraf banned fif teen to seventeen violent sectarian organizations, other similar organizations that are useful in Afghanistan and Kashmir were merely kept on a watch list. Although sectarian violence is a serious law-and-order problem, it is not a threat to regime stability in Pakistan.  Legitimizing the Army’s Political Role There is more than simply an “objective alliance” between the military regime and the religious organizations, be they political or militant. Both are integral parts of the military system of dominance. The perpetuation of a party system in what is otherwise an authoritarian regime is not the consequence of army benevolence or a sudden conversion to democracy following Zia ul-Haq’s death. The military knows that the appearance of formal democracy is essential as it deals with the West. Democratic facades also provide the military the opportunity to withdraw behind the scenes while still holding the reins of power and letting civilians deal with the difficulties of running a government. The presence of Islamic parties is a useful foil to reinforce the regime’s legitimacy abroad and to pressure secular parties domestically. In Pakistan’s October 2002 elections, after the fighting and removal of the Taliban from power in Afghanistan, the MMA won political countrywide representation far beyond its real political support. Having failed to secure the support of the PPP, the military systematically favored the MMA by redefining electoral districts and rigging the election whenever necessary. Military representatives later suggested that the result went beyond their initial expectations. The MMA’s rise to power in the North-West Frontier Province, in particular, enabled the Musharraf regime to point to the mullahs and tell the United States, in effect, “If you don’t listen to me and give me what I need, the mullahs will take over. And if you push me too hard to change, I will be thrown out; and then you will be sorry.” Yet, the MMA did not create a meaningful domestic political constraint for the government. On the contrary, the relatively strong presence of the MMA in Parliament allowed Musharraf to pass the constitutional amendments necessary to transform the parliamentary system into a presidential one and institutionalize the political role of the army through the creation of the National Security Council. Simultaneously, the violence generated by the sectarians gives credence to the existence of an Islamic threat and reinforces the army’s role


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • The entire Wahhabi edifice is based on false, concocted ahaadees. No doubt many of the ahaadees serve a useful purpose of explaining Quranic injunctions, but remember this institution was created more than a hundred years after the death of the Prophet (PBUH) by the established ruling class of Arabs that was an inveterate enemy of Islam. Niaz Fatehpuri is questioning the very possibility of the Prophet having spoken so many words and sentences as have been attributed to him in his lifetime as a Prophet. [Sultan Shahin]

    ===================================

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

     

    You must read these books before saying something on Fabricated/Concocted Hadiths. The Scholars mentioned below have compiled all such Hadith in their several books to warn all of us to be careful from such lies being spread in the name of Hadith. Books are as under:

     

    You must go through these books before quoting a Fabricated Hadith:

    1 - A Great Collection of Fabricated Traditions (Arabic: Al-Mawdu'at al-Kubrah) by ibn Al-Jawzi

    2 - Mauzuaat-e-Kabeer by Mulla Ali ibn Sultan al-Qari.

    3 -  Saheeh al-Jaami’ al-Sagheer and Da’eef al-Jaami’ al-Sagheer, both by Shaykh al-Albaani.

    4 - Irwa’ al-Ghaleel fi Takhreej Ahaadeeth Manaar al-Sabeel, also by al-Albaani.

    5 - Al-Talkhees al-Habeer fi Takhreej Ahaadeeth al-Raafa’i al-Kabeer, by al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar al-‘Aqsallaani,

    6 - Nasab al-Raayah fi Takhreej Ahaadeeth al-Hidaayah by Haafiz al-Zayla’i.

    7 - Tuhfat al-Ashraaf bi Ma’rifat al-Atraaf by al-Haafiz al-Mazzi.

    8 - Great Indian Scholar Muhammad Tahir Patni books e.g. “Tadhkirrah al-Mawdoo’aat Wal-Dhu’afaahas and countless other books.

    A minor study on Fabricated and Weak Hadiths are as under:

    Fabricated Hadiths by Mohsen Haredy

    Part 1

    Definition of a Fabricated Hadith

    The Beginning of Fabrication

    http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1158658510258&pagename=Zone-English-Living_Shariah%2FLSELayout

    Part 2

    Fabricated Hadiths Causes of Fabrication

    http://www.islamonline.net/English/HadithAndItsSciences/HadithStudies/2005/07/01.shtml

    Fabricated Hadiths
    (part 3)

    http://www.islamonline.net/English/HadithAndItsSciences/HadithStudies/2005/12/01.shtml

    A detailed Research on Hadith Compilation and Research

     

    Are There Any Early Hadiths? By M S M Saifullah & Imtiaz Damiel

     

    Issues Concerning H?adith

    As far as the Christian missionaries are concerned, nothing is spared that is related with Islam, whether it is the Qur'an or the h?adith or anything else. Everything needs to be attacked. This page deals with the refutation of the claims of the Christian missionaries and others about the h?adith.

    Science Of H?adith

    Click here for details!

    H?adith & Its Origins

    A Brief History Of H?adith Collection And Criticism

    This is a lecture given by Dr. Jonathan Brown, a young, eloquent western h?adith scholar at University of Washington where he works as an Assistant Professor. In this lecture, he briefly discusses the history of h?adith collection, its criticism and the evolution of western h?adith scholarship from Goldziher, Schacht, Juynboll to Motzki. A lot of misconceptions about h?adith are clarified in this lecture.

    Are There Any Early H?adiths?

    On The Nature Of H?adith Collections Of Imam Bukhari and Muslim

    Explosive Increase Of Isnad & Its Implications

    On The Transmitters Of Isra'iliyyat (Judeo-Christian Material)

    H?adith Criticism

    Did al-H?ajjaj Change The Qur'an?

    H?adiths Inserted Posthumously In The Sahih Of Al-Bukhari?

    On The "Versions" Of Malik's Muwatta'

    Manuscripts

    PERF No. 731: The Earliest Manuscript Of Malik's Muwatta' Dated To His Own Time

    PERF No. 665: The Earliest Extant Manuscript Of The Sirah Of Prophet Muhammad By Ibn Hisham

    http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Hadith/


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • The entire Wahhabi edifice is based on false, concocted ahaadees. No doubt many of the ahaadees serve a useful purpose of explaining Quranic injunctions, but remember this institution was created more than a hundred years after the death of the Prophet (PBUH) by the established ruling class of Arabs that was an inveterate enemy of Islam. Niaz Fatehpuri is questioning the very possibility of the Prophet having spoken so many words and sentences as have been attributed to him in his lifetime as a Prophet. [Sultan Shahin]

    ===================================

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab,  

     

     

     

    My humble view is as under:

    Courtesy: Tafsir Ibn Kathir


    ANYONE WHO REJECTS THE SUNNAH OF THE PROPHET, PEACE BE UPON HIM, DOES NOT BELIEVE IN THE QUR'AN.

    If you ask what is the best method of tafsîr, the answer is that the best way is to explain the Qur'ân through the Qur'ân. For, what the Qur'ân alludes to at one place is explained at the other, and what it says in brief on one occasion is elaborated upon at the other. But if this does not help you, you should turn to the sunnah, because the sunnah explains and elucidates the Qur'ân. Imâm Abû Abd Allâh Muhammad Ibn Idrîs al-Shâfai has said: "All that the Prophet, peace be upon him, has said is what he has derived from the Qur'ân." Allâh has said:

    Interpretation of the meaning:

    Lo! We reveal unto thee the Scripture with the truth, that thou mayst judge between mankind by that which Allah showeth thee. And be not thou a pleader for the treacherous; [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 105]



    Interpretation of the meaning:

    With clear proofs and writings; and We have revealed unto thee the Remembrance that thou mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them, and that haply they may reflect. [AN-NAHL (THE BEE) Chapter 16 - Verse 44]

    And We have revealed the Scripture unto thee only that thou mayst explain unto them that wherein they differ, and (as) a guidance and a mercy for a people who believe. [AN-NAHL (THE BEE) Chapter 16 - Verse 64]


    This is why the Prophet Mohammad [PBUH] said:

    Know that I have been given the Qur'ân and something like it. [Ahmad, Musnad, Vol. IV 131; Abû Dâwûd, Sunan, Sunnah, 5]

    As reported by Al-Miqdam ibn Ma'di Karib, that Prophet Mohammad PBUH] said: "I have indeed been given the Qur'an and something similar to it besides it. Yet, the time will come when a man leaning on his couch will say, 'Follow the Qur'an only; what you find in it as halaal, take it as halaal, and what you find in it as haraam, take it as haraam.' But truly, what the Messenger of God has forbidden is like what God has forbidden." (Reported by Abu Dawud and Darimi.)

    One of the many duties of the Messenger, may the peace and blessings of God be upon him, was to tell the believers what is lawful (halaal) and what is unlawful (haraam). For example, he prohibited the flesh of donkeys, dogs, beasts with canine teeth and birds of prey. He also made gold and silk haraam for Muslim men, but halaal for Muslim women.


    Interpretation of the meaning:

    Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honour him, and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful. [AL-ARAF (THE HEIGHTS) Chapter 7 - Verse 157]

     

     

    If hadith is hearsay then what about these hadiths defining the verse [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 105]. Do tell me if the Hadith defining the verse is in clash with Quran.


    Interpretation of the Meaning:

    Lo! We reveal unto thee the Scripture with the truth, that thou mayst judge between mankind by that which Allah showeth thee. And be not thou a pleader for the treacherous; [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 105]

    The Necessity of Referring to What Allah has Revealed for Judgement:

    Allah says to His Messenger, Muhammad


    (Surely, We have sent down to you the Book in truth) meaning, it truly came from Allah and its narrations and commandments are true. Allah then said,

    (that you might judge between men by that which Allah has shown you,) In the Two Sahihs, it is recorded that Zaynab bint Umm Salamah said that Umm Salamah said that the Messenger of Allah heard the noise of disputing people close to the door of his room, and he went out to them saying,

    (Verily, I am only human and I judge based on what I hear. Some of you might be more eloquent in presenting his case than others, so that I judge in his favor. If I judge in one's favor concerning the right of another Muslim, then it is a piece of the Fire. So let one take it or leave it.) Imam Ahmad recorded that Umm Salamah said, "Two men from the Ansar came to the Messenger of Allah with a dispute regarding some old inheritance, but they did not have evidence. The Messenger of Allah said,

    (You bring your disputes to me, but I am only human. Some of you might be more persuasive in their arguments than others. I only judge between you according to what I hear. Therefore, whomever I judge in his favor and give him a part of his brother's right, let him not take it, for it is a part of the Fire that I am giving him and it will be tied around his neck on the Day of Resurrection.) The two men cried and each one of them said, `I forfeit my right to my brother.' The Messenger of Allah said,

    (Since you said that, then go and divide the inheritance, and try to be just in your division. Then draw lots, and each one of you should forgive his brother thereafter (regardless of who got the best share).)

    End of 4:105
    ==========

    I had already said that first understand Quran from Quran and then Hadiths.

    What about the Hadiths defining verse of [AN-NAHL (THE BEE) Chapter 16 - Verse 44] and i will start explaining


    Interpretation of the Meaning:

    With clear proofs and writings; and We have revealed unto thee the Remembrance that thou mayst explain to mankind that which hath been revealed for them, and that haply they may reflect. [AN-NAHL (THE BEE) Chapter 16 - Verse 44]



    (with clear signs), meaning proof and evidence, and



    (and Books ?Zubur?), meaning Scriptures. Ibn `Abbas, Mujahid, Ad-Dahhak and others said: Zubur is the plural of Zabur, and the Arabs say, Zaburtul-Kitab meaning, "I wrote the book.'' Allah says:



    (And everything they have done is noted in (their) Records (of deeds) ?Zubur?) (54:52)



    (And indeed We have written in Az-Zabur after the Dhikr that My righteous servant shall inherit the land (i.e. the land of Paradise).) (21:105) Then Allah says:


    (And We have also revealed the Dhikr to you), meaning the Qur'an,


    (so that you may clearly explain to men what was revealed to them,) meaning, sent down from their Lord, because you know the meaning of what Allah has revealed to you, and because of your understanding and adherence to it, and because We know that you are the best of creation and the leader of the Children of Adam. So that you may explain in detail what has been mentioned in brief, and explain what is not clear.

