certifired_img

Books and Documents

Islam,Terrorism and Jihad

244 - COMMENTS

  • Quran 22:39 mentions that permission to fight against disbelievers only if Muslims are under attack by them since they were wrong to fight against Muslims.  The following is the extract:
    (سورة الحج, Al-Hajj, Chapter #22, Verse #39)-Mohsin Khan translation)
    ‘Permission to fight (against disbelievers) is given to those (believers) who are fought against, because they have been wronged; and surely, Allah is Able to give them (believers) victory –‘
    As the phrase, Permission to fight (against disbelievers) is given to those (believers) who are fought against, is mentioned in Quran 22:39, it implies that Muslims in this contemporary world has not been granted with permission to fight since they have not been fought against by non-Muslims.  The reason why Quran gives permission for these Muslims to fight was non-Muslims were wrong in their first move to fight against Muslims.
    Quran 4:90 mentions that Muslims should cease in fighting when non-Muslims have withdrawn their fight against them.
    (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #90)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Except those who join a group, between you and whom there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with their breasts restraining from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. Had Allah willed, indeed He would have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So IF THEY WITHDRAW FROM YOU, and FIGHT NOT AGAINST YOU, and offer you peace, then ALLAH HAS OPENED NO llah has opened no way for you against them. By zuma - 5/17/2017 11:07:37 PM



  • The notion that people are unclean because they fight is preposterous! By Naseer Ahmed - 5/17/2017 10:57:55 PM



  • Why should Quran 129:28 condemn pagans to be unclean?
    It is justifiable for Quran to condemn non-Muslims in the past unclean since they did evil deeds in fighting against Muslims first and that caused Muslims to have no choice to defend themselves.  The following is the quranic verse to support it:
    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #191)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘And kill them wherever you find them, and turn them out from where they have turned you out. And Al-Fitnah is worse than killing. And fight not with them at Al-Masjid-Al-Haram (the sanctuary at Makkah), unless they (first) fight you there. But if they attack you, then kill them. Such is the recompense of the disbelievers.’
    The phrase, unless they (first) fight you, in Quran 2:191 implies pagans were evil since they were the first to battle against Muslims.
    (سورة التوبة, At-Tawba, Chapter #9, Verse #13)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Will you not fight a people who have violated their oaths (pagans of Makkah), and intended to expel the Messenger while they did attack you first? Do you fear them? Allah has more right that you should fear Him if you are believers.’
    The phrase, they did attack you first, in Quran 9:13 gives another evidence that pagans in the past fought against Muslims first before Muslims fought against them.
    Secondly, Quran 4:89 mentions that these pagans in the past wanted Muslims to abandon their faith in Allah. 
    (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #89)-Moshin Khan translation:
    ‘They wish that you reject Faith, as they have rejected (Faith), and thus that you all become equal (like one another). So take not Auliya' (protectors or friends) from them, till they emigrate in the Way of Allah (to Muhammad صلى الله عليه وسلم). But if they turn back (from Islam), take (hold of) them and kill them wherever you find them, and take neither Auliya' (protectors or friends) nor helpers from them. ‘
    As the phrase, They wish that you reject Faith, is mentioned in Quran 4:89, it exposes the evil desire that pagans in the past had to cause Muslims not to believe in Allah.  As the phrase, take neither…friends… from them, is mentioned in Quran 4:89 with the phrase, They wish that you reject Faith, it implies that Quran demands Muslims not to make friends with them since they would cause them not to believe in Allah.  The word, They, as mentioned above should surely exclude Jews and Christians and Sabians who believe in Allah for they are blessed people as mentioned in Quran 2:62 below:
    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #62)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Verily! Those who believe and those who are jews and christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.’
    Quran condemns these pagans in the past who persecute Muslims so as to turn them to Muslims to hell.  The following is the extract:
    (سورة البروج, Al-Burooj, Chapter #85, Verse #10)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Verily, those who put into trial the believing men and believing women (by torturing them and burning them), and then do not turn in repentance (to Allah), then they will have the torment of Hell, and they will have the punishment of the burning Fire.’
    The same is mentioned in Quran 2:81 below:
    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #81)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Yes! Whosoever earns evil and his sin has surrounded him, they are dwellers of the Fire (i.e. Hell); they will dwell therein forever.’ By zuma - 5/17/2017 6:11:22 PM



  • Quran 9:13 mentions that non-Muslims in the past fought against Muslims so as to cause the expulsion of the Apostle that caused them to trigger off war.  The following is the extract:
    Quran 9:13, “What!  Will you not fight a people who broke their oaths and aimed at the expulsion of the Apostle, and they attacked you first; do you fear them?  But Allah is most deserving that you should fear Him, if you are believers.”
    The phrase, aimed at the expulsion of the Apostle, as mentioned in Quran 9:13 implies that non-Muslims in the past were violent to the extent to attack the Apostle.  The phrase, they attacked you first, in Quran 9:13 implies that non-Muslims were the first to battle against Muslims and that caused them to defend themselves against them.
    Quran 9:13 would serve no purpose of fighting against non-Muslims nowadays since non-Muslims would not fight against Muslims and some would like to live harmony with them. By zuma - 5/17/2017 3:11:15 PM



  • Quran 4:100-104 mention that non-Muslims were violent to the extent that they might give sudden attack against Muslims if they unprepared. Quran 4:100-104 (M.H. Shakir translation), “(100) And whoever flies in Allah’s way [forsakes his home to fight in Jihad], he will find in the earth many a place of refuge and abundant resources, and whoever goes forth from his house flying to Allah and His Apostle, and then death overtakes him [in Jihad], his reward is indeed with Allah and Allah is Forgiving, merciful. (101) Rodwell: And when ye go forth to war in the land, it shall be no crime in you to cut short your prayers, if ye fear lest the infidels come upon you; Verily, the infidels are your undoubted enemies! (102) And when you are among them and keep up prayer for them, let a party of them stand up with you, and let them take their arms; then when they have prostrated themselves let them go to your rear, and let another party who have not prayed come forward and pray with you, and let them take their precautions and their arms; (for those who disbelieve desire that ye may be careless of your arms and your luggage, so that they may then turn upon you with a sudden united attack…” As the phrase, those who disbelieve desire that you may be careless of your arms and your luggage, is mentioned in Quran 4:102 with the phrase, so that they may then turn upon you with a sudden united attack, it implies that Muslims in the past were in danger since non-Muslims might give sudden attack against Muslims. As a result of the danger Muslims would have faced in the past, Quran warned Muslims in the past to take precautions and arms against them as mentioned in Quran 4:102. As a result of the violence from non-Muslims, Quran demands Muslims to fight in Allay’s way so as to defend from the sudden attack from barbaric non-Muslims. By zuma - 5/16/2017 9:57:39 PM



  • Does Quran 4:89-91 support that Muslims must not associate with non-Muslims?
    Quran 4:89-91 (M.H. Shakir translation), “(89) They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah’s way; but if they turn back [to their homes], then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from them a friend or a helper.  (90) Except those who reach a people between whom and you there is an alliance, or who come to you, their hearts shrinking from fighting you or fighting their own people; and if Allah had pleased, He would have given them power over you, so that they should certainly fought you; therefore if they withdraw from you and do not fight you and offer you peace, then Allah has not given you a way against them [Allah supposedly does not allow Muslims to fight people friendly to Muslims].  You will find other…’
    The phrase, They desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, as mentioned in Quran 4:89 implies that these non-Muslims do not believe in Allah.  As these non-Muslims do not believe in Allah, these people could not be Jews or Christians or Sabians who believe in Allah.  The phrase, They desire that you should disbelieve, in Quran 4:89 implies that these non-Muslims who did not believe in Allah had  evil desire to influence Muslims to cause them not to believe in Allah.  As a result of their evil desire, Quran 4:89, “…(warned Muslims in the past) take not from among them friends…” so as to avoid them to use violence to force them to forsake their faith in Allah.  The phrase, their hearts shrinking from fighting you, in Quran 4:90 implies that these non-Muslims in the past would fight with Muslims so as to force Muslims not to believe in Allah.  Quran 4:89-91 could not be applicable to this contemporary world due to modern non-Muslims would not fight with Muslims so as to force them not to believe in Allah and some of them would like to live harmony with Muslims.
    The phrase, if they withdraw from you and do not fight you, is mentioned in Quran 4:90 with the phrase, Allah has not given you a way against them, it implies that Allah would not permit Muslims to fight with non-Muslims if they cease in fighting. By zuma - 5/16/2017 9:36:43 PM



  • Quran 3:172 (M.H. Shakir translation), “(As for) those who responded (at [the Battle of] Uhud) to the call of Allah and the Apostle after a wound had befallen them, those among them who do good (to others) and guard (against evil) shall have a great reward.”
    The phrase, those among them who do good (to others), in Quran 3:172 has spelt out the good deeds that Allah intends for Muslims.
    The phrase, guard (against evil), in Quran 3:172 demands Muslims that not to do evil deeds.  The same has been spelt out in Quran 2:81 & 39:28 as follows:
    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #81)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Yes! Whosoever earns evil and his sin has surrounded him, they are dwellers of the Fire (i.e. Hell); they will dwell therein forever.’
    (سورة الزمر, Az-Zumar, Chapter #39, Verse #28)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    An Arabic Qur'an, without any crookedness (therein) in order that they may avoid all evil which Allah has ordered them to avoid, fear Him and keep their duty to Him. By zuma - 5/16/2017 5:46:51 PM



  • Quran 3:158 supports that Muslims who are slain in the way of Allah could receive forgiveness of sin as mentioned below:

    Quran 3:156-158 (M. H. Shakir translation), “(156) O you who believe!  Be not like those who disbelieve and say of their brethren when they travel in the earth or engage in fighting: Had they been with us, they would not have died and they would not have been slain; so Allah makes this to be an intense regret in their hearts; and Allah gives life and causes death and Allah sees what you do.  (157) And if you are slain in the way of Allah or you die, certainly forgiveness from Allah and mercy is better than what they amass [what those who stay home from Jihad receive – no booty and no perks in heaven].  (158) And if indeed you die or you are slain, certainly to Allah shall you be gathered together.”

    As the phrase, those who disbelieve, is mentioned in Quran 3:156 with the phrase, engage in fighting, it implies that non-Muslims in the past liked fighting.

    As explained earlier, the way of Allah, as mentioned in Quran 2:62 is to believe in Allah and do good deeds since this is the only way could lead a person to paradise.  The phrase, slain in the way of Allah, in Quran 3:157 should be interpreted as those Muslims who were slain by non-Muslims had done good deeds in the past and were faithful to Allah.  As the phrase, if you are slain in the way of Allah, is mentioned in Quran 3:157 with the phrase, certainly forgiveness from Allah, it implies that Allah only mentions forgiveness of sins for those Muslims who had done good deeds in the past and were unfortunately slain by non-Muslims.