    End of 16:44
    =============================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    The hadith is also defining the Quranic verses 

    5:3:

    Forbidden unto you (for food) are carrion and blood and swineflesh, and that which hath been dedicated unto any other than Allah, and the strangled, and the dead through beating, and the dead through falling from a height, and that which hath been killed by (the goring of) horns, and the devoured of wild beasts, saving that which ye make lawful (by the death-stroke), and that which hath been immolated unto idols. And (forbidden is it) that ye swear by the divining arrows. This is an abomination. This day are those who disbelieve in despair of (ever harming) your religion; so fear them not, fear Me! This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you as religion al-Islam. Whoso is forced by hunger, not by will, to sin: (for him) lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. [AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD) Chapter 5 - Verse 3]

    Detailed Interpretation:

    The Animals that are Unlawful to Eat
           
    Allah informs His servants that He forbids consuming the mentioned types of foods, such as the Maytah, which is the animal that dies before being properly slaughtered or hunted. Allah forbids this type of food due to the harm it causes, because of the blood that becomes clogged in the veins of the dead animal. Therefore, the Maytah is harmful, religiously and physically, and this is why Allah has prohibited it. The only exception to this ruling is fish, for fish is allowed, even when dead, by slaughtering or otherwise. Malik in his Muwatta, also Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi, An-Nasa'i and Ibn Majah in their Sunan, Ibn Khuzaymah and Ibn Hibban in their Sahihs, all recorded that Abu Hurayrah said that the Messenger of Allah was asked about seawater. He said,

    (Its water is pure and its dead are permissible.) The same ruling applies to locusts, as proven in a Hadith that we will mention later. Allah's statement,


    (blood...) This refers to flowing blood, according to Ibn `Abbas and Sa`id bin Jubayr, and it is similar to Allah's other statement,

    (Blood poured forth...) Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that Ibn `Abbas was asked about the spleen and he said, "Eat it.'' They said, "It is blood.'' He said, "You are only prohibited blood that was poured forth.'' Abu `Abdullah, Muhammad bin Idris Ash-Shafi`i recorded that Ibn `Umar said that the Messenger of Allah said,

    (We were allowed two dead animals and two (kinds of) blood. As for the two dead animals, they are fish and locust. As for the two bloods, they are liver and spleen.) Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Ibn Majah, Ad-Daraqutni and Al-Bayhaqi also recorded this Hadith through `Abdur-Rahman bin Zayd bin Aslam, who is a weak narrator. Allah's statement,

    (the flesh of swine...) includes domesticated and wild swine, and also refers to the whole animal, including its fat, for this is what the Arabs mean by Lahm or `flesh'. Muslim recorded that Buraydah bin Al-Husayb Al-Aslami said that the Messenger of Allah said,

    (He who plays Nardshir (a game with dice that involves gambling) is just like the one who puts his hand in the flesh and blood of swine.) If this is the case with merely touching the flesh and blood of swine, so what about eating and feeding on it This Hadith is a proof that Lahm means the entire body of the animal, including its fat. In is recorded in the Two Sahihs that the Messenger of Allah said,

    (Allah made the trade of alcohol, dead animals, pigs and idols illegal.) The people asked, "O Allah's Messenger! What about the fat of dead animals, for it was used for greasing the boats and the hides; and people use it for lanterns'' He said,

    (No, it is illegal.) In the Sahih of Al-Bukhari, Abu Sufyan narrated that he said to Heraclius, Emperor of Rome, "He (Muhammad) prohibited us from eating dead animals and blood.'' Allah said,

    (And that which has been slaughtered as a sacrifice for other than Allah.) Therefore, the animals on which a name other than Allah was mentioned upon slaughtering it, is impermissible, because Allah made it necessary to mention His Glorious Name upon slaughtering the animals, which He created. Whoever does not do so, mentioning other than Allah's Name, such as the name of an idol, a false deity or a monument, when slaughtering, he makes this meat unlawful, according to the consensus. Allah's statement,


    (and that which has been killed by strangling...) either intentionally or by mistake, such as when an animal moves while restrained and dies by strangulation because of its struggling, this animal is also unlawful to eat.

    (or by a violent blow...) This refers to the animal that is hit with a heavy object until it dies. Ibn `Abbas and several others said it is the animal that is hit with a staff until it dies. Qatadah said, "The people of Jahiliyyah used to strike the animal with sticks and when it died, they would eat it.'' It is recorded in the Sahih that `Adi bin Hatim said, "I asked, `O Allah's Messenger! I use the Mi`rad for hunting and catch game with it.' He replied,

    (If the game is hit by its sharp edge, eat it. But, if it is hit by its broad side, do not eat it, for it has been beaten to death.) Therefore, the Prophet made a distinction between killing the animal with the sharp edge of an arrow or a hunting stick, and rendered it lawful, and what is killed by the broad side of an object, and rendered it unlawful because it was beaten to death. There is a consensus among the scholars of Fiqh on this subject. rAs for the animal that falls headlong from a high place and dies as a result, it is also prohibited. `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas said that an animal that dies by a headlong fall, "Is that which falls from a mountain.'' Qatadah said that it is the animal that falls in a well. As-Suddi said that it is the animal that falls from a mountain or in a well. As for the animal that dies by being gorged by another animal, it is also prohibited, even if the horn opens a flesh wound and it bleeds to death from its neck. Allah's statement,

    (and that which has been (partly) eaten by a wild animal,) refers to the animal that was attacked by a lion, leopard, tiger, wolf or dog, then the wild beast eats a part of it and it dies because of that. This type is also prohibited, even if the animal bled to death from its neck. There is also a consensus on this ruling. During the time of Jahiliyyah, the people used to eat the sheep, camel, or cow that were partly eaten by a wild animal. Allah prohibited this practice for the believers. Allah's statement,

    (unless you are able to slaughter it,) before it dies, due to the causes mentioned above. This part of the Ayah is connected to,

    (and that which has been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by the goring of horns - and that which has been (partly) eaten by a wild animal.) `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas commented on Allah's statement,

    (unless you are able to slaughter it, ) "Unless you are able to slaughter the animal in the cases mentioned in the Ayah while it is still alive, then eat it, for it was properly slaughtered.'' Similar was reported from Sa`id bin Jubayr, Al-Hasan Al-Basri and As-Suddi. Ibn Jarir recorded that `Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said, "If you are able to slaughter the animal that has been hit by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by the gorging of horns while it still moves a foot or a leg, then eat from its meat.'' Similar was reported from Tawus, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, `Ubayd bin `Umayr, Ad-Dahhak and several others, that if the animal that is being slaughtered still moves, thus demonstrating that it is still alive while slaughtering, then it is lawful. The Two Sahihs recorded that Rafi` bin Khadij said, "I asked, `O Allah's Messenger! We fear that we may meet our enemy tomorrow and we have no knives, could we slaughter the animals with reeds' The
    Prophet said,

    (You can use what makes blood flow and you can eat what is slaughtered with the Name of Allah. But do not use teeth or claws (in slaughtering). I will tell you why, as for teeth, they are bones, and claws are used by Ethiopians for slaughtering.)'' Allah said next,


    (and that which is sacrificed on An-Nusub. ) Nusub were stone altars that were erected around the Ka`bah, as Mujahid and Ibn Jurayj stated. Ibn Jurayj said, "There were three hundred and sixty Nusub ?around the Ka`bah? that the Arabs used to slaughter in front of, during the time of Jahiliyyah. They used to sprinkle the animals that came to the Ka`bah with the blood of slaughtered animals, whose meat they cut to pieces and placed on the altars.'' Allah forbade this practice for the believers. He also forbade them from eating the meat of animals that were slaughtered in the vicinity of the Nusub, even if Allah's Name was mentioned on these animals when they were slaughtered, because it is a type of Shirk that Allah and His Messenger have forbidden.

    The Prohibition of Using Al-Azlam for Decision Making     

    Allah said,

    ((Forbidden) also is to make decisions with Al-Azlam) The Ayah commands, "O believers! You are forbidden to use Al-Azlam (arrows) for decision making,'' which was a practice of the Arabs during the time of Jahiliyyah. They would use three arrows, one with the word `Do' written on it, another that says `Do not', while the third does not say anything. Some of them would write on the first arrow, `My Lord commanded me,' and, `My Lord forbade me,' on the second arrow and they would not write anything on the third arrow. If the blank arrow was picked, the person would keep trying until the arrow that says do or do not was picked, and the person would implement the command that he picked. Ibn `Abbas said that the Azlam were arrows that they used to seek decisions through. Muhammad bin Ishaq and others said that the major idol of the tribe of Quraysh was Hubal, which was erected on the tip of a well inside the Ka`bah, where gifts were presented and where the treasure of the Ka`bah was kept. There, they also had seven arrows that they would use to seek a decision concerning matters of dispute. Whatever the chosen arrow would tell them, they would abide by it! Al-Bukhari recorded that when the Prophet entered Al-Ka`bah (after Makkah was conquered), he found pictures of Ibrahim and Isma`il in it holding the Azlam in their hands. The Prophet commented,



    (May Allah fight them (the idolaters)! They know that they never used the Azlam to make decisions. ) Mujahid commented on Allah's statement,


    ((Forbidden) also is to make decisions with Al-Azlam,) "These were arrows that the Arabs used, and dice that the Persians and Romans used in gambling.'' This statement by Mujahid, that these arrows were used in gambling, is doubtful unless we say that they used the arrows for gambling sometimes and for decisions other times, and Allah knows best. We should also state that Allah mentioned Azlam and gambling in His statement before the end of the Surah (5:90, 91),

    (O you who believe! Intoxicants (all kinds of alcoholic drinks), and gambling, and Al-Ansab, and Al-Azlam are an abomination of Shaytan's handiwork. So avoid that in order that you may be successful. Shaytan wants only to excite enmity and hatred between you with intoxicants (alcoholic drinks) and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of Allah and from the Salah (the prayer). So, will you not then abstain) In this Ayah, Allah said,


    ((Forbidden) also is to make decisions with Al-Azlam, (all) that is Fisq.) meaning, all these practices constitute disobedience, sin, misguidance, ignorance and, above all, Shirk. Allah has commanded the believers to seek decisions from Him when they want to do something, by first worshipping Him and then asking Him for the best decision concerning the matter they seek. Imam Ahmad, Al-Bukhari and the collectors of Sunan recorded that Jabir bin `Abdullah said, "The Prophet used to teach us how to make Istikharah (asking Allah to guide one to the right action), in all matters, as he taught us the Surahs of the Qur'an. He said,

    (If anyone of you thinks of doing any matter, he should offer a two Rak'ah prayer, other than the compulsory, and say (after the prayer) `O Allah! I ask guidance from Your knowledge, from Your ability and I ask for Your great bounty, for You are capable and I am not, You know and I do not, and You know the Unseen. O Allah! If You know that this matter (and one should mention the matter or deed here) is good for my religion, my livelihood and the Hereafter (or he said, `for my present and later needs') then ordain it for me, make it easy for me to have, and then bless it for me. O Allah! And if You know that this is harmful to me in my religion and livelihood and for the Hereafter then keep it away from me and let me be away from it. And ordain whatever is good for me, and make me satisfied with it.') This is the wording collected by Ahmad, and At-Tirmidhi said, "Hasan Sahih Gharib.''

    Shaytan and the Disbelievers Do Not Hope that Muslims Will Ever Follow Them
           
    Allah said,


    (This day, those who disbelieved have given up all hope of your religion;) `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas said that the Ayah means, "They gave up hope that Muslims would revert to their religion.'' This is similar to the saying of `Ata' bin Abi Rabah, As-Suddi and Muqatil bin Hayyan. This meaning is supported by a Hadith recorded in the Sahih that states,


    (Verily, Shaytan has given up hope that those who pray in the Arabian Peninsula, will worship him. But he will still stir trouble among them.) It is also possible that the Ayah negates the possibility that the disbelievers and Shaytan will ever be like Muslims, since Muslims have various qualities that contradict Shirk and its people. This is why Allah commanded His believing servants to observe patience, to be steadfast in defying and contradicting the disbelievers, and to fear none but Allah. Allah said,


    (So fear them not, but fear Me.) meaning, `do not fear them when you contradict them. Rather, fear Me and I will give you victory over them, I will eradicate them, and make you prevail over them, I will please your hearts and raise you above them in this life and the Hereafter.'

    Islam Has Been Perfected For Muslims
           
    Allah said,



    (This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.) This, indeed, is the biggest favor from Allah to this Ummah, for He has completed their religion for them, and they, thus, do not need any other religion or any other Prophet except Muhammad . This is why Allah made Muhammad the Final Prophet and sent him to all humans and Jinn. Therefore, the permissible is what he allows, the impermissible is what he prohibits, the Law is what he legislates and everything that he conveys is true and authentic and does not contain lies or contradictions. Allah said;


    (And the Word of your Lord has been fulfilled in truth and in justice,) meaning, it is true in what it conveys and just in what it commands and forbids. When Allah completed the religion for Muslims, His favor became complete for them as well. Allah said,



    (This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion.) meaning, accept Islam for yourselves, for it is the religion that Allah likes and which He chose for you, and it is that with which He sent the best of the honorable Messengers and the most glorious of His Books. Ibn Jarir recorded that Harun bin `Antarah said that his father said, "When the Ayah,


    (This day, I have perfected your religion for you...) was revealed, during the great day of Hajj (the Day of `Arafah, the ninth day of Dhul-Hijjah) `Umar cried. The Prophet said, `What makes you cry' He said, `What made me cry is that our religion is being perfected for us. Now it is perfect, nothing is perfect, but it is bound to deteriorate.' The Prophet said,

    (You have said the truth.)'' What supports the meaning of this Hadith is the authentic Hadith,


    (Islam was strange in its beginning and will return strange once more. Therefore, Tuba for the strangers.) Imam Ahmad recorded that Tariq bin Shihab said, "A Jewish man said to `Umar bin Al-Khattab, `O Leader of the Believers! There is a verse in your Book, which is read by all of you (Muslims), and had it been revealed to us, we would have taken that day (on which it was revealed) as a day of celebration.' `Umar bin Al-Khattab asked, `Which is that verse' The Jew replied, s


    (This day, I have perfected your religion for you, completed My favor upon you...) `Umar replied, `By Allah! I know when and where this verse was revealed to Allah's Messenger . It was the evening on the Day of `Arafah on a Friday.''' Al-Bukhari recorded this Hadith through Al-Hasan bin As-Sabbah from Ja`far bin `Awn. Muslim, At-Tirmidhi and An-Nasa'i also recorded this Hadith. In the narration collected by Al-Bukhari in the book of Tafsir, through Tariq, he said, "The Jews said to `Umar, `By Allah! There is a verse that is read by all of you (Muslims), and had it been revealed to us, we would have taken that day (on which it was revealed) as a day of celebration.' `Umar said, `By Allah! I know when and where this verse was revealed and where the Messenger of Allah was at that time. It was the day of `Arafah, and I was at `Arafah, by Allah.'' Sufyan (one of the narrators) doubted if Friday was mentioned in this narration. Sufyan's confusion was either because he was unsure if his teacher included this statement in the Hadith or not. Otherwise, if it was because he doubted that the particular day during the Farewell Hajj was a Friday, it would be a mistake that could not and should not have come from someone like Sufyan Ath-Thawri. The fact that it was a Friday, is agreed on by the scholars of Sirah and Fiqh. There are numerous Hadiths that support this fact that are definitely authentic and of the Mutawatir type. This Hadith was also reported from `Umar through various chains of narration.

    Permitting the Dead Animals in Conditions of Necessity
           
    Allah said,


    (But as for him who is forced by severe hunger, with no inclination to sin (such can eat these above mentioned animals), then surely, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.) Therefore, when one is forced to take any of the impermissible things that Allah mentioned to meet a necessity, he is allowed and Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful with him. Allah is well aware of His servant's needs during dire straits, and He will forgive and pardon His servant in this case. In the Musnad and the Sahih of Ibn Hibban, it is recorded that Ibn `Umar said that Messenger of Allah said,


    (Allah likes that His Rukhsah (allowance) be used, just as He dislikes that disobedience to Him is committed.) We should mention here that it is not necessary for one to wait three days before eating the meat of dead animals, as many unlettered Muslims mistakenly think. Rather, one can eat such meat when the dire need arises. Imam Ahmad recorded that Abu Waqid Al-Laythi said that the Companions asked, "O Messenger of Allah! We live in a land where famine often strikes us. Therefore, when are we allowed to eat the meat of dead animals'' The Prophet replied,



    (When you neither find food for lunch and dinner nor have any produce to eat, then eat from it.) Only Imam Ahmad collected this narration and its chain meets the criteria of the Two Sahihs. Allah said,



    (with no inclination to sin,) meaning, one does not incline to commit what Allah has prohibited. Allah has allowed one when necessity arises to eat from what He otherwise prohibits, under the condition that his heart does not incline to eat what Allah prohibited. Allah said in Surat Al-Baqarah,



    (But if one is forced by necessity without willful disobedience nor transgressing due limits, then there is no sin on him. Truly, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.) Some scholars used this Ayah as evidence that those who travel for the purpose of committing an act of disobedience are not allowed to use any of the legal concessions of travel, because these concessions are not earned through sin, and Allah knows best.

    End of 5:3
    ========================

    The Hadith defining Quran

    O Messenger! Make known that which hath been revealed unto thee from thy Lord, for if thou do it not, thou wilt not have conveyed His message. Allah will protect thee from mankind. Lo! Allah guideth not the disbelieving folk. [AL-MAEDA (THE TABLE, THE TABLE SPREAD) Chapter 5 - Verse 67]

    Commanding the Prophet to Convey the Message; Promising Him Immunity and Protection
           
    Allah addresses His servant and Messenger Muhammad by the title `Messenger' and commands him to convey all that He has sent him, a command that the Prophet has fulfilled in the best manner. Al-Bukhari recorded that `A'ishah said, "Whoever says to you that Muhammad hid any part of what Allah revealed to him, then he is uttering a lie. Allah said,


    (O Messenger! Convey what has been sent down to you from your Lord.)'' Al-Bukhari collected the short form of this story here, but mentioned the full narration in another part of his book. Muslim in the Book of Iman, At-Tirmidhi, and An-Nasa'i in the Book of Tafsir of their Sunans also collected this Hadith. In is recorded in the Two Sahihs that `A'ishah said, "If Muhammad hid anything from the Qur'an, he would have hidden this Ayah,


    (But you did hide in yourself that which Allah will make manifest, you did fear the people while Allah had a better right that you should fear Him.)'' Al-Bukhari recorded that Az-Zuhri said, "From Allah comes the Message, for the Messenger is its deliverance and for us is submission to it.'' The Ummah of Muhammad has testified that he has delivered the Message and fulfilled the trust, when he asked them during the biggest gathering in his speech during the Farewell Hajj. At that time, there were over forty thousand of his Companions. Muslim recorded that Jabir bin `Abdullah said that the Messenger of Allah said in his speech on that day,


    (O people! You shall be asked about me, so what are you going to reply) They said, "We bear witness that you have conveyed (the Message), fulfilled (the trust) and offered sincere advice.'' The Prophet kept raising his finger towards the sky and then pointing at them, saying,



    (O Allah! Did I convey O Allah! Did I convey) Allah's statement,



    (And if you do not, then you have not conveyed His Message.) meaning: If you do not convey to the people what I sent to you, then you have not conveyed My Message. Meaning, the Prophet knows the consequences of this failure. `Ali bin Abi Talhah reported that Ibn `Abbas commented on the Ayah,



    (And if you do not, then you have not conveyed His Message.) "It means, if you hide only one Ayah that was revealed to you from your Lord, then you have not conveyed His Message.'' Allah's statement,



    (Allah will protect you from mankind.) means, you convey My Message and I will protect, aid and support you over your enemies and will grant you victory over them. Therefore, do not have any fear or sadness, for none of them will be able to touch you with harm. Before this Ayah was revealed, the Prophet was being guarded, as Imam Ahmad recorded that `A'ishah said that the Prophet was vigilant one night when she was next to him; she asked him, "What is the matter, O Allah's Messenger'' He said,


    (Would that a pious man from my companions guard me tonight!) She said, "Suddenly we heard the clatter of arms. The Prophet said,



    (Who is that''.) He (the new comer) replied, "I am Sa`d bin Malik (Sa`d bin Abi Waqqas).'' The Prophet asked,


    (What brought you here) He said, "I have come to guard you, Allah's O Messenger.'' `A'ishah said, "So, the Prophet slept (that night) and I heard the noise of sleep coming from him.)'' This Hadith is recorded in Two Sahihs. Another narration for this Hadith reads, "The Messenger of Allah was vigilant one night, after he came to Al-Madinah...'', meaning, after the Hijrah and after the Prophet consummated his marriage to `A'ishah in the second year of Hijrah. Ibn Abi Hatim recorded that `A'ishah said, "The Prophet was being guarded until this Ayah,


    (Allah will protect you from mankind) was revealed.'' She added; "The Prophet raised his head from the room and said;


    (O people! Go away, for Allah will protect me.)''' At-Tirmidhi recorded it and said,"This Hadith is Gharib.'' It was also recorded by Ibn Jarir, and Al-Hakim in his Mustadrak, where he said, "Its chain is Sahih, but they did not record it.'' Allah's statement,



    (Verily, Allah guides not those who disbelieve.) means, O Muhammad, you convey, and Allah guides whom He wills, and misguides whom He wills. In other Ayat, Allah said,



    (Not upon you is their guidance, but Allah guides whom He wills,) and,



    (Your duty is only to convey and on Us is the reckoning.)


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Sultan Sahab,

    My replies are inserted after your queries

    Dear Aamir Mughal Sahab,

     

    I am sorry for the delay in my response.

     

    If the Allama repented as this fellow says did he leave something in writing? Apparently not. As the author of this book Juhi Shahin has reported in a letter to you on this site, his son who was at his beside throughout the period of his illness in the last days says that this is all nonsense. Now I am sure you are not a liar; but Mughal Sahab, you surely are defaming Allama Niaz Fatehpuri on the basis of some idle gossip you heard from “a very dear friend of yours”. This fellow may have a number of reasons to defame him. Some personal as many relatives have. [Sultan Shahin]

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab, same logic can also be applied for Ms Juhi's statement or claim that she knew Niaz's son. May I ask from Ms Juhi which son Riaz Niyazi or Sarfaraz Niazi. My offer is open for you as well then whenever you are in Pakistan, we can go and meet Niaz's grandson and clear the confusion.

     

    Or maybe the poor chap is just trying to survive in a Talibanised Pakistan. Not everyone can be as brave as Allama Niaz Fatehpuri, even if he happens to be a relative of sorts. [Sultan Shahi]

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab, poor chap's shop in Urdu Bazar Karachi is the only shop from where you can purchase controversial books written by Ghualm Ahmed Pervez, Fatehpuri and other such writers. He is not at all Wahabi or Talibani Type, he is simply a Muslim.

     

    This fellow may very well have turned a Wahhabi, for the sake of his own survival in today’s Pakistan where non-Wahhabi mosques and worshippers are being bombed within the mosque premises during prayers. [Sultan Shahin]

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab, situation in Pakistan is not good at all rather very far from it but Dear Sir, please get your facts corrected and one of the fact is this that majority of Pakistanis are Barelvi Hanafis. You should wait and read the newspapers of Pakistan after 12 Rabiul Awwal Celebration [most detested Bida'at] of Prophet Mohammad [PBUH]. The fact is that Pakistani Military Establishment [when need arises] even utilize the services of Prostitutes and Pimps so they never even think twice to utilize Deobandis and Wahabis for gain some quick strategic depths. Wahabis, Salafis or Ahl-e-Hadith are basically in minority in Pakistan. Read the report of International Crisis Group which I have uploaded in the following posts on my blog and then comment. Sir, Pakistani problem is Establishment not Shia, Sunni, Wahabi, Deobandi or Barelvi.

     

    Sectarianism and Sects - III

     

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/sectarianism-and-sects-iii.html

     

    Sectarianism and Sects - IV

     

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/sectarianism-and-sects-iv.html

     

    Sectarianism and Sects - V

     

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/sectarianism-and-sects-v.html

     

    Sectarianism and Sects - VI

     

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/sectarianism-and-sects-vi.html

     

    Sectarianism and Sects - VII

     

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/sectarianism-and-sects-vii.html

     

    Sectarianism and Sects - VIII

     

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/sectarianism-and-sects-viii.html

     

    Now Mughal Sahab, you are not lying, for sure, but you certainly are creating a red herring to deflect attention from discussing Niaz Fatehpuri’s ideas which are the need of the hour to save the world from Wahhabi depredations. The entire Wahhabi edifice is based on false, concocted ahaadees. No doubt many of the ahaadees serve a useful purpose of explaining Quranic injunctions, but remember this institution was created more than a hundred years after the death of the Prophet (PBUH) by the established ruling class of Arabs that was an inveterate enemy of Islam. Niaz Fatehpuri is questioning the very possibility of the Prophet having spoken so many words and sentences as have been attributed to him in his lifetime as a Prophet.

     

    Dear Sultan Sahab, if you would go through my early posts in this thread you may find that I have posted my comment on late Allama and not at all deflect the attention and if anybody would raise a question other then Allama then I have to answer as per my poor and humble knowledge. Before commenting on Hadith you should reveiw your earlier comment on Hadith "Created by Abu Jehel" and you should also go and read as to when and how Hadiths were compiled and this too I tried to answer if you would go through my early posts.

     


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Dear Aamir Mughal Sahab,

     

    I am sorry for the delay in my response.

     

    I have absolutely no reason to consider you a liar. However, in discussing scholarly works we should go by what the person has written and that too throughout his life and in a fairly long literary and journalistic career, not by what is said by someone who may happen to be a relative of sort, but who was most likely not even born at the time this writer died. We can only go by what is available to us in writing. If the Allama repented as this fellow says did he leave something in writing? Apparently not. As the author of this book Juhi Shahin has reported in a letter to you on this site, his son who was at his beside throughout the period of his illness in the last days says that this is all nonsense.

     

    Now I am sure you are not a liar; but Mughal Sahab, you surely are defaming Allama Niaz Fatehpuri on the basis of some idle gossip you heard from “a very dear friend of yours”. This fellow may have a number of reasons to defame him. Some personal as many relatives have. Or maybe the poor chap is just trying to survive in a Talibanised Pakistan. Not everyone can be as brave as Allama Niaz Fatehpuri, even if he happens to be a relative of sorts.  This fellow may very well have turned a Wahhabi, for the sake of his own survival in today’s Pakistan where non-Wahhabi mosques and worshippers are being bombed within the mosque premises during prayers. Some Shias supported by Iran are making feeble attempts to kill a few Wahhabis too but achieving only a rare success once in a while.

     

    Now Mughal Sahab, you are not lying, for sure, but you certainly are creating a red herring to deflect attention from discussing Niaz Fatehpuri’s ideas which are the need of the hour to save the world from Wahhabi depredations. The entire Wahhabi edifice is based on false, concocted ahaadees. No doubt many of the ahaadees serve a useful purpose of explaining Quranic injunctions, but remember this institution was created more than a hundred years after the death of the Prophet (PBUH) by the established ruling class of Arabs that was an inveterate enemy of Islam. Niaz Fatehpuri is questioning the very possibility of the Prophet having spoken so many words and sentences as have been attributed to him in his lifetime as a Prophet.

     

    Fatehpuri is asking us to think; he is asking us to do the same thing that the Holy Quran asks us to do: and repeatedly. Let us look at him objectively and give him a fair hearing. Of course, it would be foolhardy to expect either Wahhabis or Shias of the South Asian sub-continent to do that. Most of the intellectual and political leaders of these people are committed to their agendas and would use any weapon, even the lowest to further their agenda. Wahhabis of Saudi Arabia or Shias of Iran are an entirely different breed. They are suffering from the ravages of Wahhabism and Shiism in their societies on a daily basis. They have a very good appreciation of the diabolical nature of any sort of authoritarian system. They have been forced to think. They know this is not Islam. In their own ways they are fighting the system as well. Maybe they are just thinking bad things about these authoritarian regimes, which is the last refuge of a true Mujahid in Islam.

     

    Now Mughal Sahab, I expect you to discuss Fatehpuri Saheb in a rational manner. Do please stop creating red herrings with the help of your Shia friends to divert readers’ attention from the issue at hand. I am sure you will agree with me that this is your methodology. Point fingers at others. Never discuss the issues themselves. This is precisely what our Shia brothers and sisters also do. Just point fingers at others. You must remember the din that was created by our Shia friends when we tried to discuss the issue of the so-called 12th Imam. But when a similar issue arises – the theft of easily available published material on the net and twice – and the culprit is a Shia lady, they all fall silent. No moral outrage this time. This is the state of our community. This is the stage to which our deep sectarian divisions have reached. Even theft does not cause moral outrage. It does, of course, but only when the thief belongs to a rival sect. Islam of the Prophet has completely vanished. What sect did the Prophet belong to no Muslim wants to know? May God save us all!