    By zuma - 5/16/2017 5:35:27 PM



  • Quran 3:152 only allows Muslims to kill non-Muslims by Allah’s permission.  Or in other words, if Allah disallows Muslims to kill non-Muslims, they should not kill.  The following is the quranic extract:
    Quran 3:152 (M.H. Shakir translation), ‘And certainly Allah made good to you His promise when you slew them by His [Allah’s] permission [during a Jihad battle],…’
    As the word, slew, is mentioned in Quran 3:152 with the phrase, by [Allah’s] permission, it implies that Muslims could only kill non-Muslims with Allah’s permission.
    Quran 2:193 mentions that there should not be hostility between non-Muslims and Muslims when non-Muslims cease in fighting. 
    Quran 2:193 (M.H. Shakir translation), “And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility…’
    As the phrase, if they desist, is mentioned in Quran 2:193 with the phrase, there should be no hostility, it implies that Allah gives no permission for Muslims to have hatred against non-Muslims if they would cease fighting.  As Muslims should not have hatred against non-Muslims when they cease fighting, it implies that Allah does not give permission for them to fight when non-Muslims cease fighting. 
    Modern non-Muslims do not fight with Muslims and like to live in harmony with them.  Certainly!  Allah does not give permission for Muslims to fight with non-Muslims since non-Muslims cease in fighting.
    The same is spelt out in Quran 4:90 as below:
    (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #90)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Except those who join a group, between you and whom there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with their breasts restraining from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. Had Allah willed, indeed He would have given them power over you, and they would have fought you. So IF THEY WITHDRAW FROM YOU, AND FIGHT NOT AGAINST YOU, and offer you peace, then ALLAH HAS OPENED NO WAY FOR YOU AGAINST THEM. By zuma - 5/16/2017 3:27:46 PM



  • Quran 2:193-194 and 2:216-218 provide the truth that non-Muslims in the past were violent and would fight aggressively against Muslims.  The following are the extracts:

    Quran 2:193-194 (M.H. Shakir translation), ‘And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.  The Sacred month for the sacred month and all sacred things are (under the law of) retaliation:  whoever then acts aggressively against you, inflict injury on him according to the injury he has inflicted on you and be careful (of your duty) to Allah and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).’

    The word, persecution, as mentioned in Quran 2:193 implies that Muslims were facing persecution from non-Muslims at the era.  The phrase, whoever then acts aggressively against you inflict injury on him, in Quran 2:194 implies also non-Muslims in the past exercised aggressive fighting against Muslims.  As non-Muslims fought aggressively against Muslims, Quran 2:193 demands Muslims to fight defensively with them till persecution from non-Muslims ceased.  As the phrase, if they desist, is mentioned in Quran 2:193 with the phrase, there should be no hostility except against the oppressors, it implies that there should not be any hostility between Muslims and non-Muslims if they desisted or ceased in fighting except for oppressors, or in other words, except those who continuously oppressed Muslims.  As Quran 2:195 demands Muslims not to have hostility against non-Muslims when they ceased fighting, it promotes defensive fighting instead of aggressive fighting.

    Quran 2:216-217 (M.H. Shakir translation), ‘Fighting is enjoined on you, and it is an object of dislike to you; and it may be that you dislike a thing while it is good for you, and it may be that you love a thing while it is evil for you, and Allah knows, while you do not know.  They ask you concerning the sacred month about fighting in it.  Say: Fighting in it is a grave matter, and hindering (men) from Allah’s way and denying Him, and (hindering men) from the Sacred Mosque and turning its people out of it, are still graver with Allah, and persecution is graver than slaughter; and THEY WILL NOT CEASE FIGHTING WITH YOU UNTIL THEY TURN YOU BACK FROM YOUR RELIGION, IF THEY CAN; and whoever of you turns back from his religion, then he dies while an unbeliever…’

    The phrase, they will not cease fighting with you until they turn you back from your religion, in Quran 2:217 implies that non-Muslims in the past were violent.  The reason why they fought against Muslims in the past was to turn Muslims to be unbelievers ultimately since the phrase, they turn you back from your religion, is mentioned in Quran 2:217.

    The word, unbelievers, as mentioned in Quran 2:217 should exclude those Jews or Christians or Sabians who believe in Allah since the word, unbelievers, by its word, should refer to those non-Muslims who do not believe in Allah.  Quran 2:62 even mentions that Jews and Christians and Sabians who believe in Allah and do righteous deeds will have their rewards with the Lord.

    By zuma - 5/16/2017 8:52:44 AM



  • I believe I have refuted all the quranic verses that have been brought out above to be abused by muslim extremists.  Do you have any other weird quranic or hadith verses that are hard to handle?

    By zuma - 5/15/2017 11:00:25 PM



  • Does Quran forbid Muslims to enjoy the nature and the beauty of the earth?
    No, it is not true to support since Quran 2:36 mentions that the earth is our dwelling place and it is meant for our enjoyment as a result of Allah’s creation.  The entire earth is Allah’s creation.  Should we then despise his creation even his aim is meant for our enjoyment?  The following is the extract:
    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #36)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Then the Shaitan (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."
    The phrase, We said, in Quran 2:36 should refer Muslims.  As the phrase, on earth will be, is mentioned in Quran 2:36 with the phrase, an enjoyment for a time, it implies that Quran does not forbid Muslims to enjoy Allah’s creation of this earth.
    Quran 4:77 mentions the enjoyment of this world is short.  The following is the extract:
    (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #77)-Mohsin Mohan translation:
    ‘Have you not seen those who were told to hold back their hands (from fighting) and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat but when the fighting was ordained for them, behold! a section of them fear men as they fear Allah or even more. They say: "Our Lord! Why have you ordained for us fighting? Would that You had granted us respite for a short period?" Say: "Short is the enjoyment of this world. The Hereafter is (far) better for him who fears Allah, and you shall not be dealt with unjustly even equal to a scalish thread in the long slit of a date-stone.’
    The phrase, Short is the enjoyment of this world, in Quran 4:77 does not forbid Muslims to enjoy Allah’s creation of this earth.  Should Muslims then condemn Allah’s creation of the beauty of this earth?
    Even Allah mentions that the earth will be an enjoyment for a time for Muslims.  The following is the extract:
    (سورة الأعراف, Al-A'raaf, Chapter #7, Verse #24)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘(Allah) said: "Get down, one of you is an enemy to the other [i.e. Adam, Hawwa' (Eve), and Shaitan (Satan)]. On earth will be a dwelling-place for you and an enjoyment for a time."
    As the phrase, (Allah) said, is mentioned in Quran 7:24 with the phrase, on earth will be..an enjoyment for a time, Allah does not forbid Muslims to enjoy his creation of earth.
    The same is mentioned in other quranic verses as extracted below:
    (سورة الرعد, Ar-Ra'd, Chapter #13, Verse #26)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Allah increases the provision for whom He wills, and straitens (it for whom He wills), and they rejoice in the life of the world, whereas the life of this world as compared with the Hereafter is but a brief passing enjoyment.’
    (سورة القصص, Al-Qasas, Chapter #28, Verse #60)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘And whatever you have been given is an enjoyment of the life of (this) world and its adornment, and that (Hereafter) which is with Allah is better and will remain forever. Have you then no sense?’
    (سورة القصص, Al-Qasas, Chapter #28, Verse #61)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Is he whom We have promised an excellent promise (Paradise) - which he will find true - like him whom We have made to enjoy the luxuries of the life of (this) world, then on the Day of Resurrection, he will be among those brought up (to be punished in the Hell-fire)?’
    The word, We, in Quran 28:61 should refer to Muslims.  The phrase, We have made to enjoy the luxuries of the life of (this) world, in Quran 28:61 implies that Allah does not forbid Muslims to enjoy his creation of this earth. 
    The same is mentioned in Quran 28:77:
    (سورة القصص, Al-Qasas, Chapter #28, Verse #77)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    "But seek, with that (wealth) which Allah has bestowed on you, the home of the Hereafter, and forget not your portion of lawful enjoyment in this world; and do good as Allah has been good to you, and seek not mischief in the land. Verily, Allah likes not the Mufsidun (those who commit great crimes and sins, oppressors, tyrants, mischief-makers, corrupters)."
    The phrase, forget not your portion of lawful enjoyment in this world, in Quran 28:77 implies that Allah does not forbid Muslims to enjoy his creation of this earth.
    Quran 32:6 relates the stars of beauty:
    (سورة الصافات, As-Saaffaat, Chapter #37, Verse #6)-Mohsin Khan trasnaltion:
    ‘Verily We have adorned the near heaven with the stars (for beauty).’
    Quran 27:60 even praise the creation of gardens on earth to be full of beauty and delight:
    (سورة النمل, An-Naml, Chapter #27, Verse #60)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Is not He (better than your gods) Who created the heavens and the earth, and sends down for you water (rain) from the sky, whereby We cause to grow wonderful gardens full of beauty and delight? It is not in your ability to cause the growth of their trees. Is there any ilah (god) with Allah? Nay, but they are a people who ascribe equals (to Him)! By zuma - 5/15/2017 11:38:24 AM



  • Does Quran 3:118 support that Muslims should not employ an unbeliever if there is a Muslim who can do the job or the Kuffar can never be trusted?

      "O you who believe! Do not take for intimate friends those other than your own people; they do not fall short of inflicting loss upon you; they love what distresses you; vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, and what their breasts conceal is greater still" (Quran 3:118)

     The phrase, inflicting loss upon you they love what distresses you, in Quran 3:118 implies that these non-Muslims should have agitated Muslims to cause them to be distressed.  The phrase, vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, in Quran 3:118 implies the anger that non-Muslims have upon Muslims.  Modern non-Muslims would not have hatred against Muslims and some even like to live harmony with them.  As modern non-Muslims do not have any hatred against Muslims, how could Quran 3:118 be applicable to non-Muslims in this contemporary world at the absence of their hatred upon Muslims.  This verse could only be applicable when the Prophet Muhammad was on earth since non-Muslims at that time were violent and would even kill seventy Muslims even though their purpose in approaching them was to have peace treaty with them instead of fighting.  The phrase, vehement hatred has already appeared from out of their mouths, in Quran 3:118 implies non-Muslims in the past were not only violent, but they also filled with hatred in their faces.

     As non-Muslims in this contemporary world would not have hatred against Muslims and some prefer even to live harmony with them, how could Quran 3:118 be applicable to this modern world for the fact that Quran 3:118 could only be able to apply in the past due to non-Muslims in the past were violent and was filled with hatred against Muslims.

     As Quran 3:118 could only be applicable at the era, it is irrational to use it to support that Muslims in this contemporary world should not employ an unbeliever if there is a Muslims who can do the job.