     

    Niaz Fatehpuri’s task was very hard in his own time. It is much harder today. Making Muslims see reason is extremely difficult. Making them follow a vanished 12th or a 13th Imam or a concocted hadees is very easy, particularly if you have the support of Saudi or Iranian petrodollars at your command. But making them see reason, making them see the fact that they should follow the Islam of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), is very difficult.

     

    I am sorry my conversation has turned rather long and one-sided, maybe boring. But please, let us try and use our faculty of reasoning. That was Niaz Fatehpuri’s message. Our reasoning may not lead us to where Fatehpuri’s reasoning led him. But he will be happy as long as we are thinking and rethinking. May his soul rest in peace and may God save him from the likes of one of his grandsons who will have no compunction spreading canards about him to serve his personal agenda or to hide his own cowardice or maybe just his inability to think rationally.

     

    Best regards,

     

    Sultan Shahin


    By Sultan Shahin -



  • was it justified on part of late maulana to serve his confusions to our generation in the name of ijtihaad?trust me i too have many wild ideas like anyone of you ... but  thinking them in solitude and making them public rule are two different things.. and I don't think I find myself fit enough to propagate my wild/ revolutionary ideas... caution!!! although is a major cause of religious backwardness but is at times the only option mortals like me find handy. [Traveler]

    ==================================

    Dear Sir,

    An example of such rantings is as under [by the way followers of the many mentioned below issued Fatwa of Apostasy against Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri], read and enjoy the flight.

    1 - Eternal Darkness of the Unimaginative MULLAH Mind

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/eternal-darkness-of-unimaginative.html

    2 - Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 1

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/11/heresy-apostasy-misuse-of-blasphemy-law.html

    3 - Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 2

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/11/heresy-apostasy-misuse-of-blasphemy-law_10.html

    4 - Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 3

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/11/heresy-apostasy-misuse-of-blasphemy-law_771.html

    5 - Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 4

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/11/heresy-apostasy-misuse-of-blasphemy-law_7697.html

    6 - Heresy, Apostasy & Misuse of Blasphemy Law - 5

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/11/heresy-apostasy-misuse-of-blasphemy-law_4971.html

    Followers of the many mentioned below issued Fatwa of Apostasy against Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri, and please go through their teaching and ponder who really deserve the Fatwa of Apostasy?

    Barelvis and Deobandi Tableeghi Jamaat - 1

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/barelvis-and-deobandi-tableeghi-jamaat.html

    Barelvis and Deobandi Tableeghi Jamaat - 2

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/barelvis-and-deobandi-tableeghi-jamaat_21.html

    Barelvis and Deobandi Tableeghi Jamaat - 3

    http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/barelvis-and-deobandi-tableeghi-jamaat_4243.html


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • I have read your comments with much interest earlier, and you have pointed to other useful resources and articles. However, in the case of Allama Fatehpuri, I am afraid you are wrong. I am based in the States and am acquainted with his family. After reading your comment, I contacted them, and his son who himself is a great scholar told me that he was with his father all through his illness, and Fatehpuri sb. always remained steadfast in all that he believed. There is no one with the name Salman in the family. Please let us know more about this person. For instance, how old is he? Fatehpuri sb. died in 1966. I hope you do not make such baseless insinuations in the future.

    Best,

    Juhi

    ===========================

    Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri on Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Quadiyani:

    http://www.aaiil.org/text/whatothr/mga/mgatrib4.shtml

    "Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Sahib came to the defence of Islam at a time when even the greatest scholar of the Faith could not dare to confront the opponents." (Monthly Nigar, Lucknow, India, October 1960)

    "What I have studied so far of the founder of the Ahmadiyya Movement, and not only me but anyone who studies his life and character sincerely and truthfully, will have to concede that he was a lover of the Holy Prophet, in the true sense, and had within him a sincere urge for the cause of Islam." (ibid., July 1960)

    In a subsequent issue of the same monthly, the following comment appears about Hazrat Mirza Sahib:

    "I found him to be a believer in the finality of prophethood, and a lover of the Holy Prophet in the true sense. When I studied the life of Mirza Sahib, I found that he was certainly a very active, resolute and determined man. Having understood the true spirit of religion, he presented the same practical teachings of Islam as are to be found in the time of the Holy Prophet and the early Khalifas." (ibid., November 1961)

    NOW READ THIS

    "QUOTE"

    Mirza Ghulam's Autobiography


    EARLY LIFE OF MIRZA QADIANI

    "My birth took place in 1839 or 1840 A.D. I was one of the twins. The other one with me was a girl whose name was jannat (paradise). In my revelation 'Ya Adam uskun antaa wa zaujoka al-jannah', which was mentioned in Braheen Ahmadiyya on p.496 some 20 years ago, the word ‘jannat’ carried this special reference that the girl who was born with me, her name was jannat and this girl died after living for 7 months."

    (Tiryaq-ul-Quloob, Roohani Khazain vol.15 p.479 by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani)

    "My father Mirza Ghulam Murtuza, was a famous landlord. During my childhood my education started in such a way that when I was 6-7 years old a Persian teacher was employed who taught me Quran and few Persian books. His name was Fazl Ilahi. When I reached 10 years of age, an Arabic teacher, Moulvi, was appointed for my education whose name was Fazl Ahmad.


    When I was 17-18 years old, I had the chance of receiving some education from my father. He taught me Grammer, logic and hikmat (Medicine) and some of the medical books were taught by my father. Because of my health, my father always used to discourage me from reading too much.

    "Regarding the villages which the British Government had confiscated, my father had filed a suit in English court to retrieve them. I was made to represent in these cases. Although to it was against my up bringing and I did not want to waste my time at such bad places but I was forced to look after the estate matters. In those days, I was employed for a few years by British Government in Sialkot court as a clerk for Rs15/- per month.

    "Later I resigned and once again got busy in estate management. Very often I was thinking about the meaning of Quran (Tafseer). When I reached 30-35 years of age my father died. I was in Lahore at that time. After the death of my father, series of conversation with God (Mukalimat-e-Ilahiah) started in full swing."

    (Kitab-ul-Bariayh pp.134-136, Summary of commentary on margins, by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani. Roohani Khazain vol.13 p.180; TUZUK-E-AHMADI written in AKHBAR -AL-HAKAM QADIAN Special No, vol.37 No.18519, dated 21-28 May 1934 AD)

    Mirza elopes with pension money:

    "Bismillah ar-Rehman ar-Raheem. Hazrat Waalida Sahiba (Respected Mother i.e. wife of Mirza Ghulam) told me that once during his youth days, when Hazrat Maseeh Mowood went to recieve your grandfather's pension, Mirza Imamdeen ( a cousin of Mirza Ghulam) went after him. When you recieved the pension, then with connivance and deception he took him (Mirza) out instead of Qadian, took him here and there and when he spent all the money, Imamdeen left him and went away somewhere. Hazrat Maseeh Mowood did not come home due to shame and since your grandfather had always wanted
    him to take up a j ob, therefore he took up a job at the Court of Deputy Commissioner of Sialkot City at a meagre salary."

    (Seeratul Mahdi part I p.41 by Mirza Basheer Ahmad s/o Mirza Ghulam)
     
    FAMILY DECLINE

    "My father, Mirza Ghulam Murtuza, used to sit in a chair in Governor’s Darbar, and was such a well-wisher of British Government and brave at heart, that in the Mutiny of 1857 AD, he helped the Majestic Government, beyond his means, by purchasing from his own pocket 50 horses and providing fifty mercenaries. The glory of our estate was declining day by day until in our days our family position was of a small grade landlord."

    (Tohfa-e-Qaiser, Roohani Khazain vol.12 pp.270-271)

    "The British confiscated our family lands and fixed honorary pension of only Rs.700/- per year in the form of cash which was reduced to Rs 180/- at the death of my Grandfather and stopped compeletely after my uncle’s (Father’s elder brother) death." (Seerat-ul-Mahdi, Part I p.41 By Mirza Basheer Ahmad s/o Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani)
     
    DISEASES OF THE PROMISED ONE (SO CALLED):

    "His (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani) moral teeth had caries which used to pain occasionlly; the end of one molar became pointed which caused ulcer on his tongue; it had to be fild away."

    (Seerat-ul-Mahdi part ii p.135 By Mirza Basheer Ahmad s/o Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani)

    "Once he fell down from a window and injured his left arm, which remained weak till the end." (Seerat-ul-Mahdi part ii p.198)
     
    IMPOTENCE

    "This decrepid is suffering from weakness of brain. for long time after I got married. I used to think that Iam impotent."

    (Letter By Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani date: 22/2/1887 in Maktoobate Ahmadiyya Vol. 5, p. 14 copied from Navishta-e-Ghaib By Khalid Wazirabadi)

    "At the time of marriage my heart and brain were very weak and I was suffering with dizziness have been with me for long time;because of these I had bitterness (sadness) of the heart (depression)and the absence of
    sexual power."

    (Tiryaq-ul-Quloob Roohani Khazain vol.15 p.203 By Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani) 

    Writng to Hakeem Nooruddin, Mirza says:

    " I have great improvment with your medicines. Few diseases like lethargy and gastric acidity have been cureed by it. I had one very serious problem that the erection used to subside when I leid down for intercourse. Lack of sexual energy was it’s cause. So with your medicines my sexual power have returned."

    (MAKTOOBAT-E-AHMADIYYA, Vol 5, No.2 Collection of letters by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani)

    "Revelation was sent to me regarding marriage; at that time my heart and brain and body were very weak. Apart from diabetes mellitus and dizziness in the head and sadness of heart (Depression), I was suffering from tuberculosis also."

    (Nuzool-e-Maseeh, Roohani Khazain vo.18 p.587 footnote By Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani)

    " He (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani) used to keep very few fasts during Ramadan whose redemption was paid; and because of the suffering of an attack he broke one fast exactly at Maghrib (Sunset) time. "He used to get
    attacks very frequenctly and his health was generally down."

    (Seerat-ul-Mahdi part i p.51 By Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani)

    "Hazrat Saheb was a chronic melancholic. This illness was inherited. (Mirza Sahab could not bear the burden of prophethood!! - Author) Mirza sahab had a real uncle (maternal) whose name was Mirza Jamiat Baig. He had one son and one daughter and both were suffering from mental defects. Boy’s name was Mirza Sher Ali. Girl was Hurmat Bibi. She got married to Hazrat Sahab" (Mirza and Hurmat Bibi -- both mental !! It must have been great fun! and the resulting children?-one can imagine - Author)

    (Seerat-ul-Mahdi part I p.51)

    MELANCEHOLIA IN ANCIENT MEDICAL LITERATURE

    Depression has probably been part of the human condition as long as man has inhabited the earth. Even a brief perusal of early manuscript or writing reveals descriptions of depression. Ancient writers recognized some of the same problems that we are treating 2,000 to 4,000 years later. Most Greek literature described the concept of divinely inspired depression. Yet 2,300 years ago, Hippocrates recognized that psychiatric problems originate from natural causes rather than from supernatural capriciousness. His terminology for the psychiatric disorders remain in use today: epipepsy (the sacred disease); mania (states of abnormal excitement); melancholia (states of abnormal depression due to black bile); and paranioa. Hippocrates also described a woman of melancholic turn of mind who suffered loss of sleep, aversion to food, thirst and nausea. This ancient catalogue of melancholic symptoms presages modren description of depression. 

    During the Roman Era, Physician Galen wrote about depresstion. In describing the melancholic state Galen commented that certain patients show fear, depression, discontent with life, and hatred for all people. He postulated that psychic functions were found in the brain, which was directly affected in melancholia. In his encyclopedic descriptions, Galen including dyshmia (ill temper) crasis (temperament), and chymos(humor).

    Robert Burton’s "Anatomy of Melancholia", published in 1630, summarized what was known at that time as depression and categorized melancholy as "a disease of the head or mind" frequently associated with pain and sorrow. Burton paved the way of future scientific understanding of depression by cataloging the causes of depression, including such psychological ones as
    shame, disgrace, anger, self love and losses. 

    The next significant contribution to the description of depression was by Freud in his book, Mourning and Melancholia, published in 1917. Frued wrote that melancholia represented regression from object choice to a primitive mode of relating to objects. His description of "delusional depression " emphasizes self-reproaches replacing what should actually be outwardly directed anger. He believed that sufferers of depression torment themselves mercilessly while relating the torment to another person, such as the sexual object they may have lost. One can imagine now, what happened with our Mirza. If only Frued had the opportunity to study Mirza!

    Depression has been described for thousand of years, first by the poet and philosphers and only later by the physicians. Today, we have entered an era in which the description of the disease are contributed by research oriented clinics and scientists.

    "According to Hikmat and Greek oriented system, this disease occurs because of collection of black acidic material in the stomach. In whicheever organ this material collects, black vapours arise from it and climb towards the brain. The symptoms are: bitter eructations, anoxia because of weak stomach, disturbed digestion, abdominal distension, loose motions, feeling of smoke like vapours climbing inside." (Could Mirza’s revelation and inspiration be the result of these vapours? - Author).

    (Guide to the causes & symptoms of Melancholia By Allama Burhanuddin Nafees)

    " It was thought that this disease’s (Melancholia) symptoms are caused by the fault in sexual power of drive which are in liver & stomach. But recent
    research has shown that it is a mental illness just like Hysteria in female. The fault in internal organs lead to weakness of mind resulting in Melancholia in Males. Symptoms: Patient is always apathetic, worried thinking always about himself, exaggerating everything............ with no appetite and poor digestion." (Makhzan-e-Hikmat, By Hakeem Dr. Ghulam Jeelani)

    " Poor Digestion bitter reuctaions, sailorhoea, abdominal distension, borbarygmi, burning sensation in stomach, false appetite , feeling of smoky vapours climbing towards head, symptoms subsiding with improvement in digestion and aggravating with indigestion, sometimes tremors of upper part of body, hands and feet and sometimes whole body becoming cold, according to the phase of disease becoming weak, occasionally seeing flashes of light in front of eyes, eyelids becomming heavy, feeling heat and burnig in head and brain, headache and sudden chocking such are
    the symptoms of Melancholia"

    (Akseer-e-azam, vol : 1 , p 189 By Hakeem Mohammad Azam Khan)

    You have read the above features of this disease. I request everybody in the right mind to consider the claims of inspiration, revelation and conversation with God of this Maseeh as ramblings of a deranged person and dissociate yourself from this melancholic, so-called, prophet, so that you can become a true Muslim and from the curse of faithlessness become a believer and a faithful follower of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). The Prophet (PBUH) said:

    " In my Ummah there will be about 30 false claimants and everyone of them will say that he is God’s prophet. Now it is upto you to find out what is the number of this man.

    Now let us see what other intellectuals and Hakeems say about Melancholia.

    AVICENIA (ABU ALI SENA) Says:

    "Melancholia is that disease in which abnormal ideas & thought occurs. Its cause if the extreme blackness of mood so that mind becomes deranged and patient is very upset by is darkness. Or else this disease is caused by too much heat liver. This is called hypochonriasis. When the waste of food and gases mixed in intestines, it gives rise to blackish substance and then vapours from them ascends towards the brain, this is called
    gaseous melancholia"

    (Canon in Medicine, Fun-e-Awwal from book 3, Bu Ali Sena (Avecina)

    Treatment: It is neccessary for the patient with Melancholia to be busy in work which keeps his heart contended and surrounded by people who give him
    respect and deep him happy.  Small quantity of wine mixed with water should be given in moderation."  (Canon in Medicine By Aviecnia)

    Note: Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani was using Tonic wine and opium for the same reason.

    " Melancholia is the change of thoughts from normal due to fear and disease. In some patient this disease progesses so much that the patient thinks that he can tell the hidden things and often tells what is going to happen in future. Later it progresses to such an extent that he consider himself an angel."

    (Guide to the Aetiology & Manifestaions of disease of Melancholia By Allama Burhanuddin Nafees)

    Patient’s fanciful delusions are very frequently related to the same work he has been doing during his health eg if the patient is a religious man, he claim prophethood and miracles, talk about divinity and preaches people about it". (Akseer-e-Azam Vol 1 p 188, By Mohammad Azam Khan)

    " For a claimant of inspiration, if this is proved that he suffers from Hysteria, Melancholia or Epiepsy, then you don’t need any other proof to reject his claim, because this is such a blow that his whole structure of truth is blown apart from is foundation." (By Dr. Shahanawaz Qadiani in Magazine Review of Religions, Qadiani Date, Aug. 1926 A.D.)
     
    MIRZA QADIANI AND ALCOHOL + DRUG ADDICTION

    "Opium is so frequently used in Medicines that Hazrat Maseeh (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani) used to say that in the eyes of doctors opium is half the medicine. Hence the used of opium with medicines as treatment and not as intoxicant is not objectionable in any way. Every one of us, knowingly or unknowingly, has used opium at some stages.

    "Hazrat Maseeh Mawood (promised Maseeh Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani ) made a medicine Tiryaq-e-Ilahi by instructions from God and its main constituent was opium; and this medicine, after some increase in opium content was given to Hazrat Khalifa (First Khalifa- Hakeem Nooruddin)by Hzrat (Mirza Qadiani) for more than six months and himself used it off and on during
    attacks of disease."

    (Article by Mian Mahmood Ahmad Khalifa Qadian in Akber Al Fazal, Qadian, Vol 17 no 6, 19 July 1929) 

    Tonic Wine:

    "My Dear Brother Mohammad Hussain Saheb  May God protect you, Assalam-O-Alaikum 

    Main Yar Mohammad is being sent now. Things to be purchased, you purchase yourself and purchase one bottle of Tonic Wine from Plommer’s Shop but I need Tonic Wine keep this in mind. Rest is O.K. (Signed: Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani)

    (Letters of Imam to P.S. Collections of letters by Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani to Hakeem Mohammad Hussain Qadiani, owner of Dispensary Rafiq-us-Sehat Lahore)

    "True nature of Tonic Wine was inquried from Plommer’s shop in Lahore through Dr. Aziz Ahmad wrote back:

    As per instructions, I inquired from plommer’s Shop and the following reply:

    "Tonic Wine is a type of strong and intoxicating wine which is imported from U.K. Wilayat) in sealed bottles. Its price is Rs.5 Annas 8 (21.9.1933) !"

    (Sauda-e-Mirza p. 39 By Hakeem Mohammad Ali, Principal Tibbiya College Amratsar)

    See how clear it is now that claims of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of being the Promised Messiah, Mahdi and Prophethood are symptoms of disease and not the result of inspirations or conversations with God. The problem was further compounded by the use of Opium and Tonic Wine. I pray that may God give guidance and understanding to Qadianis so that they follow the right path, otherwise the followers of a melancholiaic prophet will also be melancholics.

    Mirza Ghulam Qadiani His Life at a Glance Chronology of Important Events Prepared by Dr. Syed Rashid Ali

    1839/40 Mirza is born to Chiragh Bibi and Ghulam Murtaza 1846 Formal education of Quran, Hadith etc begins at home by Molvi Fazl Ilahi

    1849 Molvi Fazal Ahmad teaches various subjects.

    1852/53 1st Marriage with Hurmat Bibi alias Phajje di Maan. She bore two sons, Sultan Ahmad and Fazal Ahmad.


    1857/58 Gul Ali Shah teaches Arabic Grammer etc.

    1857 War of Independence, the so-called Indian Mutiny.


    To prove his loyalty to The British Raj, Mirza's father donates 50 Armed Horsemen to fight against the Muslims in the War of Independence. Mirza Ghulam Qadir, elder brother of Mirza Ghulam, who served in the 46th Division of the British Army under Gen Nicholson, killed several freedom fighters near Sialkot.

    1864 Mirza runs away from home with the yearly pension of his father and spends it in undesirable pursuits. 

    1864-68 Mirza takes up a clerical post in the British Govt. Court at Sialkot. Takes up the Law exam but failed. Mirza befirends a Christian Padre, who later on played a role 

    1868 A Parliamentary Commision of Inquiry came from England to find out ways and means to control and subdue the spirit of Jihad amongst the Muslims.  Mirza resigns from his job and left for Qadian  Introduces himself as a Debator in Islam.

    1870 Report of Parliamentary Commission 'The Arrival of British Empire in India' submitted to the British Parliament. Report recommended creating an Apostolic Prophet to subdue the Spirit of Jihad in Muslims.

    1871 Mirza Ghulam selected for the 'post' of Apostolic Prophet.

    1877 Criminal case registered against him by postal authorities.

    1879 Claims to have been 'Appointed by God' to proves the truthfulness of Islam Announcement of writing Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya in 50 volumes.

    Appeals for financial help and advance payments for publication of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya.

    1879-84 Publishes four volumes of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya.


    1884 onwards Stops writing Braheen-e-ahmadiyya.  Writes books after books, wrote some 80 books over the next 25 years. Refers to Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya as the book of God.

    1884 Claims to be Revivalist (Mujaddid) of Islam.  2nd Marriage to Shahjehan Begum d/o Mir Nasir Nawab, from whom three sons, Mirza Bashiruddin Mehmood (2nd Khalifa and father of Mirza Tahir, the present Khalifa), Mirza Bashir Ahmad (author of Seerat-ul-Mahdi) and Mirza Sharif Ahmad were born.  Admits being impotent at the time of 2nd Marriage. Prays to God for sexual powers. God sends his Wahi for making a divine potion. Upon Divine instructions, makes a potion called 'TIRYAQ-e-ILAHI' to regain his 'energy'. Major component is 'OPIUM'. 

    1888 Start taking oath of allegiance (Peeri-Mureedi) by the people. Asks for the hand of Mohammadi Begum for his 3rd Marriage. Advertises that his 3rd Marriage with Mohammadi Begum is a divinely inspired proposal and that any hinderance from any quarter will result in Tragic Consequences for the girl, her family and the person to whom she is married.  Mirza Ghulam announced: This should be clear to people that there can be no bette r criterion to judge my truth or falsehood than my prophecy."(Aina-e-Kamalate Islam, Roohani Khazain vol 5 p.288, by Mirza Ghulam) Mirza threatens his 1st wife and her sons of dire consequences for not helping in the marriage with Mohammadi Begum.

    1891 Claims to be A Maseel Messiah (Like Messiah) and denies that he is the Promised Messiah. Labels those who accused him of it, as Liars

    1891 Claims to have become Mariam.

    Claims to have become pregnant by the insufflation of the soul of Eisa (Jesus). Claims to have converted to Eisa after staying for 10 months in his own (Maryam's) womb. Says: "This is how I am Jesus son of Mary."

    (Kishtee Nooh, Roohani Khazain vol 19 p. 87-89)

    1891 Establishes Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam.

    1892 Mohammadi Begum got married to Mirza Sultan Baig.


    In retaliation, Mirza:

    divorces his first wife. forces his one son to divorce his wife. disinherits his second son.

    [PS His first wife was related to Mohammadi Begum.]

    1893 Challenged Deputy Commissioner Abdullah Khan Atham, a Christian Missionary, for a written debate to prove the truthfulness of either religion.

    Feb 1893 Mirza declared: "Everyone has accepted me and affirmed my claims, except Children of Prostitutes, whose hearts have been sealed by God." 
    (Aina-e-Kamalate Islam, Roohani Khazain vol 5 p.548)  Note: Mirza's own sons from the first marriage had not accepted him as Messiah!!

    22nd May -5th June '93 Written debate with Atham.  Mirza recieves humiliating defeat. As a result, many Muslims become Christians! Unrepentant, Mirza issues the Divine Prophecy of Atham's death within 15 months (by 5th Sept 1894). He said: "I admit that if this prophecy turns out to be false... I am prepared to recieve any punishment, I should be disgraced, my face blackened, put a rope around my neck and hang me... I swear upon God t hat He will definitely fulfilled it, definitely fulfil it, fulfil it. Earth and heavens can move but God's word will not be annulled." (Jang-e-Muqqaddas, Roohani Khazain vol 6 p.293) 

    Apr 1894 Atham is still alive. Several attempts made on the life of Atham by unknown persons.

    4th Sept

    1894 Magic Bullet: Mirza recites a wazeefa over gram seeds and throws them in an abandoned well to kill Atham.

    6th Sept

    1894 Christains celebrated the victory of Abdullah Atham and ridiculed and lampooned Islam - thanks to Mirza Ghulam!!.

    1896 Reiterates the divine origin of the Prophecy and Marriage with Mohammdi Begum. He said: "If I am a Liar, my death will come  and this prophecy will not be fulfilled."(Anjame Atham) He published this revelation:"and they ask thee if this is true? Say: Yes, By my Lord, it is true and you cannot prevent it from taking place. We have wed thee to her. There is none to change my words."  (Asmani Faisla)

    27th July

    1896 Declares that paternal and maternal grandmothers Jesus Christ were Prostitutes, from whose blood his was born and that was the reason for Jesus' inclination towards prostitutes!!

    1897 Petition to the British Govt.

    Thanksgiving to Queen Victoria on her Silver Jubilee of Coronation. Case against Mirza by Income Tax authorities. House search by police on suspicion of murder of Pundit Lekhram, criminal case agianst him and his acquittal.

    1898/99 Petition to Lt Governor of Punjab reminding him that:

    His forefathers have always been loyal servants.  He himself is the SELF IMPLANTED & SELF CULTIVATED SEEDLING of the British Raj. From his early age till now when he is 65 years of age, he has been engaged with his pen and tongue to turn the hearts of Muslims towards true love and goodwill for the British and to remove the concept of Jehad from the hearts of stupid muslims. Criminal case against Mirz a to keep peace. 

    1900 Mirza Abrogates Jihad.

    Named his followers 'Ahmadis' and instructs them to use the same nomenclature for census.

    1900 Claimed prophethood.

    25th May

    1900 Mirza Ghulam announces that all those who do not accept him as prophet are disobedient of God and His Prophet and will dwell in hellfire.

    1901 Mirza has still not forgotten Mohammadi Begum. Issues yet another statement that events will take strange turn and she will inevitably come into his wedlock as these are divinely ordained matters.

    1902 Finally to give some reprieve to the poor Mohammadi Begum, some muslims thought of a novel idea. Jaafer Zitly published the following in his newspaper: "I saw in my dream that wife of Mirza Ghulam Qadiani
    is going to come into my wedlock!!"  Mirza was struck dumb. After that he never said a word about Mohammadi Begum until his death in 1908. Mohammadi Begum lived happily with her husband for the next 40 years.

    8th Nov

    1902 Mirza announces:"The basis for my claims is not Hadiths but Quran and my own revelation; in support we also cite those Hadiths which do not contradict my revelation. All the rest of Hadiths, I throw them away like a waste paper." (Zamima Nuzoole Maseeh, Roohani Khazain vol 19 p.140)

    1903 Constructs Minarat-ul-Maseeh in Qadian, 12 years after becoming the Promised Messiah!!

    1904 Claims to be the Lord Krishna of Hindus.

    1905 Establishes the Heavenly Graveyard in Qadian.

    1906 Admits having been afflicted by Mental Illness and Excessive Urination of upto 100 times per day, since the time of claiming to have been appointed by God (1879)

    1907 Prayer Duel with Molvi Sanaullah Amratsari.  Advertises his prayer in Newspapers whereby he prays to God AlMighty to let the Liar die in the lifetime of truthful and that the liar's death should either be from Cholera or Plague, which in his opinion was the sign of Divine Anger.