    By zuma - 5/15/2017 5:36:25 AM



  • Does the following statement seem justifiably from Quranic point of view? ------ Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, Majmua Al-Rasael Wal-Masael Al-Najdiah 4/291 “Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam, regardless of the country or the nation which rules it.

    The purpose of Islam is to set up a state on the basis of its own ideology and programme, regardless of which nation assumes the role of the standard-bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State. The above statement has contradicted against the words of Quran. Firstly, Quran demands Muslims to be peace-makers instead of trouble-makers on the earth. Yet the above statement demands Muslims to act contradictorily against the words of Quran to make mischief so as to destroy all states and governments anywhere.

     The following is the extract: (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #11)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘And when it is said to them: "make not mischief on the earth," they say: "We are only peace-makers." Secondly, Quran demands Muslims to do righteous deeds instead of evil deeds since it condemns those who do evil to hell. Yet the former statement promotes Muslims to do evil so much so to create havoc against governors and innocent residents. The following is the extract: (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #81)-Moshin Khan translation: ‘Yes! Whosoever earns evil and his sin has surrounded him, they are dwellers of the Fire (i.e. Hell); they will dwell therein forever.’ What is Islam ideology and program? The Islam Ideology and program has been spelt out vividly in the following quranic verse: (سورة هود, Hud, Chapter #11, Verse #11)-Mohsin Khan translation: ‘Except those who show patience and do righteous good deeds: those, theirs will be forgiveness and a great reward (paradise).’ The phrase, do righteous good deeds, is mentioned in Quran 11:11 demands all Muslims to do righteous deeds instead of evil deeds. Yet Muslim extremists twist the words of Quran that Islam ideology is to kill non-Muslims and to stir up havoc against their governors.

    By zuma - 5/14/2017 10:47:50 PM



  • Does Quran 129:29 support Muslims should abstain from Shirk (polytheism) and are Muwahhid (believer in oneness of God) that their Faith could not be perfect unless they have enmity and hatred in their action and speech against non-Muslims?
    Quran 129:29 (Moshin Khan translation), “Fight against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger Muhammad (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.’
    If we would interpret Quran 129:29 that Quran encourages Muslims to fight against non-Muslims, we would have found lots of contradictions with other parts of the Quran.  Firstly, the interpretation would have contradiction against Quran 4:90 in which it demands Muslims to cease in fighting even if non-Muslims would offer peace treaty with them.  The reason is simply that Muslims should continue in fighting with non-Muslims if they would have withdrawn their fight as a result of peace treaty.  Secondly, the acceptability of this interpretation would imply that Muslims must continue in fighting to make mischief on earth despite non-Muslims do not fight with them and that contradicts Quran 2:11 that mentions that Muslims should not make mischief on earth since they are merely peace-makers.  Thirdly, the interpretation would certainly contradict Quran 5:32 that demands Muslims not to kill innocent non-Muslims.
    (سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #32)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Because of that We ordained for the Children of Israel that if anyone killed a person not in retaliation of murder, or (and) to spread mischief in the land - it would be as if he killed all mankind, and if anyone saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of all mankind. And indeed, there came to them Our Messengers with clear proofs, evidence, and signs, even then after that many of them continued to exceed the limits (e.g. by doing oppression unjustly and exceeding beyond the limits set by Allah by committing the major sins) in the land! ‘
    The phase, all mankind, in Quran 5:32 covers all the Muslims and non-Muslims.  Thus, this verse forbids Muslims to kill non-Muslims and even moderate Muslims.
    The problem of interpretation lies upon the word, fight.  If the word, fight, in Quran 5:32 has to be interpreted as defensive fighting, the entire sentence would turn up to be like:
    Quran 129:29 (Moshin Khan translation), “Fight (defensively) against those who (1) believe not in Allah, (2) nor in the Last Day, (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger Muhammad (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.’
    Once the word, defensively, is added in Quran 129:29, the entire verse would turn up to be justifiable since Muslims only have to fight defensively against those who believe not in Allah.  As Muslims could only fight defensively against non-Muslims, Muslims should only fight if non-Muslims first fight with them.  If non-Muslims cease in fighting, Muslims should cease in fighting too. By zuma - 5/14/2017 10:14:05 PM



  • Does Quran 18:9 encourage Muslims to have aggressive fighting among themselves?  No, it is not true to support it since Quran 85:10 forbids Muslims to put believing men and believing into trial by torturing them, i.e. beating them and causing them to be in pain.

     

    The following is the extract:

     

    (سورة البروج, Al-Burooj, Chapter #85, Verse #10)-Mohsin Khan translation:

    ‘Verily, those who put into trial the believing men and believing women (by torturing them and burning them), and then do not turn in repentance (to Allah), then they will have the torment of hell, and they will have the punishment of the burning Fire.’

     

    As Quran 85:10 forbids Muslims to put other Muslims into trial, the so-called, fight, in Quran 18:9 should be meant for defensive fighting instead of aggressive fighting.  Defensive fighting here refers to Muslims are themselves under attack and that is why they defend themselves in order to protect themselves.  Aggressive fighting is the reverse since they fight even other moderate Muslims do not fight with them.  They blow down their mosques even though these moderate Muslims do not do any evil to them.

    By zuma - 5/14/2017 6:28:16 PM



  • Should Quran 49:9 be used to support Muslims should abstain from Shirk (polytheism) and are Muwahhid (believer in oneness of God), their Faith could not be perfect unless they have enmity and hatred in their action and speech against non-Muslims?
    (سورة الحجرات, Al-Hujuraat, Chapter #49, Verse #9)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘And if two parties or groups among the believers fall to fighting, then make peace between them both. But if one of them outrages against the other, then fight you (all) against the one that which outrages till it complies with the Command of Allah. Then if it complies, then make reconciliation between them justly, and be equitable. Verily! Allah loves those who are the equitable.’
    The phrase, two parties or groups among the believers, in Quran 49:9 refers to Muslims themselves and have nothing to do with non-Muslims.  As the phrase, if one of them outrages the other, is mentioned subsequently the phrase, two parties or groups among the believers, it gives the implication that the entire verse for Quran 49:9 has nothing to do with non-Muslims.  As the entire verse has nothing to do with non-Muslims, it is erroneous to use it to support that Muslims should abstain from Shirk (polytheism) and that their Faith could not be perfect unless they have enmity and hatred in their action and speech against non-Muslims.
    If the entire verse in Quran 49:9 does not promote evil relationship between Muslims and non-Muslims, does this verse encourage Muslims to fight against each other?  No, it is not true to support it since the phrase, outrages against the other, is mentioned above.  Again fighting here is meant for defensive fighting instead of aggressive fighting.  The phrase, if one of them outrages against the other, in Quran 49:9 implies that Muslims should defend if the other Muslims would outrage against them.  As moderate Muslims in this contemporary world would like to have peace with other Muslims and would not like to fight among Muslims themselves, this verse would serve no value to them in reality.
    No doubt Quran 49:9 might seem to encourage fighting among Muslims, it would never demand Muslims to do evil so as to kill other Muslims.  The following is the extract:
    (سورة النساء, An-Nisaa, Chapter #4, Verse #93)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is hell to abide therein; and the Wrath and the Curse of Allah are upon him, and a great punishment is prepared for him.’
    As ISIS kills moderate Muslims, their destiny would be in the hell as spelt out in Quran 4:93.  As these people would turn up to be in the hell as they kill moderate Muslims, they are indeed un-islamic.
    Those non-Muslims, i.e. Christians and Jews and Sabians, who believe in Allah and do good deeds would have their place in paradise and yet these people who proclaim to be themselves Muslims would have their destiny in hell since they kill innocent non-Muslims as well as moderate Muslims. By zuma - 5/14/2017 5:50:13 PM



  • Does Quran 120:54 support Muslims should abstain from Shirk [polytheism] and are Muwahhid (believer in oneoness of God), their Faith could not be perfect unless they have enmity and hatred in their action and speech against non-Muslims?
    (سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #54)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘O you who believe! Whoever from among you turns back from his religion (Islam), Allah will bring a people whom He will love and they will love Him; humble towards the believers, stern towards the disbelievers, FIGHTING IN THE WAY OF ALLAH, and never fear of the blame of the blamers. That is the grace of Allah which He bestows on whom He wills. And Allah is All-Sufficient for His creatures' needs, All-Knower.’
    (سورة المائدة, Al-Maaida, Chapter #5, Verse #54)-Saheeh – English translation:
    ‘O you who have believed, whoever of you should revert from his religion - Allah will bring forth [in place of them] a people He will love and who will love Him [who are] humble toward the believers, powerful against the disbelievers; they strive IN THE CAUSE OF ALLAH and do not fear the blame of a critic. That is the favor of Allah; He bestows it upon whom He wills. And Allah is all-encompassing and Knowing.’
    The phrases, the way of Allah, and, in the cause of Allah, is spelt out in Quran 5:54 above.  The way or the cause of Allah should refer to those Muslims who believe in Allah and do righteous deeds instead of evil deeds since Quran 2:18 condemns those who do evil deeds to hell as spelt out below:
    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #81)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Yes, whoever earns evil and his sin has encompassed him - those are the companions of the Fire; they will abide therein eternally.’
    As Quran 2:81 demands Muslims not to do evil and Quran 5:54 demands Muslims to strive in the cause of Allah or fight in the way of Allah, Muslims should adopt defensive fighting instead of aggressive fighting since all evil would lead to hell as spelt out in Quran 2:81. By zuma - 5/14/2017 3:03:52 PM



  • It looks so funny that people still believe in such primitive and irrational ideas. It is high time that scientific temper and critical thinking must take roots among masses. By Ashok Sharma - 5/14/2017 10:50:51 AM



  • Is it true to use Quran 8:12 to support that Muslims must abstain from Shirk [polytheism] and are Muwahhid (believer in oneness of God), their Faith cannot be perfect unless they have enmity and hatred in their action and speech against non-Muslims?

    Quran 8:12 (Mohsin Khan translation), “(Remember) when your Lord reveal to the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed, I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”

    Let’s meditate Quran 8:11 before jumping into conclusion as given in Quran 8:12 as follows:

    (سورة الأنفال, Al-Anfaal, Chapter #8, Verse #13)-Yusuf Ali translation:

    ‘This because they contended against Allah and His Messenger: If any contend against Allah and His Messenger, Allah is strict in punishment.’

    The phrase, contend against, in The Free Dictionary is defined as fighting against someone.  As the phrase, any contend against Allah and His Messenger, is mentioned in Quran 75:13, it implies that those who have disbelieved as mentioned in Quran 75:12 should be those non-Muslims who have fought against Allah and His Messenger.  Or in other words, Quran 75:12 should be interpreted as the Lord would reveal to the angels to cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved so as to strike them over the necks and smite over all their fingers and toes due to they have fought against Allah and His Messenger.  If the interpretation would be so, it is erroneous to use it to apply into this modern society since non-Muslims in this contemporary world would not fight against Allah and Muslims since they would like to live in harmony with Muslims.