    Claims that God has named him Mohammed and Ahmad 26 years ago in Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya. (Haqeeqatul Wahi, Roohani Khazain vol 22 p.502)

    Claims that God has revealed 300,000 signs to substantiate his claims.

    15th May

    1907 Claims that following verses of Holy Quran, revealed in the Honour nad Glory of Holy Prophet Mohammed SAAW, have now been revealed in Mirza's
    honour: 

    Verse 7:17 
    Verse 55:1 
    Verse 9:33 
    Verse 53:9 
    Verse 17:1 
    Verse 3:31 
    Verse 48:10 
    Verse 48:1 
    Verse 73:15 
    Verse 107:1 
    Verse 36:3 

    (Haqeeqat-ul-Wahi, Roohani Khazain vol 22)

    Claims that God has named him after every prophet. Therefore, he said:

    "I am Adam, I am Noah, I am Abraham, I am Isaac, I am Jacob, I am Ishmael, I am Moses, I am David, I am Eisa son of Maryam, I am Mohammed...(Peace be upon Them)."  (Haqeeqatul Wahi, Roohani Khazain vol 22 p. 521)

    1908 Publishes the fifth volume of Braheen-e-Ahmadiyya. In its preface he wrote:

    "Initially I had promised to write it in 50 volumes. Since the difference between 5 and 50 is only ZERO, my promised is now fulfilled after writing the 5th volume.

    1908 Mirza gives a reception to the Financial Commissioner Punjab

    DEATH: Mirza suddenly develops Cholera. With remorse and disappointment he uttered his last words to his father in law: 

    "Mir Sahib! I have developed Epidemic Cholera." He could not utter any words after that and died within a short time.

    Mohammadi Begum lived happily with her husband for next 35 years.

    Molvi Sanaullah Amratsari lived for the next 40 years.
     
    1908 Hakeem Nuruddin becomes the 1st Successor.

    1914 Hakeem Nuruddin fell from the horse and died.  Mirza Basheeruddin Mehmood, s/o Mirza Ghulam, becomes the 2nd Khalifa.

    "UNQUOTE"


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • I would request syyeda not to be outrageous to fellow readers/ commentators ( now don't charge me for that!!!...).  You might be very exalted in your IMAN but what authority you have to downgrade others?.. There is an old saying  ONLY FOOLS AND DEAD DONOT CHANGE OPINIONS.. I'm sure none of us would want to belong to either of those catagories..

    Iman to me is something which needs to be qualified not what is passed on as a conditioned reflex from our ancestors , and like any other qualifying examination one should LEARN to DOUBT...for doubt is human... it is the primary pre-requisite for research

    UMR TAMAM HUI BAS PATA YEH NA CHAL SAKA

    MAIN KAUN HOON? AUR SAHI KYON NA CHAL SAKA??..

     this is my state and I have no misgivings about myself and my state.. because they day I will be RIGHT in your terms I will meet my death..[Traveler]

    =====================================

    Dear Sir,

    I salute you. It couldn't be written better than this.

    =====

    we are sons of Adam full of filth and defeciencies but that is what makes us ASHRAF UL MAKHLOOQAT for only angels are perfect and as per Islamic belief they are far more inferior than a sultan shahin, a jamshed, a shamshad and possibly a traveler.. [Traveler]

    ======

    Dear Sir,

    Eecellent.

    1- Ye are the best community that hath been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin right conduct and forbid indecency; and ye believe in Allah. And if the People of the Scripture had believed it had been better for them. Some of them are believers; but most of them are evil-livers. [AL-E-IMRAN (THE FAMILY OF 'IMRAN, THE HOUSE OF 'IMRAN) Chapter 3 Verse - 110]


    2- Verily we have honoured the Children of Adam. We carry them on the land and the sea, and have made provision of good things for them, and have preferred them above many of those whom We created with a marked preferment. [AL-ISRA (ISRA', THE NIGHT JOURNEY, CHILDREN OF ISRAEL) Chapter 17 - Verse 70]


    3- Surely We created man of the best stature [AT-TIN (THE FIG, THE FIGTREE) Chapter 95 - Verse 4]

    Minor Interpretation:


    (Verily, We created man in the best form.) This is the subject being sworn about, and it is that Allah created man in the best image and form, standing upright with straight limbs that He beautified. Man becoming Lowly even though He was created in the Best Form.

    makes us ASHRAF UL MAKHLOOQAT for only angels are perfect [Traveler]

    And (remember) when We said unto the angels: Fall prostrate before Adam, and they fell prostrate, all save Iblis. [AL-KAHF (THE CAVE) Chapter 18 - Verse 50]

    Dear Sir Traveler and Friends,

    On Mortal and Sinner Human:

    And (remember) when thy Lord said unto the angels: Lo! I am creating a mortal out of potter's clay of black mud altered, So, when I have made him and have breathed into him of My Spirit, do ye fall down, prostrating yourselves unto him. So the angels fell prostrate, all of them together Save Iblis. He refused to be among the prostrate. [AL-HIJR (AL-HIJR, STONELAND, ROCK CITY) Chapter 15 - Verse 28, 29, 30, 31]


    O son of Adam, so long as you call upon Me and ask of Me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds of the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I would forgive you. O son of Adam, were you to come to Me with sins nearly as great as the earth and were you then to face Me, ascribing no partner to Me, I would bring you forgiveness nearly as great at it. [Tirmidhi and Musnad Ahmad ibn Hanbal]

    AL-BAQARA (THE COW) 2:30-38

    30. And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Verily, I am going to place (mankind) generations after generations on earth." They said: "Will You place therein those who will make mischief therein and shed blood, - while we glorify You with praises and thanks (Exalted be You above all that they associate with You as partners) and sanctify You." He (Allâh) said: "I know that which you do not know."

    31. And He taught Adam all the names (of everything), then He showed them to the angels and said, "Tell Me the names of these if you are truthful."

    32. They (angels) said: "Glory be to You, we have no knowledge except what you have taught us. Verily, it is You, the All-Knower, the All-Wise."

    33. He said: "O Adam! Inform them of their names," and when he had informed them of their names, He said: "Did I not tell you that I know the Ghaib (unseen) in the heavens and the earth, and I know what you reveal and what you have been concealing?"

    34. And (remember) when We said to the angels: "Prostrate yourselves before Adam.". And they prostrated except Iblîs (Satan), he refused and was proud and was one of the disbelievers (disobedient to Allâh).

    35. And We said: "O Adam! Dwell you and your wife in the Paradise and eat both of you freely with pleasure and delight of things therein as wherever you will, but come not near this tree or you both will be of the Zâlimûn (wrong-doers)."

    36. Then the Shaitân (Satan) made them slip therefrom (the Paradise), and got them out from that in which they were. We said: "Get you down, all, with enmity between yourselves. On earth will be a dwelling place for you and an enjoyment for a time."

    37. Then Adam received from his Lord Words. And his Lord pardoned him (accepted his repentance). Verily, He is the One Who forgives (accepts repentance), the Most Merciful.

    38. We said: "Get down all of you from this place (the Paradise), then whenever there comes to you Guidance from Me, and whoever follows My Guidance, there shall be no fear on them, nor shall they grieve.

    TA-HA (TA-HA)  20:115-123

    115. And indeed We made a covenant with Adam before, but he forgot, and We found on his part no firm will-power.

    116. And (remember) when We said to the angels: "Prostrate yourselves to Adam." They prostrated (all) except Iblîs* (Satan), who refused.

    117. Then We said: "O Adam! Verily, this is an enemy to you and to your wife. So let him not get you both out of Paradise, so that you be distressed in misery.

    118. Verily, you have (a promise from Us) that you will never be hungry therein nor naked.

    119. And you (will) suffer not from thirst therein nor from the sun's heat.

    120. Then Shaitân (Satan) whispered to him, saying : "O Adam! Shall I lead you to the Tree of Eternity and to a kingdom that will never waste away?"

    121. Then they both ate of the tree, and so their private parts appeared to them, and they began to stick on themselves the leaves from Paradise for their covering. Thus did Adam disobey his Lord, so he went astray.

    122. Then his Lord chose him, and turned to him with forgiveness, and gave him guidance.

    123. (Allâh) said:"Get you down (from the Paradise to the earth), both of you, together, some of you are an enemy to some others. Then if there comes to you guidance from Me, then whoever follows My Guidance shall neither go astray, nor fall into distress and misery.


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • If you want more details then whenever your are in Pakistan    { Amir Moghul}

    No body is so insane to be in Pakistan in near future   specially  Juhi or else she  would have known about   this Salman the grandson  of Niyaz Fatehpuri and visited his house as well.


    By Nauheed Nusrat -



  • @ Traveler /  SS.. salaamz

     

    Since you are in ‘Musafirat’ and must be very tired …..and a  tired  mind is bound to err here and there….I really wish, to give you the benefit of that, and spare you, but not without an advice,  you try and abstain from dedicating your posts to the rights and wrongs that I do,  instead,  concentrate on the subject as you keep advising all of us.

    I would really want every one to understand that if a particular correspondent is writing a message to the editor requesting for something, does not necessarily mean, that the particular message is read by one and all. Mr. Shamshad Elahi himself has written that ‘HE THOUGHT’ I wrote that article…what have I got to do with the whims and fancies of Mr. Shamshad ? Secondly if the editor wanted to Use the article he would have asked himself..?

    You do not understand a wee bit about the term ‘Ashraful Makhlukaat’ and why Allah swt said it, or you would not have sited that example...….Habeel and Kabeel….(cane and able) both were Ashraful Makhlukat but were poles apart when weighed in the scale of religion and humanity. I wish to write more but, as I said I would spare you……as too much of SALT is bad for a heart patient.

     

    Ps....Don't wait so impatiently for my posts, they might just stop one fine morning for ever.....Kullo Nafsin Zaikatul Maut...remember...


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • dear friends The debate as usual has deviated from Niyaz Fatehpuri to other things.

    All of us are watching the development with amusement . I have to say that at no point of time Syyeda ever said that she was writing her own work, therefore accusing her of piracy is probably not justified, secondly she has said that I am not a researcher/ scholor etc. I'mwhat I am and we all know what syyeda is?.. Lols.. she is salt nothing more and nothing less...

    I would request syyeda not to be outrageous to fellow readers/ commentators ( now don't charge me for that!!!...).  You might be very exalted in your IMAN but what authority you have to downgrade others?.. There is an old saying  ONLY FOOLS AND DEAD DONOT CHANGE OPINIONS.. I'm sure none of us would want to belong to either of those catagories..

    You seem to have special affinity for your SYYED origin but my fair lady it is always INSERTION not ORIGIN which is important.. You see filth all around...yes !! we are sons of Adam full of filth and defeciencies but that is what makes us ASHRAF UL MAKHLOOQAT for only angels are perfect and as per Islamic belief they are far more inferior than a sultan shahin, a jamshed, a shamshad and possibly a traveler..

    Iman to me is something which needs to be qualified not what is passed on as a conditioned reflex from our ancestors , and like any other qualifying examination one should LEARN to DOUBT...for doubt is human... it is the primary pre-requisite for research

    UMR TAMAM HUI BAS PATA YEH NA CHAL SAKA

    MAIN KAUN HOON? AUR SAHI KYON NA CHAL SAKA??..

     this is my state and I have no misgivings about myself and my state.. because they day I will be RIGHT in your terms I will meet my death..

     

    As far as we know Mr. Shamshad Elahi is a clear thinking mind and you should not label him PRESBYOPIC etc.

    Syeda you also did a little mistake by not proclaiming the facts when Mr. Shamshad Ansari and Mr. Hasan asked the editor to give your writeup space on main page, had editor posted that what name it would carry in authorship?..

    having said this all I personally feel that we live in the age of information and borrowing from other sites is simply inevitable particularly when someone is participating in a debate..

    honestly speaking I did not feel that Syyeda tried to fool the audience in making them believe it was her ORIGINAL RESEARCH as claimed by Mr. jamshed basha.....therefore there can not be any sensible comparision between the two cases.

     

    now regarding the hadith mentioned by Mr.aamir mughal where martyr, scholor and rich all three are designated hell... i too feel this is very pertinent hadith because  LEADING is a great responsibilityu and no sensible honest individual would like to lead ( provided he knows the responsibility)..

    the debate has entered in a crucial phase by the Aamir's statement about Mr. Fatehpuri's grandson SALMAn.. with the kind of references he is giving one should have no option except believing him..then a point disturbs me is... was it justified on part of late maulana to serve his confusions to our generation in the name of ijtihaad?

    trust me i too have many wild ideas like anyone of you ... but  thinking them in solitude and making them public rule are two different things.. and I don't think I find myself fit enough to propagate my wild/ revolutionary ideas... caution!!! although is a major cause of religious backwardness but is at times the only option mortals like me find handy.

     


    By traveler -



  • Neither does God need worship and submission, nor does He need anyone’s prayers. [Niya@z Fateh{puri@, “Si@dah Ra@stah,” Niga@r, January 1959, 90.]