    Let’s meditate Quran 8:13 in Moshin Khan translation as well as Saheeh 13 translation as below:

    (سورة الأنفال, Al-Anfaal, Chapter #8, Verse #13)-Mohsin Khan translation:

    ‘This is because they defied and disobeyed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever defies and disobeys Allah and His Messenger, then verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.’

    (سورة الأنفال, Al-Anfaal, Chapter #8, Verse #13)-Saheeh – English translation:

    ‘That is because they opposed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger - indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.’

    Let’s assume that both Moshin Khan translation and Saheeh translation are correct that Quran 8:13 has nothing to do with fighting but as a result of their disobeying and opposing from Allah and His Messenger.

    Even if Quran 8:13 should be interpreted as disobeying and opposing from Allah and His Messenger, those non-Muslims in Quran 8:12 should not refer to those Jews and Christians and Sabians who believe in Allah and the Last Day and do righteous deeds since Quran 2:62 supports that all these non-Muslims would have their reward with the Lord with no fear and grieve.  The following is the extract:

    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #62)-Mohsin Khan translation:

    ‘Verily! Those who believe and those who are jews and christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.’

    The reason is simply that the phrase, on them shall be no fear nor shall they grieve, in Quran 2:62 implies that Allah would not execute severe punishment against these non-Muslims who believe in Allah and do good deeds.  As Allah would enable these non-Muslims to have no fear or grieve, the phrase, I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, in Quran 8:12 should not be interpreted as Allah will cast terror into the hearts of these non-Muslims instead, Quran 8:12 should be interpreted to those non-Muslims in the past who liked to act contrarily against Allah and His Messenger to the extent in fighting against them since Allah does not reject all non-Muslims but only those who act contrarily against Allah by fighting against him in the past.  If the interpretation could be so, it is erroneous to use it to apply into this modern society since non-Muslims in this contemporary world would not fight against Allah and his Messengers nowadays.

    This verse certainly should exclude some non-Muslims who are ignorant of the words of Quran.  Their ignorance of the Quran would cause them not to be aware of the existence of Allah.  As these non-Muslims do not read the words of Quran, it is irrational to use this verse to condemn these people to act against Quran due to their ignorance of the words of Allah in Quran.  They do not believe in Allah due to they do not like the existence of Allah in reality.  How could their ignorance of the existence of Allah to be treated as their disobedience to Allah?  Thus, Quran 8:12 could not be applicable to them due to their disbelief in Allah is the result of their ignorance of Allah instead of to be treated as their continuous disobedience to Allah.

    By zuma - 5/14/2017 9:09:45 AM



  • Is it true to use Quran 8:12 to support that Muslims must abstain from Shirk [polytheism] and are Muwahhid (believer in oneness of God), their Faith cannot be perfect unless they have enmity and hatred in their action and speech against non-Muslims?
    Quran 8:12 (Mohsin Khan translation), “(Remember) when your Lord reveal to the angels, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed, I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes.”
    Let’s meditate Quran 8:11 before jumping into conclusion as given in Quran 8:12 as follows:
    (سورة الأنفال, Al-Anfaal, Chapter #8, Verse #13)-Yusuf Ali translation:
    ‘This because they contended against Allah and His Messenger: If any contend against Allah and His Messenger, Allah is strict in punishment.’
    The phrase, contend against, in The Free Dictionary is defined as fighting against someone.  As the phrase, any contend against Allah and His Messenger, is mentioned in Quran 75:13, it implies that those who have disbelieved as mentioned in Quran 75:12 should be those non-Muslims who have fought against Allah and His Messenger.  Or in other words, Quran 75:12 should be interpreted as the Lord would reveal to the angels to cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved so as to strike them over the necks and smite over all their fingers and toes due to they have fought against Allah and His Messenger.  If the interpretation would be so, it is erroneous to use it to apply into this modern society since non-Muslims in this contemporary world would not fight against Allah and Muslims since they would like to live in harmony with Muslims.
    Let’s meditate Quran 8:13 in Moshin Khan translation as well as Saheeh 13 translation as below:
    (سورة الأنفال, Al-Anfaal, Chapter #8, Verse #13)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘This is because they defied and disobeyed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever defies and disobeys Allah and His Messenger, then verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.’
    (سورة الأنفال, Al-Anfaal, Chapter #8, Verse #13)-Saheeh – English translation:
    ‘That is because they opposed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever opposes Allah and His Messenger - indeed, Allah is severe in penalty.’
    Let’s assume that both Moshin Khan translation and Saheeh translation are correct that Quran 8:13 has nothing to do with fighting but as a result of their disobeying and opposing from Allah and His Messenger.
    Even if Quran 8:13 should be interpreted as disobeying and opposing from Allah and His Messenger, those non-Muslims in Quran 8:12 should not refer to those Jews and Christians and Sabians who believe in Allah and the Last Day and do righteous deeds since Quran 2:62 supports that all these non-Muslims would have their reward with the Lord with no fear and grieve.  The following is the extract:
    (سورة البقرة, Al-Baqara, Chapter #2, Verse #62)-Mohsin Khan translation:
    ‘Verily! Those who believe and those who are jews and christians, and Sabians, whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day and does righteous good deeds shall have their reward with their Lord, on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve.’
    The reason is simply that the phrase, on them shall be no fear nor shall they grieve, in Quran 2:62 implies that Allah would not execute severe punishment against these non-Muslims who believe in Allah and do good deeds.  As Allah would enable these non-Muslims to have no fear or grieve, the phrase, I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, in Quran 8:12 should not be interpreted as Allah will cast terror into the hearts of these non-Muslims instead, Quran 8:12 should be interpreted to those non-Muslims in the past who liked to act contrarily against Allah and His Messenger to the extent in fighting against them since Allah does not reject all non-Muslims but only those who act contrarily against Allah by fighting against him in the past.  If the interpretation could be so, it is erroneous to use it to apply into this modern society since non-Muslims in this contemporary world would not fight against Allah and his Messengers nowadays.
    This verse certainly should exclude some non-Muslims who are ignorant of the words of Quran.  Their ignorance of the Quran would cause them not to be aware of the existence of Allah.  As these non-Muslims do not read the words of Quran, it is irrational to use this verse to condemn these people to act against Quran due to their ignorance of the words of Allah in Quran.  They do not believe in Allah due to they do not like the existence of Allah in reality.  How could their ignorance of the existence of Allah to be treated as their disobedience to Allah?  Thus, Quran 8:12 could not be applicable to them due to their disbelief in Allah is the result of their ignorance of Allah instead of to be treated as their continuous disobedience to Allah. By zuma - 5/14/2017 9:09:42 AM



  • Modern Terrorist attacks are simply manifestations of the radical wahhabi ideology, the symptoms of the threat, not the threat itself. The global policies that ignore the ideological driving force will fail, because they are not addressing the real menace.  

    By Ghulam Ghaus Siddiqi - 9/7/2016 8:23:11 AM



  • How many of the commentators of this forum have an idea or mechanism that can uplift a society from one level to another? I have none, but 19th century philosopher Friedrich Hegel explains that societies evolved through a form of dialectic. Prevalent ideas (theses) will not change unless they are challenged by contradictory ideas (antitheses). This will create a conflict. The contradiction is then reconciled by third proposition (synthesis). The synthesis then will become the new thesis until it is challenged by a new antithesis and the process will perpetuate itself.

    Since the world is constantly changing and therefore old ideas must be challenged and where there is freedom of speech truth will eventually prevail. The alternative would be to ban new ideas and protect the old ones by force. The Islamic societies follow the latter model. The laws of the 7th century Arabia are canonized for eternity since they are given by a deity and no one can change them.

    Credit should be given to Sultan Shahin for attempting a form of dialectic by criticizing Wahhabism, Salafism, Sufi scholars, seventh century mind-set and refuting Jihadis’ xenophobic supremacist Millenarian theses.

    Some of you may wish to know how the second great prophet of Islam gently and authoritatively confronted Judaism and Old Testament violent versus. It is a form of dialectic. A few examples.

    “You have heard that it was said to those of old, ‘You shall not murder’ but I say to you, that whoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of judgement. Whoever says ‘You fool’ shall be in danger of hell fire.”

    “You have heard that ‘You shall not commit adultery’. But I say to you that whoever looks at a woman to lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart”

    “You have heard that it was said ‘An eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth’. But I tell you not to resist an evil person. But whoever slaps you on your right cheek, turn the other to him also.”

    By Royalj - 7/3/2016 6:38:23 AM



  • The only way out is to denounce all religions. They have no place in a civilized society.  By Sarfaraz Niazi - 12/31/2015 5:04:47 PM



  • janab faujdar saheb
    while i agree that it should begin from a mosque, but let us see who dares to do it.
    and which sufi will stand by the side of sultan shahin?
    in fact his sufi colleagues have no such inclination as they belong to ahl e sunnat wal jamat.
    they refused to comment on Naseer saheb's work either in favor or disfavor.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 6/23/2015 11:27:45 AM



  • Aadab janaab faujdaar saheb.

    True. all efforts of akbar were zeroed by another sufi sahikh ahmed sarhindi the mujaddid. Akabar's son jahangir slaughtered cows in the presence of Hindus. this was the result of shaikh sarhindi.
    how many mainstream Muslims accepted deen e ilahi? 
    baaqi jo kami rah gayi thee woh shawaliuulah ne poori kardee.
    in fact akbar is more popular among hindus than Muslims.
    most of the Muslim scholars didn't like or approved deen e ilhai.
    this was confined to court. it died in the court with akbar.

    can you please tell me which sufi of repute accepted deen e ilahi?
    By rational mohammed yunus - 6/23/2015 11:20:55 AM



  • Janab rational Sahib-Aadab. 
             Sheikh Mubarak and his son Abu-L-Allami showed the way of Deen-Ilahi to Akbar and against this ideology and the power of the great Mughal  sheikh Ahmed rose alone and people began to join him. Because the voice of agitation rose from a hut, as this a voice against kingdom of mullahes should rise from a Khanqah, then it will be effective. 
    By Mohammad Ishaque Foujdar - 6/23/2015 8:55:02 AM



  • Foujdar saheb aadab - 6/22/2015 7:36:13 AM

    tajwwez to aap ki bahut khoob hai lekin
    sar bachega tabhi to bolenge naa

    kar deejiye nishandahi us masjid ki
    jahan par,
    bolne ki ijaazat ho, aur sar qalam na ho

    kiy karenge aap gar islam ki devi khoon maangto ho


    By rational mohammed yunus - 6/22/2015 8:42:57 PM



  • janab Sultan Shahin Sahib Aadab. 
       What you are doing from this platform is a appreciative struggle of bring a revolutionize change into stale Islamic concept, but your this forum has converted into a place of  mental luxury and entertainment for a few of educated people. Your motive is good but UNO is not a suitable place for bringing a grass-root change in the Muslim community. I think, this work should be started from a pulpit of a small village mosque. Not from a luxurious air conditioned auditorium. please dare to come on the Muslim  public platform.     
    By Mohammad Ishaque Foujdar - 6/22/2015 7:36:13 AM



  • Thab tak Maqaam ibrahim pe nahi pohochoge Hal nahi milega. By Ibrahim Mohammed - 5/11/2015 10:56:21 AM



  •  Sultan Shahin sab, May people like you live long to bring semblance of tolerance, correct interpretation of holy Quran, coexistence, reforms in madrasas, re-education of kazis / maulanas in the masjid. We love your step in this direction. By Udaya Sankar - 5/11/2015 9:36:18 AM



  •  Good thought.., but Nobody from Muslim Community can come forward , as he/she will be declared an Apostate under their Blasphemy law...!!! By Anil Kumar Shukla - 5/11/2015 5:07:46 AM



  • if you where been neglected and justice denied to u.. then sure u will turn a traitor.. at least we Muslims didn't became traitor. we r just expressing our anger... betraying the country is not in our blood... if u r not satisfied with my views then go and check traitors list who were passing the secrets of this country to ISI... start from ISRO espionage case to latest "Navy War Room" leakage case....