    =================================

    Dear Sultan Sahab,

    If that is so then the following Verses from Quran should immediately be discraded and forthwith:

    Be guardians of your prayers, and of the midmost prayer, and stand up with devotion to Allah. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 238]

    Worship at fixed times hath been enjoined on the believers. [AN-NISA (WOMEN) Chapter 4 - Verse 103]

    Turn ye back in repentance to Him, and fear Him: establish regular prayers, and be not ye among those who join gods with Allah,- [AL-ROOM (THE ROMANS, THE BYZANTINES) Chapter 30 - Verse 31]

    Seek help in patience and prayer; and truly it is hard save for the humble-minded, [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 45]

    Recite that which has been revealed to you of the Book and keep up prayer; surely prayer keeps (one) away from indecency and evil, and certainly the remembrance of Allah is the greatest, and Allah knows what you do. [AL-ANKABOOT (THE SPIDER) Chapter 29 - Verse 45]

    Praise the name of thy Lord the Most High,

    [AL-ALA (THE MOST HIGH, GLORY TO YOUR LORD IN THE HIGHEST) Chapter 87 Verse 1]

    So pray unto thy Lord [AL-KAUTHER (ABUNDANCE, PLENTY) Chapter 108: Verse 2]

    As per my humble and poor knowledge:

    Times of the Prayers as per Quran:

    1 - The Morning Prayer [Fajr]:

    O you who believe! let those whom your right hands possess and those of you who have not attained to puberty ask permission of you three times; before the morning prayer, and when you put off your clothes at midday in summer, and after the prayer of the nightfall; these are three times of privacy for you; neither is it a sin for you nor for them besides these, some of you must go round about (waiting) upon others; thus does Allah make clear to you the communications, and Allah is Knowing, Wise. [AL-NOOR (THE LIGHT) Chapter 24 - Verse 58]

    2 - The Noon Prayers [Zuhur]:

    Establish regular prayers - at the sun's decline till the darkness of the night, and the morning prayer and reading: for the prayer and reading in the morning carry their testimony. [AL-ISRA (ISRA', THE NIGHT JOURNEY, CHILDREN OF ISRAEL) Chapter 17 - Verse 78]

    3 - The Afternoon Prayer [Asr]:

    Be guardians of your prayers, and of the midmost prayer, and stand up with devotion to Allah. [AL-BAQARA (THE COW) Chapter 2 - Verse 238]

    4 - The Sunset Prayer [Maghrib]:

    And establish regular prayers at the two ends of the day and at the approaches of the night: For those things, that are good remove those that are evil: Be that the word of remembrance to those who remember (their Lord) [HUD (HUD) Chapter 11 - Verse 114]

    5 - The Night Prayer [Isha'a]:

    O you who believe! let those whom your right hands possess and those of you who have not attained to puberty ask permission of you three times; before the morning prayer, and when you put off your clothes at midday in summer, and after the prayer of the nightfall; these are three times of privacy for you; neither is it a sin for you nor for them besides these, some of you must go round about (waiting) upon others; thus does Allah make clear to you the communications, and Allah is Knowing, Wise. [AL-NOOR (THE LIGHT) Chapter 24 - Verse 58]

    JUMA PRAYER [Congregation]:

    O ye who believe! When the call is proclaimed to prayer on Friday (the Day of Assembly), hasten earnestly to the Remembrance of Allah, and leave off business (and traffic): That is best for you if ye but knew! [AL-JUMUA (THE CONGREGATION, FRIDAY) Chapter 62 - Verse 9]

    These Prayers [Namaz - Salat or any other kind of worship] helps when these are free from this:

    Let me quote a Quranic verse and Hadith on this Riya [Showoff]

    Ah, woe unto worshippers

    Who are heedless of their prayer;

    Who would be seen (at worship)

    Yet refuse small kindnesses!

    [AL-MAUN (SMALL KINDNESSES, ALMSGIVING, HAVE YOU SEEN) Chapter 107 - Verses 4, 5, 6, 7]

    Say: I am only a mortal like you. My Lord inspireth in me that your Allah is only One Allah. And whoever hopeth for the meeting with his Lord, let him do righteous work, and make none sharer of the worship due unto his Lord. [AL-KAHF (THE CAVE) Chapter 18 - Verse 110]

    1 - On the authority of Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) in a marfoo' form, the following Qudsi narration: "I am Independent of all the partners (ascribed to me). Whoever performs a deed while associating partners with Me, I will leave him and his Shirk." [Sahih Muslim]

    2 - It is reported that the Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) said: "Of the things which I fear for my Ummah, the thing which I fear most is minor Shirk. Then he was asked about minor Shirk, and he said: "It is ar-riyaa.

    On the authority of Abu Sa'eed Al-Khudri (ra ), in a marfoo' form, it is reported: "Shall I not tell you what I fear for you more than Al-Maseeh Ad-Dajjaal?" They replied: "Yes." He (saas ) said: "It is hidden Shirk such as when a person stands in prayer and he improves his prayer when he knows that others are watching." (Narrated by Imam Ahmad)

    Allah's Messenger Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) informs us in this Hadith that he worries for his Ummah and fears for them Al-Maseeh Ad-Dajjaal, but that more than this, he fears for them hidden Shirk, which is riyaa`; this is because the danger of Al-Maseeh Ad-Dajjaal is confined to a specific time, while the danger of riyaa` is present at all times and in all places and because riyaa` is hidden and its power of seduction is great and it is difficult to free oneself from its grip. In addition, it leads to showy, ostentatious behaviour, self-glorification, self-promotion, all of which appeal to the weaknesses in man.

    How can Mr. Mughal too take such a rational view in the matter of goings on at Sufi shrines and then turn around and take such an irrational view of considering Hadees sacrosanct?  While, of course, some Ahadees that elaborate and explain Quranic injunctions, have some value for us, even if their authenticity would still be in doubt, but how can a rational Muslim consider this Yazeedi institution, that was created by Abu Jahal’s family to subvert Islam and turn it into an expansionist, exploitative monarchy in the name of democracy, consider it worth preserving in this day and time. [Sultan Shahin]


    3 - On the authority of Abu Hurayrah (May Allah be pleased with him), who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah, Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) say:

    The first of people against whom judgment will be pronounced on the Day of Resurrection will be a man who died a martyr. He will be brought and Allah will make known to him His favours and he will recognize them. [ The Almighty] will say: And what did you do about them? He will say: I fought for you until I died a martyr. He will say: You have lied - you did but fight that it might be said [of you]: He is courageous. And so it was said. Then he will be ordered to be dragged along on his face until he is cast into Hell-fire. [Another] will be a man who has studied [religious] knowledge and has taught it and who used to recite the Quran. He will be brought and Allah will make known to his His favours and he will recognize them. [The Almighty] will say: And what did you do about them? He will say: I studied [religious] knowledge and I taught it and I recited the Quran for Your sake. He will say: You have lied - you did but study [religious] knowledge that it might be said [of you]: He is learned. And you recited the Quran that it might be said [of you]: He is a reciter. And so it was said. Then he will be ordered to be dragged along on his face until he is cast into Hell-fire. [Another] will be a man whom Allah had made rich and to whom He had given all kinds of wealth. He will be brought and Allah will make known to his His favours and he will recognize them. [The Almighty] will say: And what did you do about them? He will say: I left no path [untrodden] in which You like money to be spent without spending in it for Your sake. He will say: You have lied - you did but do so that it might be said [of you]: He is open-handed. And so it was said. Then he will be ordered to be dragged along on his face until he is cast into Hell-fire. [Muslim, Tirmidhi and Nasa'i]


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Lols …..

     

    It is evident now that Janab Amir Moghul has more affinity with the family of ‘Fathehpuri’  than the PhD read Juhi Shahin….

    Shamshad Elahi Ansari I believe you are reading, this time with your glasses on?

    I am so very confused ….whom to believe …Phd read Juhi Shahin or Mr. Amir Moghul a Non PhD, but lanced with a more thorough research on ‘Fathehpuri’, and his irrelevant third generation.

    Amir Moghul Kash tum Ache Musallman bhi hotey….what a waste…… But good work…


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Dear Ms Juhi,

    If you want more details then whenever your are in Pakistan [mail me http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/ and we will both visit Late. Allama Fatehpuri's Grandson to make some enquiries to clear the confusion.

    Regards

    Muhammad Aamir Mughal

    Karachi-Sindh

    Pakistan


    By Aamir Mughal -



  •  

    It is simply deplorable when such elements corss their limits and advise a PhD (read Juhi Shahin) to do some more research. Its unacceptable, untenable.( Shamshad Elahi Ansari)

    Janab Shamshad Elahi Ansari Sb.

     

    India is producing PhD read scholars by scores every year, if a PhD is your yardstick for measuring intellect and FAITH, then your credentials as an educated Muslim is deplorable, abstain from baseless ‘Chaplusi’ and stop trying to cash in on some one else’s efforts and popularity.

     

     


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Dear Mr. Mughal,

    I have read your comments with much interest earlier, and you have pointed to other useful resources and articles.

    However, in the case of Allama Fatehpuri, I am afraid you are wrong. I am based in the States and am acquainted with his family. After reading your comment, I contacted them, and his son who himself is a great scholar told me that he was with his father all through his illness, and Fatehpuri sb. always remained steadfast in all that he believed. There is no one with the name Salman in the family. Please let us know more about this person. For instance, how old is he? Fatehpuri sb. died in 1966.

    I hope you do not make such baseless insinuations in the future.

    Best,

    Juhi

    ========================================

    Dear Ms Juhi,

    Salam,

    Late. Allama Fatehpuri [May Allah have mercy on his soul] used to live in North Nazimabad - Karachi - Sindh [after the partition of India in 1947] and he passed away in that very house that is located opposite block "H" North Nazimabad. He had two wives and from them he had three daughters and two sons [Riaz Niazi and Sarfaraz Niazi - in Chicago USA]. My friend Salman is grand-son of of Late. Ms. Akhter Jehan [D/O Late. Allama Fatehpuri] and I have just talked to him on telephone [around 1430 Pakistan Standard Time]. Both the wives of Late. Allama Fatehpuri [May Allah have mercy on his soul] were real sisters and Allama married to the second sisters after his first wife passed away. I amy remind you all that one Pseudo Intellectual of Pakistan i.e. Dr Farman Fatehpuri [Cheat and Former Caretaker Minister under President Ghulam Ishaq Khan rather Military Establishment during 1990s] had encahsed the good name of Late. Allama Fatehpuri. Allama's son had serious differences with Dr Farman Fatehpuri and there were even legal proceedings on the ownership of Nigar Magazine [founded by Late. Allama Fatehpuri]. If you want more details then whenever your are in Pakistan [mail me http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/] and we will both visit Late. Allama Fatehpuri's Grandson to make some enquiries to clear the confusion.

    Regards

    Muhammad Aamir Mughal

    Karachi-Sindh

    Pakistan


    By Aamir Mughal -



  • Mr. Elahi ANSARI

    You may post on new age for some kind of recognition and false praises, but Madam Kaneez has all together a different and much superior motive. The difference between the likes of you and her is that of truth and false.

    Mr. Editor has the entire article now, so he should keep his word and upload it as a main article for the benefit of one and all.


    By Nauheed Nusrat -



  •  Shamshaad elahhi ANSARI

    It seems you have taken the fact, that some time back, Mrs Kaneez called one Thief of Article Mr. Jamsheed Basha a JULAHA to your heart, and now you are proving her so very righth by repeating your nonsense again and again, when she has reprimanded you for your shallow and maligned line of thinking. Sir you do not just need a reading glass you also need a tuning of your mental faculties as well.

    I am taking this initiative on my own, otherwise, madam feels you are too childish to be payed any undue attention.

    let it hurt where it should, though no offence intended really


    By Nauheed Nusrat -



  • Dear Editor,

    I am really very sorry for my request to give the space of the article of Mrs.S K as I thought that its her original work. I have found the Original site from where it was picked up, pls find below the link and allow me to paste the total script of that article. Same lady has posted her comments eleswhere about her intentions of copy and paste, significance of the change of colour  with an advise for me to wear reading glasses which I dont wear.

    I don't need to make you feel right or wrong since its your personal matter, I leave the ball in the court of readers and Editor. Let them judge it on merit. It is simply deplorable when such elements corss their limits and advise a PhD (read Juhi Shahin) to do some more research. Its unacceptable, untenable.

    No offence.

    Best Reagrds

    The original article lifted by Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez:

    http://sweetshenu.multiply.com/journal/item/2276

    28th Safar 1430 A.H. - Anniversary of wisal of Prophet Mohammad(sawaw) and Shahadat of Imam Hasan(a.s.).


     
    We offer my heartfelt condolences to the Prophet Mohammad(sawaw), Imam
    Zamana(a.s.), the Ahl-e-Bait(a.s.) and to all momineen and mominaat on this sad occassion. As usual practice among momineen and mominaat, please recite the Ziarat of both the Prophet Mohammad(sawaw) and Imam Hasan(a.s.) which are available on the site on the main page. In addition, as instructed by Imam Ali Naqi(a.s.) to all momineen and mominaat, please also recite Ziarat-e-Jamea which is available on the Site in the “Ziarat Summary” section.

    Customarily, momineen and mominaat arrange special majalis and jaloos
    processions on this occassion. I encourage you to participate in them with religious fervour to renew your allegiance to the Prophet
    Mohammad(sawaw) and his Ahl-e-Bait(a.s.).

    Special Presentations at http://www.ziaraat.com
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    Ziarat of Prophet Muhammad(sawaw): http://www.ziaraat.com/mdnmas03.php

    Images of Masjid-e-Nabawi: http://www.ziaraat.com/mdnmas02.php

    Inside Roza-e-Rasool(sawaw): http://www.ziaraat.com/mdnmas01.php

    How well do you know about: http://www.ziaraat.com/hwdyk_sawaw_1.php

    How well do you know about: http://www.ziaraat.com/hwdyk_sawaw_2.php

    How well do you know about: http://www.ziaraat.com/hwdyk_sawaw_3.php

    -----
    Masjid-e-NabaviBelow Green DomeMasjid-e-Nabavi
     Profile of Imam Hasan(a.s.):

    http://www.ziaraat.com/mdnhas01.php

    Ziarat of Imam Hasan(a.s.): http://www.ziaraat.com/mdnhas03.php

    Here is a link to masaib of Imam Hasan(a.s.) and Hazrat Qasim(a.s.) recited by Allama Naseem Abbas : http://www.rizvia.com/huzn/hasan01.ram.