    By Shamim Ali - 4/23/2015 3:11:28 PM



  •  Let me ask one question to all i am a Muslim nd i have to form an Islamic constitution nd secular one as Islam is complete way of life. Now if somebody stops me for doin the same what should I do

    By Mudasir Iqbal - 4/23/2015 1:55:12 PM



  •  This page is not Islamic. By Yazid Ierna - 4/22/2015 8:25:59 AM



  •  Why this jihad? From whom they want to attain this? Is it by eliminating innocent people who do not know what this jihad is......... ? Is it for making all the people of the world, Muslims? . We know that these things will only bring misery and agony and nothing but a chaotic situation. Let us not become a prey to this. Let us live in harmony.

    By Kunjusankaran Bhavani Mukundan - 4/20/2015 11:58:12 PM



  • Answer A solution without A complaint: *Many political Muslims you will see complaining' agitating' protesting' politicising against America 'Israel etc for disaster of Muslim Nations!!

    But no one come with a solution for Muslim worlds prosperities!!"They r just sucks who don't want to speak peace development' technology and education etc for their people..they have stupid policies of complaining... They want people children should die and they just do pity complaining games on coffee and cigarette!!!But they don't have any Idea to lead Muslims towards success and prosperity!! Isn't it strange truth???

    By Asef Ahemad Kazi - 4/20/2015 11:52:33 PM



  • @Pervez Ahmed, Well said brother.

    By Abdullah Al Mamun Choudhury - 4/20/2015 3:13:34 PM



  •  best way to handle terrorism is to burn the bodies of terrorist killed !!! automatically "religion-less terrorism" will subside !!!

    By Uchhrang Jethwa - 4/20/2015 3:09:10 PM



  • @ Pervez Ahmed, it's not the time to define terrorism,,,, it's the time for Muslims to stop terrorism

    By Vivek Srivastava - 4/20/2015 3:06:16 PM



  • Somebody is selling them arms and somebody is buying oil from them, why can not that be stopped, one can not wait for mind-set to change, World government is not taking the threat seriously. Big brother is enjoying the bloodbath. By Zahid Latif - 4/20/2015 3:04:30 PM



  • The difference between Jihad and Terrorism is covered in the following articles:

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/20/2015 6:37:31 AM



  • Mr. Sultan Shahin, you must clear the difference between Jihad and terrorism on international platform. Please stop the wrong propaganda of a Qur'anic Term.

    "Jihad" is a Qur'anic term and the Holy Quran provides its definition also."And strive for Allah with endeavour which is His right." Thus Jihad is only sincere struggle against wrong for right. fighting permission is given in the condition of "Those who have been driven from their homes unjustly only because they said: Our Lord is Allah." It is Jihad. But western country is the Term Jihad is using instead terrorism deliberately, and we are following them.

    By Mohammed Ishaque Foujdar - 4/20/2015 4:44:51 AM



  • First we should define 'Terrorism' and its different kinds. Thereafter the definition of 'Terrorist'. Next who is more inflicted to terrorism? Who suffered more due to terrorism? What is state sponsored terrorism and its different kinds?
    What kind of immediate relief is given to a person related to another religion and affected by state sponsored terrorism in the name of secularism or other isms? To terrorise a person or a group of persons mentally is also a severe kind of terrorism and more worse than bodily harm. By Pervez Ahmed - 4/20/2015 4:40:24 AM



  • Hello Anil Kumar Shukla, Rana Chatterjee, Prakash Pandey, Manish Singh & Sanjay Narain Saigal, 

     

    Greetings Gentlemen!

     

    Respecting your viewpoints, I therefore, earnestly request you to reflect upon the two articles which has just been posted by me.

     

    Guess what! It sure will be nice for all of you, to at least make a sincere attempt to understand one of the major causes of terrorism too? Merely saying, to ban Islam is simply unwise.

     

    If most of you insist that banning is the final solution, then, why not enlighten me as to how you would convey such a verdict to 1.5 billion followers of Islam? Does anyone of you know how to make a convincing argument to the Muslims?   

     

    Hearing “One-Sided” negative news will make most of you to pass such remarks. Isn’t it high time to at least read all three sides of the story, that is, Jewish, Christians and Muslims. Let’s say, those belonging to the three Abrahamic faiths.

     

    By the way, if a Jew and a Christian can give a fair and balanced opinion, then why should it be so much difficult for those in India to be judicious in making their comments about the religion of Islam. The problem is, “If the goons are on the loose, then, so are the loons.” One should not let the “Uneducated Brutes” and “Intellectual Bigots” rule the world. Am I right or wrong, gentlemen?    

     

    Awaiting the favor of your early reply.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    A Pen1  www.myfellowmuslims.com

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/20/2015 12:21:59 AM



  • ISLAMIC EXTREMISM HAVE MORE TO DO WITH THE WEST

     

    Islam is a religion, which for most of the centuries it has been practiced, has professed tolerance. Its non-ecclesiastical structure has made it easy for some to interpret its tenets in varying and sometimes very intolerant ways, as Islamic State or al-Qaida have infamously demonstrated. Nevertheless, the West has been guilty itself of confusing what is written in the texts with the practices implemented by terrorist groups and by some exalted imam who use religion as a pretext to commit crimes against humanity. This is evidently unfair and wrong. Would we ever confuse the massacre of 2,900 Palestinian refugees at the Sabra and Shatila Camp in Beirut by Christian Phalangist militias in September 1982 with the words of Jesus Christ and his teachings of peace? It is very doubtful. The episode, classified by the Assembly of the United Nations as genocide, was documented by photographers who clearly described the perpetrators as Christians because they were brandishing crucifixes during the massacre.

     

    Islam, which represents more than a billion people of every race, nationality and culture, as well as being a religion is also a lifestyle. The overwhelming majority of Muslims profess a religion of peace, mercy, and forgiveness that has nothing to do with the violence of Islamic State, or al-Shabaab in Somalia and Kenya, or Boko Haram. Moreover, only 18% of Muslims reside in the Arab world – the majority is scattered in every corner of the earth. Muslims believe in the chain of prophets starting with Adam and including Noah, Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Job, Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon, Elias, Jonah, John the Baptist and Jesus. When discussing Islam, therefore, it is important to avoid making the now all too common link to terrorism. Perhaps it is even wrong to speak of “Islamic terrorism,” especially as the modern manifestations of Islamic extremism have more to do with the West than with Mecca, having their roots in the Afghanistan of the late eighties and early nineties, with the full financial and military support of the United States and some Arab Gulf countries.

     

    Alessandro Bruno

    Terrorism And Fundamentalism Not Exclusive To Islam – Analysis

     

    Geopoliticalmonitor.com

    April 17, 2015

     

      www.myfellowmuslims.com

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/20/2015 12:14:50 AM



  • THINK MUSLIMS HAVEN’T CONDEMNED ISIS? THINK AGAIN

     

    Stereotypes about Muslims are as corrosive as stereotypes about Jews. Yet, to my shame, in the past few months, I’ve heard Jews call Islam an “evil, bloodthirsty religion” and accuse “the Muslims” of being “animals,” “savages” and “uncivilized.” I’ve also read warnings of an imminent Holy War and endless demands for imams and other Muslims to speak out against their militants.

     

    In fact, many of their leaders have done so but have been ignored, from the full-page ad in The New York Times on January 11 by Muslims Against Islamism, to the “46 Examples of Muslim Outrage about Paris Shootings that Fox News Can’t Seem to Find” collected by Katie Halper at RawStory. Beliefnet published another compilation of denunciations of ISIS by major Islamic groups and religious authorities in “Think Muslims Haven’t Condemned ISIS? Think Again.”

     

    Only prejudice, in this case Islamophobia, can explain why people insist that every Muslim answer for jihadist extremists but not that every German answer for Hitler, Himmler and Mengele; or that every descendant of the pioneers answer for massacres of Native Americans; or that every white Southerner atone for the grim abuses of white slave owners; or that every heterosexual answer for straight homophobic killers. Not every male is expected to do penance for men who sexually abuse little girls, beat and murder their wives or earn billions from violent pornography, prostitution and human trafficking.

     

    Should every Jew be loathed and feared because Baruch Goldstein gunned down 29 unarmed Palestinian Muslim worshippers in a mosque in Hebron? Should we have to answer for the Jewish fanatics who kidnapped a 16-year-old Arab, beat him with a wrench, forced him to drink gasoline and torched him? Should any Jew be victimized by anti-Semites because some people object to events in Israel?

     

    Letty Cottin Pogrebin

    Islamophobia, The Flip Side of Anti-Semitism

     

    Moment

    March 2015

     

     

      www.myfellowmuslims.com

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/20/2015 12:12:05 AM



  • Why not just ban Islam. like Nazism was uprooted, this too needs similar uproot meant. By Rana Chatterjee - 4/19/2015 4:49:56 PM



  • "Extremism is caused by corrupt interpretation of the Quran" says expert. By Miftar Ahmed - 4/19/2015 4:48:32 PM



  •  mafhoom of hadith 'paradise lies under shade of sword' By Hanan BoOker - 4/19/2015 4:47:38 PM



  • Moderate Muslims don't refute or oppose the activities of Radical jihadis , silently presumes them to be involved with the Radicals ....!!! By Anil Kumar Shukla - 4/19/2015 4:46:47 PM



  •  There is no Jihadist challenge in the world - it only exists in the Western imagination. If there is any challenge in the Middle East it is against Western imperialism. By Percy Shiva - 4/19/2015 4:45:54 PM



  •  Muslims should be explained the true meaning of jihad. By Idris Khan - 4/18/2015 4:19:42 PM



  • Till you reform extremely violent scriptures how can you be peaceful. As scriptural injunctions provide the moral pedestal to terrorists. By Sanjay Narain Saigal - 4/18/2015 4:18:42 PM



  • But how can you change the verdicts of terrorism and destruction for non-muslims. By Prakash Pandey - 4/18/2015 8:22:58 AM



  • Congrats indian society we (all indians) will also with u to fight against these bleedy jihadis nd who against our india - -JAIHIND
    By Abhiram Asok R Sreekuttan - 4/18/2015 8:20:40 AM



  • "Jíhad" aur "Terrorism" 2 different thing he. Jihad means Kisi Goal ko hasil korne k lia Jaan thur koushish korna. Aur terrorism means dusro ko marna pitna, dusro ki dilo me dhar payda korna. Islam se Terrorist ki koi sammand nahi he Jo terrorist he Woi #Musolman nahi he By Ahmed Mustafa - 4/18/2015 6:57:24 AM



  •  Real teaching of Islam and modern day terrorism....... .............first....a Muslim or group of Muslims who kills an innocent human being is killer of whole humanity......second..a Muslim or group of Muslims who kills people of other state to which its govt. have peace agreement is rejected from the circle of islam ....third...a muslim or group of muslims who kills people indiscriminately irrespective of good' bad. women. children is also rejected from the circle of islam...a muslim or group of muslims who rebels against its islamic govt..is also rejected from islam......4th..a muslim or group muslims who declare war against king..president..pm whatever and disrupt peace of the country for its selfish means and greed of power is also rejected from Islam......now modern day jehad like ISIS and Huthi rebels..Alshabab are not Islamic in character they have been rejected by scholars of islam and by Saudi govt which is the epicentre of islam....these terrorist organisations are not based on Islamic laws indeed they have little and raw Islamic knowledge they work on Newton's third law of motion" to every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"...it is a natural phenomenon when we disturb a community with external influence the same habitate ll develop into a new community with some extraordinary characters alien to the habitate...same is the case with modern world ..powerful nations are manipulating peaceful states according to their tastes by wars and conspiracies and civil wars...this is creating a society with extraordinary characters in and these disturbed habitates become havens for them to grow and express...so', this terrorism is due to alien not related to any old tradition it is invented by modern day super powers ..

    By Mehraj Udin - 4/18/2015 6:56:19 AM



  • Shahin Sb,

    There are 7 postings between 12:43:51 PM to 12:48:51 PM with different names but using same format.

    And again 4 postings between 2:03:36 PM and 2:07:26 PM

    This is becoming a regular feature in this thread, You will find the same pattern earlier also.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/16/2015 11:32:32 PM



  •  One sane voice in the midst of crores of insanes. By RS Gopal - 4/16/2015 2:07:26 PM



  • But how can you change the verdicts of terrorism and destruction for non-muslims. By Prakash Pandey - 4/16/2015 2:05:17 PM



  •  Moderate muslims don't refute or oppose the activities of Radical jihadis , silently presumes them to be involved with the Radicals ....!!! By Anil Kumar Shukla - 4/16/2015 2:03:36 PM



  • Till you reform extremely violent scriptures how can you be peaceful. As scriptural injunctions provide the moral pedestal to terrorists By Sanjay Narain Saigal - 4/16/2015 12:48:51 PM



  • While the Islamic followers fall short of a good mentor the evil of the Baghdadis take over. By Krishnan Nathan - 4/16/2015 12:48:10 PM



  •  If you drive a dog or a cat to a corner, it would bite and attack, so why deny Muslims the right to seek revenge from those who have harmed them. But I don'tt approve of killing unconcerned innocent citizens. Direct the ire against those who are responsible for your destruction. Muslims howsoever aggrieved have no right to harm the innocents, whosoever they may be. By Zamiruddin Ahmad - 4/16/2015 12:47:24 PM



  • Sultan Shaheen is working on a project against Islam. He is an agent of the enemies of Islam. His sole aim is to distort the true image of Islam to please his masters in India and abroad. In fact Islam itself is a bête noire for him. He wants to propagate altogether a different religion in the name Islam. May be a new "Deen e Ilahi".
    By Mahmood Alam - 4/16/2015 12:46:36 PM



  • One sane voice in the midst of crores of insanes. By RS Gopal - 4/16/2015 12:45:52 PM



  • First we should define 'Terrorism' and its different kinds. Thereafter the definition of 'Terrorist'. Next who is more inflicted to terrorism? Who suffered more due to terrorism? What is state sponsored terrorism and its different kinds? What kind of immediate relief is given to a person related to another religion and affected by state sponsored terrorism in the name of secularism or other isms? To terrorise a person or a group of persons mentally is also a savere kind of terrorism and more worse than bodily harm. By Pervez Ahmed - 4/16/2015 12:45:23 PM



  • Welcome! we need to raise voice against the jihadi cult and sudden mushrooming of wild practices and postures defacing Islam. I am ready to walk extra mile for this great cause to save Islam from fanatics and dogmatics. We need to popularise improved and simple ways and practices. By Sharique Hayat - 4/16/2015 12:43:51 PM



  • You need to change your title "New Age Islam" first.
    When the beginning is wrong how terrible the journey will be.
    You really have a terrible line and how terribul your intentions be.
    It is not only your problem but with most of the so called moderate Muslims, who only want to live and see the Islam of their own choice and of their own taste but people like you will never be successful in their designs.
    Just a advice to you
    Leave Islam what it is,change yourself rather than trying to change the Islam.


    By Arshad hussain - 4/16/2015 6:18:36 AM



  • Welcome! It's good sign. By Sunil Singh - 4/15/2015 11:24:55 AM



  • New Age Islam???? what was wrong with old one? i do not think this page worth following By Muhammad Uzair - 4/15/2015 11:24:09 AM



  • Plz dont ignore it. By Bhatt Tariq - 4/15/2015 11:22:51 AM



  • Presently, the achievements of scientific insight are resurrecting beyond the process of Nature, and the graces of spirituality are descending to a dangerous abyss.
    PLEASE SIGN AND PROMOTE THIS PETITION to prevent the further rise of hate religious campaigns and rescue humanity from the shadow of Nuclear weapons. change.org/petitions/a-policy-for-united-nation-to-reduce-the-cost-of-the-war-on-terrorism-unify-all-the-religious-definitions-within-scientific-insight-and-history   By Ajay Singh - 4/15/2015 11:21:28 AM



  • Muslims must follow khatamun nabi muhammed rasoolullah (s) not Saudi or any other
    Create world shoora council, choose ameerul muhmineen, follow him . DONT SPEAK ABOUT DHEEN, ACTION IS ISLAM . MUSLIM'S NO NEED ANY OTHERS . WORLD SHOORA CONCIL MUST . Re
    move name SAUDI ARABIA .
    CREAT ISMAEL ARABIA .
    WHO IS SAUD ?
    If you wanna learn about imaan insha allah soon read Ghazwa E Hind . Then you can understood about imaan . It will help you to maintain nufs.
    By Ibrahim Mohammed Yesh - 4/14/2015 2:10:33 PM



  • These are craps its all happening because of one reason ..these guys want to go to fictitious paradise nothing ..these paradise seekers are problem of their own..No one can change them , they will remain same..even after 100 years even after 1000 years By Manish Singh - 4/14/2015 2:07:21 PM



  • are bhai simpl sa bat ka koi jawab dega. hum log jinda kitne din rahenge. By Baba Jena - 4/14/2015 2:06:09 PM



  •  Sultan Shahin is working on a project against Islam. He is an agent of the enemies of Islam. His sole aim is to distort the true image of Islam to please his masters in India and abroad. In fact Islam itself is a bête noire for him. He wants to propagate altogether a different religion in the name Islam. May be a new "Deen e Ilahi". By Mahmood Alam - 4/14/2015 2:05:02 PM



  •  First we should define 'Terrorism' and its different kinds. Thereafter the definition of 'Terrorist'. Next who is more inflicted to terrorism? Who suffered more due to terrorism? What is state sponsored terrorism and its different kinds? What kind of immediate relief is given to a person related to another religion and affected by state sponsored terrorism in the name of secularism or other isms?

    To terrorise a person or a group of persons mentally is also a severe kind of terrorism and more worse than bodily harm.

    By Pervez Ahmed - 4/14/2015 2:02:40 PM



  • We must change our image.Well addressed and must read article of New Age Islam.we are targeted on every occasion by these incidents. By Md. Habib - 4/14/2015 1:58:48 PM



  •  At least read it once or twos time youngsters. Please read. By Sohail Anwar - 4/14/2015 1:55:13 PM



  •  If you drive a dog or a cat to a corner, it would bite and attack, so why deny Muslims the right to seek revenge from those who have harmed them.

    But I don't approve of killing unconcerned innocent citizens. Direct the ire against those who are responsible for your destruction. Muslims howsoever aggrieved have no right to harm the innocents, whosoever they may be.

    By Zamiruddin Ahmad - 4/14/2015 1:53:35 PM



  • Jihadis r manufactured by imperialist powers, be it alqoeda in Afghanistan against soviets or isis angst Syria n Iran n Lebanon. By Shuaib Naqvi - 4/14/2015 1:51:43 PM



  • GM Sb,

    Please relate it to what Shahin Sb asked. Follow the thread.
    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/14/2015 1:54:49 AM



  • We do not have to explain terms like zimmi and jizyah because they have no current relevance, at least not in India. We should also make obsolete terms like kafir, kufr, mushrik and jehad because we have no use for them. Such terms promote takfirism and exclusiveness, so we should stop using them. Our writers should focus instead on subjects such as reconciliation, compromise, nonviolence, peace, inclusiveness, minority rights, gender equality, justice, inter-faith dialogue and universal brotherhood. By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 4/14/2015 1:49:38 AM



  • I am sorry. I quoted 8:72 using the translation of Yusuf Ali without checking for its correctness and faithfulness to the Arabic text. It is mistranslated. The Arabic Text is given below:

    إِنَّ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَهَاجَرُوا وَجَاهَدُوا بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ

    The correct translation would be:

    Innal lazina amanu -Those who believed
    wa hajaru - and emigrated
    wa jahadu - and strove/struggled
    biamwalihin - with their possessions
    wa anfusihim - and with their lives
    fi sabilillah - in the way of Allah

    Yusuf Ali mistranslates the same as:

    Those who believed, and adopted exile, and fought for the Faith, with their property and their persons, in the cause of Allah

    wa jahadu has become "fought for the faith" when it simply means "strove hard in all earnestness"

    This is a point that I want to impress upon so that there is no scope for misunderstanding. There is no verse in the Quran that asks the Prophet to:
    1. Fight for the faith
    2. Fight to end kufr
    3. Fight to establish the truth of Islam.