    Nohas of Imam Hasan(a.s.): http://www.rizvia.com/brownoha.asp?masaibof=imamhasan&recitor=All&orderby=titulo&idioma=All&details=yes

    How well do you know about: http://www.ziaraat.com/hwdyk_imam2_1.php

    Online Books Library: http://www.rizvia.com/findbook.asp

    Historical aspects
    ---
    These are two very sad events in the Islamic History. The Prophet
    Mohammad(sawaw) had a very difficult time during his last days when he was constantly disturbed by the shouting and quarreling people around him which gave him great suffering and pain and he had to ask them to leave him alone and go away. He asked the sahabas present there to bring him paper and pen so he could write instructions for them so they would not go astray after him. A group a Sahabas lead by the second caliph said that Prophet(sawaw) was overtaken with severe pain due to his illness and has lost consciousness. They quarreled with the others and did not bring anything to the Prophet(sawaw) to write despite his instructions saying that the Quran was sufficient for them and they do not need any written instruction from the Prophet(sawaw). The Prophet(sawaw) ordered them to leave him alone.

    Probably the most troublesome aspect of the wisal of the Prophet(sawaw) was the event of his namaz-e-janaza. Imam Ali(a.s.) led the prayers and only the handful true followers of the Prophet Mohammad(sawaw) were present and the rest of the PROMINENT and RESPECTFUL Sahabas were absent. They preferred to leave the dead body of the Prophet(sawaw) without Janaza and burial and go to Saqifa bani Saeda to distribute Khilafat among themselves considering it more important than the burial of the Prophet(sawaw).

    Prophet Muhammad(sawaw) was in the company of Hazrat Fatima(s.a.) in his last moments. She heard a knock at the door and someone sought permission to enter. Bibi Fatima(s.a.) said “I am busy talking to my father. Don’t disturb us”. The visitor knocked again after a while and got the same answer. The third time when it happened, the Prophet(sawaw) said to Bibi Fatima(s.a.) “O my dear daughter, the angel of death is on the door and it is a great privilege of your house and of you that he is seeking your permission to do what he has been ordered by Allah(swt) to do. He does not seek permission from anyone else. O my daughter, my time to leave this earth has come and I must answer the call of Allah(swt) and submit to His will. Please allow the angel of death to enter and carry out his task.” Bibi Fatima(s.a.) started weeping and the Prophet(sawaw) departed leaving her in tears.
    Inna lillahe wa inna ilehe rajeoon.

     Fourth Infallible    

    On this sad occassion, We  present Our condolences to our living imam Imam-e-Zamana(a.s.),Muslim Ummah and all the lovers of the Holy Ahlul Bayt(A.S.)
    momineen and mominaat

    Shahadat of Imam Hasan(a.s.)
    ----The history of the shahadat of Imam Hasan(a.s.) is no less treacherous.
    Imam Hasan(a.s.) had a wife named Jada binte Ashas bin Qais. She was bribed to poison the Imam(a.s.) by Moawiya on promise of a handsome amount of cash and marriage with his son Yazeed(l.a.). She poisoned Imam Hasan(a.s.) in milk with a poison called “Hilahil” and while Imam(a.s.) was drinking it, his liver got torn apart and its pieces fell into the milk pot. Jada was ditched by Moawiya saying that when she could conspire against a person such as Imam Hasan(a.s.), she could do that with anyone so he would not marry his son with her. She was eventually thrown into a river on Moawiya’s orders.

    After his martyrdom, despite his will he was not allowed to be buried close to the Prophet Mohammad(sawaw) by a group of Sahabas of bani-ummaya tribe lead by a wife of the Prophet(sawaw). The followers of Imam Ali(a.s.) tried to take his janaza several times to the Hujra of Prophet Mohammad(sawaw) for burial but to no avail. In the final effort, the janaza was attacked by arrows and according to a tradition, 70 arrows pierced in the dead body of Imam Hasan(a.s.). Finally he had to be buried in the darkness of the night in Jannat-ul-Baqi.

    A few words of Masaib
    ------
    On the 28th of Safar in 50th A.H., Imam Hasan(a.s.) visited the grave of his mother and his grand father(sawaw). When Imam Hasan(a.s.) returned to his home in the evening, he knew of the intentions of Jada binte Ashas. He asked her to bring milk and do what she had in her mind. As soon as Imam Hasan(a.s.) drank a little bit of the milk, the poison started making its effect and the pieces of his liver came out of his mouth.

    Seeing this, his other wife Umm-e-Farwa – the mother of Hazrat Qasim(a.s.) - rushed towards him. It was already night and she was very worried. She asked Qasim to go and inform the sisters of Imam Hasan(a.s.). Qasim was only about 3 or 4 years so he said how would I tell them what had happened so Umm-e-Farwa told him that his condition would tell all the story. She tore off the dress of Qasim, took off his little turban and poured mud in his hair. Then asked him to go to the nearby house of Bibi Zainab(s.a.) and Bibi Umm-e-Kulsoom(a.s.).

    The daughters of Imam Ali(a.s.) were preparing for the namaz-e-shab when Qasim(a.s.) knocked the door. When they saw him in this state, they started weeping and asked him what had happened. Qasim(a.s.) told them that his father is in his last moments in this world. They were the daughters of Imam Ali(a.s.) so they knew what had happened. They hurriedly reached the house of Imam Hasan(a.s.). Imam(a.s.) asked Bibi Umm-e-Farwa to hide the milk pot so his sisters would not see his blood in it. Daughters of Imam Ali(a.s.) said please don’t hide the pieces of our brother from us, we have come to collect them in our hijab and would preserve them.

    Imam Hasan(a.s.) gathered all his relatives and appointed Imam Hussain(a.s.) as the next Imam by the will of Allah(swt). He asked Imam Hussain(a.s.) to try to bury him next to the Prophet Mohammad(sawaw) but if that were not possible then not to harm anyone and bury him in Jannatul Baqi. He breathed his last in the night of 28th Safar.

    Imam Hussain(a.s.) took out the funeral of his brother with some of his companions but for the first time in history the janaza of a muslim was returned back without burial and the slain body of Imam Hasan(a.s.) was riddled with arrows. Both the brother Imams had arrows in their destiny – the only difference was that arrows were in the body of Imam Hasan(a.s.) but Imam Hussain(a.s.)’s body was on arrows.

    All brothers and sisters of Imam Hasan(a.s.) then sat together to take out the arrows one by one weeping and shouting aloud – wa Muhammada, wa Hasana, wa musibata.

    Ala lanatullahe alal quamiz zalimin. Sayalamul lazina zalamu ayya munqalabi yanqaliboon. Inna lillahe wa inna ilehe rajeoon.
    Be prepared for your traveling (for Akhira), and keep
    By Shamshad Elahee Ansari -



  • 3/5/2009 8:58:23 PM

    Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez

    Mr. Shamshad Elahi Ansari ...

     All this time, I took you to be a sensible correspondent on this site, but you proved me utterly wrong, when you stupidly or may be intentionally equated my copy paste with the blatant theft of article committed by one Mr. Jamshed Basha Abu...an established journalist and a govt. employee from Chennai..
    Jamshed Basha posted someone else’s  article claiming it to be his own....Mr. Ansari if you would wear your reading glasses and look again  you would notice that my post is in a different color and font from the  copy / paste which I posted along with my message for all to see and benefit from. And I never said that it is my research.....You are suggested to do some proper reading before you jump to nasty conclusions.


    By kaneez -



  • @ Editor newageIslam.com and all those who visit this site …

     

    I wish to make it clear to one and all, that I am no Journalist/Scholar/Author/disciple Researcher / or member of any organization / Union/ or associated with any cult / I am what I am, only a simple Muslimmah’ ,  who has 100% faith on the holy Quran and in the teachings of Islam passed on to us From Prophet Mohammad saww and his progeny,  and have unwavering faith on Allah swt. And firmly believe that all that happens in the life of true Muslims is only for the good, because Allah swt loves his creation far more than the human race can ever comprehend.

    I wish to make it clear to all those, who have a nasty habit of jumping to hasty conclusion’s, whether habitually or with an ulterior motive God knows well.

    Note : what ever I write in my messages  is   My faith and conviction,  and whatever I copy / paste should not be attributed to me as if I authored it, unless and until I write in bold letters that I have written it myself. I am surprised at the foolish suggestion, that all that is copy pasted should be associated with some author or publisher, any regular net surfer receives a thousand and one mails, some good, some bad and some useless, and some that are very good and one feels the urge to share it with people….and that’s exactly I do whenever I deem fit, some times it practically impossible to track the origin due to lack of time and interest.

    I request all good people to pay attention, to what is being said instead of wasting time in researching as to who is saying it.  


    By Mrs. Sayyeda Kaneez -



  • Dear Mr. Mughal,

    I have read your comments with much interest earlier, and you have pointed to other useful resources and articles.

    However, in the case of Allama Fatehpuri, I am afraid you are wrong. I am based in the States and am acquainted with his family. After reading your comment, I contacted them, and his son who himself is a great scholar told me that he was with his father all through his illness, and Fatehpuri sb. always remained steadfast in all that he believed. There is no one with the name Salman in the family. Please let us know more about this person. For instance, how old is he? Fatehpuri sb. died in 1966.

    I hope you do not make such baseless insinuations in the future.

    Best,

    Juhi

     


    By Juhi Shahin -



  • Shame on this grandson of Allama Niaz Fatehpuri, “a very dear friend” of Mr. Aamir Mughal, who tells people baseless stories about his own grandfather, undoubtedly a great mind of the 20th century who is becoming more and more relevant with the passage of time. Mr. Mughal would do well to let us know the name of this character who would spread such canards about his own grandfather. This cowardly grandson of a heroic scholar needs to be exposed to the glare of sunlight. [Sultan Shahin]====================================================== Dear Sultan Sahab, I may be a Fasiq - Fajir [Corrupt, Vile and whatever bad you can say] but i dont lie [when I dont even spare Mullahs, ISI, Pakistan Army, Pakistani System, and Two Nation Theory while living in Pakistan then why should I be lying about Fatehpuri]. His name is Salman and by the way most of the family members of Allama Niaz live in the USA. How can Mr. Mughal too take such a rational view in the matter of goings on at Sufi shrines and then turn around and take such an irrational view of considering Hadees sacrosanct?  While, of course, some Ahadees that elaborate and explain Quranic injunctions, have some value for us, even if their authenticity would still be in doubt, but how can a rational Muslim consider this Yazeedi institution, that was created by Abu Jahal’s family to subvert Islam and turn it into an expansionist, exploitative monarchy in the name of democracy, consider it worth preserving in this day and time. [Sultan Shahin] How about these Hadiths [read the comment and then you are free to declare that Hadiths are manufactured by Abu Jehel and Yazeed] Quraanists / Hadith Rejectors - 1 http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/quraanists-hadith-rejectors-1.html Quraanists / Hadith Rejectors - 2 http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/quraanists-hadith-rejectors-2.html Quraanists / Hadith Rejectors - 3 http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/quraanists-hadith-rejectors-3.html Quraanists / Hadith Rejectors - 4 http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/quraanists-hadith-rejectors-4.html Quraanists / Hadith Rejectors - 5 http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/quraanists-hadith-rejectors-5.html Quraanists / Hadith Rejectors - 6 http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/quraanists-hadith-rejectors-6.html Quraanists / Hadith Rejectors - 7 http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/quraanists-hadith-rejectors-7.html Allama Niaz Fatehpuri, on the other hand, was to a large extent rational and logical in all his arguments on a variety of religious issues, except perhaps in the matter of girls’ education. He has a world view and a religious outlook with which one may or may not agree, which is fine, of course, but to call him a coward who turned away from his life-long views before he died is the height of calumny. Unless you come up with the name of this person, Mr. Mughal, you alone would be considered the author of this slander. [Sultan Shahin]  Aamir Mughal: I know Mr Salman very well and he was not lying. And if you dont believe me then there is no compulsion.
    By Aamir Mughal -



  • A few quick points:

    Shame on this grandson of Allama Niaz Fatehpuri, “a very dear friend” of Mr. Aamir Mughal, who tells people baseless stories about his own grandfather, undoubtedly a great mind of the 20th century who is becoming more and more relevant with the passage of time. Mr. Mughal would do well to let us know the name of this character who would spread such canards about his own grandfather. This cowardly grandson of a heroic scholar needs to be exposed to the glare of sunlight. How can Mr. Mughal too take such a rational view in the matter of goings on at Sufi shrines and then turn around and take such an irrational view of considering Hadees sacrosanct? While, of course, some Ahadees that elaborate and explain Quranic injunctions, have some value for us, even if their authenticity would still be in doubt, but how can a rational Muslim consider this Yazeedi institution, that was created by Abu Jahal’s family to subvert Islam and turn it into an expansionist, exploitative monarchy in the name of democracy, consider it worth preserving in this day and time. Allama Niaz Fatehpuri, on the other hand, was to a large extent rational and logical in all his arguments on a variety of religious issues, except perhaps in the matter of girls’ education. He has a world view and a religious outlook with which one may or may not agree, which is fine, of course, but to call him a coward who turned away from his life-long views before he died is the height of calumny. Unless you come up with the name of this person, Mr. Mughal,