    Every verse regarding fighting is for fighting in the cause of Allah which is defined as fighting to end oppression against any people. These verses are faith neutral. If the oppressed are mushrik and the oppressors call themselves Muslim, fighting against the oppressor to end oppression would be fighting in the cause of Allah.

    The mistranslations are responsible for considering the word "Jihad" as a holy war for the defense of the faith of Islam alone and this is unwarranted and amounts to attributing words/meanings to Allah that are not there in the Quran.

    Who is a believer and who is a kafir is also situational. For example, the Indian army liberated Bangla Desh by defeating the Pakistan Army which practiced great oppression on the people of Bangla Desh. The role that the Indian army played was of the Momin and the Pakistan army were playing the role of the kafirin as it concerned the oppressed people of Bangla Desh.

     

    (4:141) ….And never will Allah grant to the kafirin a way (to triumph) over the Mominin.

    The Kafirin suffered a humiliating defeat and the verse 4:141 proves that in the temporal dimension both the words kafir and momin are faith neutral and a momin or kafir is defined by what a person does. A person who stands for justice is a momin and one who stands for oppression is a kafir.
     
    Fighting is of course the last option after exhausting all political/diplomatic options and can be waged only by a ruler of a legitimate country. Every other fighting is fasad.

    Jehad is one of the best forms of worship that take you closest to Allah but Jehad is faith neutral and is to fight against injustice and oppression after exhausting all political and diplomatic avenues and the duty of only a legitimate ruler of a legitimate country. 

    The rest of us also should fight against all injustice and oppression with words and join hands with other people in ending all injustice and oppression. 
    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/14/2015 1:22:16 AM



  • Javed Ahmed Ghamidi on Jiziya:

    THE CONCEPT OF “ZIMMI” AND “JIZYAH”

    This subject at this turn requires an answer to the questions regarding the identity of a “Zimmi” and the definition of “Jizyah”.

    Before answering this question we shall have to keep the special status of the Prophet Hood of Muhammad (SWS). In fact after the completion of the process of communication of the message of Islam, the Holy Prophet, just one year before his death, was ordered by God that all Jews and Christians, living on the Arabian soil who have not yet embraced Islam, should be declared “Zimmi”. These Zimmis would be the subjects of the Muslim state if they want to stay here and would be its responsibility; they would pay a tax named as “Jizyah” as the Muslims pay the tax known as Zakat.

    Thus they were punished in a way that their independent status was terminated and they were included among the subject of the Muslim government of Arabia. The following order was issued forth by God one year before the death of the Holy Prophet:

    “Fight against such of those to whom “the Book” was given as they believe neither in Allah nor the last day, who do not forbid what Allah and His Prophet have forbidden, and do not embrace the true faith, until they pay tribute out of hand and are subdued”. (Al-Tawbah-9:29)

    Certain facts here are noteworthy. First, there was no regular state formulated on the Arabian soil. So when the establishment of a regular state was planned, it was to be perceived what should be the status of the Jews and the Christians reluctant to embrace Islam. Therefore, they were declared Zimis and were levied the tax of Jizyah upon them. It was made clear that they would not render compulsory military service in return to their payment of Jizyah.

    Second, those who did not accept Muhammad (SWS) as the Prophet of God faced the penalty inflicted upon them by God. This punishment was not the same for the believers of the Holy Books and the pagans. The pagans were warned to be ready for death or exile in case they failed to accept Islam as their religion whereas the believers of the Holy Books were just declared Zimmis.

    Thus these instructions were also exclusively related with the direct addressees of the Holy Prophet. Since a Rasool is himself a court of God set in this world, they were penalized by this court. This instruction is no more applicable in later periods. This is why, there is neither any Zimmi today nor does the tax of Jizyah exist. Now, all the non-Muslims ruled by a Muslim government are the party of the treaty made between the two groups by the constitution of that country. And the Muslims are bound to honor this treaty and treat the non-Muslims with justice. These people are called “Maahid” (Non-Muslims with whom an agreement has been accorded).

    This principled and ideological discussion gives birth to some questions. The first one is about the obligations of the Muslim governments of today towards the non-Muslim minorities according to the Islamic point of view. The answer is that in the present day all the Muslim governments are the members of the United Nations Organization and they are, therefore, bound to observe its charter. They are also bound to honour the treaties with any other nation on reciprocal basis. Their treatment with the minorities has to be just; rather they must treat them even better than their own people.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/13/2015 9:14:46 PM



  • Individuals should not concern themselves with verses relating to fighting at all. Fighting in the cause of Allah is ordained only for legitimate rulers of legitimate countries.

    The verses relating to fighting only applied to the Prophet and the Muslims who had migrated with him to Medina. It did not apply to the Muslims who had stayed behind in Mecca.

    A Muslim ruler also has no obligation to protect a Muslim who resides in another country not under his control as is evident from the following verse:

    (8:72) "Those who believed, and adopted exile, and fought for the Faith, with their property and their persons, in the cause of Allah, as well as those who gave (them) asylum and aid,- these are (all) friends and protectors, one of another. As to those who believed but came not into exile, ye owe no duty of protection to them until they come into exile; but if they seek your aid in religion, it is your duty to help them, except against a people with whom ye have a treaty of mutual alliance. And (remember) Allah seeth all that ye do."

    Only a ruler with a territory under his control can fight with the help of his people residing in his territory and protect them as well. The Prophet was not such a ruler when he was in Mecca and therefore he was not permitted to fight as long as he was in Mecca. He and his people had to put up with the persecution and even killing as part of the persecution but could not retaliate.

    For the same reason, the verses relating to fighting were inapplicable to the Muslims who had not migrated to Medina and stayed behind in Mecca.

    All these questions are covered in detail in the following articles:

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/13/2015 8:52:43 PM



  • Furthermore, one can clearly see that another commentator Mohammad Hanif Khan Saheb is also a victim of a similar confusion, though he seems to have made up his mind that the answer is the second answer provided by the student in Iftikhar Hai Saheb's mail. He wrote:

    WARFARE IS ORDAINED FOR YOU (2/216) QURAN,,,, jo jehad se munkar hon wo chhod jayen khuda ka islam-wallaho azizun zunteqam-aip leader.

    By Sultan Shahin - 4/13/2015 2:35:14 PM



  • It seems Muslims, particularly some of the youth, living in the West, are beginning to wonder and ask questions.

    I found the following in a mail circulated by an American Muslim activist Iftekhar Hai  Saheb. It is important for Muslim scholars to address such questions and come out with straightforward answers. My answer is, of course, given in the statement above as well as in many other places, but some, even from New Age Islam forum need to introspect and come out with clear answers guiding particularly the youth living in non-Muslim majority countries.

    Says Iftikhar Hai sahib: "Here is the Question that Muslims need to answer to our neighbours who are from different faith:


    "A student who is studying Quran points, for example, to the Koran 9:29, where God commands Muslims to “Fight those among the People of the Book [Jews and Christians] … until they pay the jizya [tribute] with willing submission and feel themselves subdued.”

    "Now how can we in modern days living in Canada, USA, Europe, etc. around Jews and Christian explain what this means today.

    "Possible answer:

    "1) This verse belongs in historical context.  During the times of 6th century when Jews and Christian were enemies trying to destroy the small community of Muslims.  This verse does not apply to present day Jews and Christians because we are now settled among them and are part of nationally bestowed human rights by our Constitution.

    "2) Another radical answer:  Muslims must fight Christians and Jews till the end of times until Islam is established in the whole world.  This is the Wahhabi or radical angle."

    By Sultan Shahin - 4/13/2015 2:24:16 PM



  • Save Britain from Muslim and Shariah law.

    By Vinod Sharma‎ - 4/13/2015 11:59:49 AM




  • RELIGIOUS DEFINITIONS……ON PATH TO PEACE OR WAR ?

     

    This is one of the biggest questions of this current period that would provide a great opportunity to the world community to explore beyond their faith and belief following both scientific and theological insight to secure the morality and safety of future generation. But we have already separated the existence of God in mazes of religious definitions, and ignored the true facts of the religions that navigating our life towards heaven or hell.

     

    Faith of an individual person evolves on basis of their inherited system of thoughts and genetic nature, within a tendency to fulfil the terrestrial desires. It is the genetic nature of mankind that forces them to utilize whatever they have innovated to secure their own physical world, eliminating the real potential of spiritual graces. At this rising period of science (mind), the sacred potential of theology (spirit) has fallen down bellow to its dangerous point. Thus all the leading religious thinkers will have to understand the excellence of this big question and bring all the religious definitions in one idea for the perpetuation of the basis of peace and solidarity.

     

    Regarding this issue there are large possibilities for the world literate community to bring all the religious group and non religious group together by revealing the philanthropic aspects of this big question as a principal of “New spiritual information”.

     

    According to both scientific and theological points of view in one idea, our religious tenets and definitions are the basis of our faith, it is potential enough to civilize the existence of human beings on basis of peace and humanity, but the origin (incarnations) of religions are based on its contemporary needs, which is now existing as invisible boundaries separating our existence according to our inherited system of thoughts. Whenever our genetic nature had tried to evolve beyond the natural process, it always crippled the verve of religious definitions, creating the basis of war.

     

    Our steady belief or faith, that unable to obtain the terrestrial bliss from religious teachings and spiritual graces has emerged as non religious groups following the potential of science (mind) after neglecting the graces of theology (spirit).

     

    To achieve the graces of religious definitions for peace, the world community needs an exploration following both scientific and theological insight, to unify all our religious teachings in one idea, to uproot the basis of religious conflicts, without disgracing the faith of any mankind. Though we have lots of religious groups and organizations leading us on path to peace according to its fame, excellence and generosity, but the separation of their principal, God revelation and exploration are the obstacles between religious and non religious groups seeking to perpetuate the basis of peace.

     

    Even the present dubieties from religious points of view that emerged from political complexities and communal conflicts will never equate the non religious groups to work beyond their premeditated tenets. Within these circumstances, we will have to explore for our leadership in ministry and religious thinkers, to equip all the religious complexities facts within one idea. It will help the world leadership to approach all the religious and non religious groups for the perpetuation of the basis of peace and solidarity.

     

    Though the definitions and languages of all our religious and non religious groups are quite different from each other, but their meaning is based on a single view and that is only philanthropy. If the true facts of all our religions are framed in one idea in form of literature according only to its philanthropic points of view, there would be an opportunity for all religious followers to stand together with non religious groups to prevent the issues of war. It’s an aspect of literature which even exists as Holy books that enthralls our mind and spirit right up from our childhood creating the basis of our faith according to our culture and philosophical tradition.

     

     It is not possible for science and an individual religion to equip our understanding of the realities of human nature and its physical world, which might evolve our morality and faith to change our inherited system of thought and genetic nature according to the basic needs of this current period.

    By Ajay Singh - 4/13/2015 11:55:04 AM



  • WARFARE IS ORDAINED FOR YOU (2/216) QURAN,,,,jo jehad se munkar hon wo chhod jayen khuda ka islam-wallaho azizun zunteqam-aip leader

    By Mohammad Hanif Khan - 4/13/2015 11:51:30 AM



  • @ Ahsän Kämrän, What do you know about Sultan Shahin?

    By Sarfaraz Nasir Jung - 4/13/2015 11:46:56 AM



  •  While the Islamic followers fall short of a good mentor the evil of the Baghdadis take over.

    By Krishnan Nathan - 4/13/2015 7:27:51 AM



  • A must read article.. Ayesha Sadaf

    By Asim Rais - 4/13/2015 7:20:35 AM



  • अति उत्तम विचार By Govind Raturi - 4/13/2015 7:11:15 AM



  • Great man.

    By Amit Kumar - 4/13/2015 7:09:48 AM



  •  Is pe behas karna awam ko gumrah karna hai jo maujudah halat hain By Mohammad Faiyaz Ali Masoom - 4/13/2015 7:08:17 AM



  • Welcome! we need to raise voice against the jihadi cult and sudden mushrooming of wild practices and postures defacing Islam. I am ready to walk extra mile for this great cause to save Islam from fanatics and dogmatists. We need to popularise improved and simple ways and practices.

    By Sharique Hayat - 4/13/2015 7:04:54 AM



  • My Dear Fellow Muslims,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    My little input is as follows:

     

    Sultan Shahin, You're doing same thing what BJP says on many issues. You've become another Zafar Saroshwala, a stooge of BJP after that interview. smile emoticon

     

    By Ahsän Kämrän  - 4/12/2015 7:33:00 AM

     

    MRL - Let’s not use the word, “stooge.” Sultan Shahin Saheb must get into the habit of calling a spade a spade, when it comes to those commentators who have proven themselves, to be “Intellectually Dishonest.

     

    I agree with Sultan Shahin. Muslims doing utmost harm to Islam. Time for liberal honest Muslims to stand up and be counted.

     

    By Shahid Siddiqui  - 4/12/2015 7:28:31 AM

     

    MRL – I also agree with the comment. However, it is Sultan Shahin Saheb who must ponder over how to steer his own forum, so that the “Real Name,” of the commentators can be known to the readers. Let’s face, if he cares so deeply about reforming the Muslim minds, then why would the so-called “Reformer,” allow others to continue to debate with an intent to smear Islam, mock Qur’an and insult Muslims.

     

    Western Christianty, sadism, mass murders, genocides, fanaticism, lust, incitement of hatred, .... .... .... are inseparable.

     

    By Gh Rasool Mir  - 4/12/2015 7:25:45 AM

     

    MRL – If that is what you think, then what words will you use to attach to the behavior of the followers of Islam? Do you think that “mass murders, genocides, fanaticism, hatred,” are not present in the Islamic countries? It is high time to confront the truth,

    Mir Saheb.

      

    Sultan Sahab is one untiring crusader against the cancer of political and religious terrorism. Good wishes!

     

    By Sarkar Haider  - 4/12/2015 12:33:28 AM

     

    MRL - Sure, well-wishers are always there for Sultan Shahin Saheb. If he wishes to continue to act as a “Crusader,” against the cancer of political and religious terrorism, then he must also be sensitive enough to respect the sentiments of “Moderate Muslims.

     

    I think no direction is needed. you cant keep this satanic world under your control. Allah is all-knowing. work hard, pray and try your best to company your family.

     

    By Masood Khan Samar - 4/12/2015 12:32:09 AM

     

    MRL – You missed one thing, that is, Speak Up. “Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good; enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong; they are the ones to attain blissfulness," (Surah: Al-‘Imran or the Family of ‘Imran – Chapter: 3 - Verse: 104).

     

    The people well versed in the area of conceiving, interpreting, implementing and directing the dictates and commands of Allah SWT and our beloved Prophet Mohammed Sallallahu alaihi wassallam can join their heads and find out the solution of the impasse before it is too late.

     

    By Muzaffer Hussain Talib - 4/12/2015 12:30:54 AM

     

    MRL – Who are the people, you think are well versed in the area of convincing, interpreting and implementing and directing the dictates and commands of Almighty Allah?” The Qur’anic verse clearly dictates, “let there arise out of you a band of people.” This commandment did not classify certain group of people, and certainly, it did not meant to be only for “rabbis, priests and mullahs.”  

     

    As per Allah, Islam will vanish before the end of the world. This is what seems to be happening.

     

    By Manzurul Haque - 4/12/2015 12:28:37 AM

     

    MRL – Another doom and gloom prediction which is solely derived from the teachings of the secondary sources of Islam.

     

    'Jihadists' who are misusing Islam for evil deeds are wrong and must be challenged. But, Mr. Sultan Shahin, you should also write about oppressions on Muslims in western countries. I searched google, i have never found any article against Zionists in Israel, against RSS in India, against extremist jews, extremist christians, extremist Hindus. Whatever the case may be, extremism is extremism and you must challenge this kind of extremism too.

     

    I have read many articles. You have more knowledge of good writing skills than Islam.


    This writing style can stop extremism from all sides. I expect challenging accounts from your sides against those extremist jews, christians, hindus as well but you can continue to challenge violent people.

     

    If you do not write against them, my doubts will remain about you. So please let me clear my doubts

     

    By A Request To Mr. Sultan Shahin  - 4/11/2015 7:57:20 AM

     

    MRL – Mr. Request or Mr. Whoever. First of all, why are you afraid to reveal your true identity? If you spoke the “Truth, then what is the point in covering up as to who you are? You are obviously concerned. The readers have no idea as to who you are? You certainly heard about the modern day syndrome, “Political Correctness. That’s the root cause of all the problems. How can any sane and educated Muslim point about the extremism in other religions, when on the first place, he continues to believe that, we the Muslims, must continue to learn from those who insult and mock the religion of Islam.

     

    The truth of the mattere is, what Sultan Shahin Saheb should do, is to question the bigots who pops up every time on his forum about the extremists Hindus, Christians and Jews. It is very much obvious that many Muslims have indeed forgotten the wisdom of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him) which is to, “Say what is true, although it may be bitter and displeasing to people.”

     

    Sorry for being brutally honest, my fellow Muslims.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    A Pen1  www.myfellowmuslims.com

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/12/2015 3:17:13 PM



  • Sultan Shahin, You're doing same thing what BJP says on many issues. You've become another Zafar Saroshwala, a stooge of BJP after that interview.
    By Ahsän Kämrän - 4/12/2015 7:33:00 AM



  • I agree with Sultan Shahin. Muslims doing utmost harm to Islam. Time for liberal honest Muslims to stand up and be counted.
    By Shahid Siddiqui - 4/12/2015 7:28:31 AM



  • Western Christianty, sadism, mass murders, genocides, fanaticism, lust, incitement of hatred, .... .... .... are inseparable. By Gh Rasool Mir - 4/12/2015 7:25:45 AM



  •  Sultan Sahab is one untiring crusader against the cancer of political and religious terrorism. Good wishes! By Sarkar Haider - 4/12/2015 12:33:28 AM



  •  I think no direction is needed. you cant keep this satanic world under your control. Allah is all-knowing. work hard, pray and try your best to company your family. By Masood Khan Samar - 4/12/2015 12:32:09 AM



  •  The people well versed in the area of conceiving, interpreting, implementing and directing the dictates and commands of Allah SWT and our beloved Prophet Mohammed Sallallahu alaihi wassallam can join their heads and find out the solution of the impasse before it is too late. By Muzaffer Hussain Talib - 4/12/2015 12:30:54 AM



  •  As per Allah, Islam will vanish before the end of the world. This is what seems to be happening.

    By Manzurul Haque - 4/12/2015 12:28:37 AM



  • 'Jihadists' who are misusing Islam for evil deeds are wrong and must be challenged.
    But, Mr. Sultan Shahin, you should also write about oppressions on Muslims in western countries. I searched google, i have never found any article against Zionists in Israel, against RSS in India, against extremist jews, extremist christians, extremist Hindus. Whatever the case may be, extremism is extremism and you must challenge this kind of extremism too. 
    I have read many articles. You have more knowledge of good writing skills than Islam. 
    This writing style can stop extremism from all sides. I expect challenging accounts from your sides against those extremist jews, christians, hindus as well but you can continue to challenge violent people. 
    If you do not write against them, my doubts will remain about you. So please let me clear my doubts
    By A Request To Mr. Sultan Shahin - 4/11/2015 7:57:20 AM



  • 'Jihad in Islam' is one of the most misinterpreted and misunderstood topics.On the one extreme are those who declare Jihad as the 'do all and be all of Islam' and on the other hand are those who misinterpret Quarnic verses to please the so -called pacifists of the west lead by the US.

    The fact is that the'Islamic jihad' is the only panacea for the ills that the world suffers in the present age.We have lost peace,justice,love and progress just because the 'love for humanity' has been waning to the extent that it seems almost extinct now.
    'Islamic Jihad' is the only instrument and weapon that can restore peace and harmony in the world.
    The enemies of Islam need to see through the message of Islam as impartial humans and not as Christians,Jews ,Hindu's etc .The message of Islam and the means for implementing that message is clear and unambiguous for anyone who approaches Islam with pure intention.
    The greatest duty of the friends of Islam is to  remove the misgivings that have been created by the vested interests about the concept of Jihad in Islam. By Rafi Ahmad Masoodi - 4/8/2015 5:07:16 AM



  • The Ideology of the extremists is based on:

    1. All non Muslims are kafir.
    2. The prophet fought battles with the disbelievers (kafir) to end disbelief (Kufr)
    3. Apostates deserve the death punishment.

    I have shown that point 1 is part of Sunni theology and most probably part of Shia theology as well. 

    40% of the translators of the Quran and some of the most influential ones concur with point 2.

    Ulema of all sects agree on point 3.

    Ulema of every sect has indulged in Takfir and for people of every sect the people of other sects are apostates with caveats of course not necessarily calling for their killing.

    The extremists, if anything, are therefore only extreme in what most people consider to be Islam.

    Unless we correct the false notions as brought out clearly in my articles "who is a kafir" and "the story of the prophetic mission of Muhammad (pbuh)",  we are only indulging in empty rhetoric and the youth will continue to be attracted to extremism. Mind you, it is only extremism in degree, but it is Islam as it is understood by the mainstream.

    We need to accept that these mainstream notions are not Islam and bring about fundamental changes in our theology as discussed in my articles. This is going to be as difficult for the Muslims as it is for anyone to change his religion to a new one. Until we do this, addressing the symptoms will not result in a cure.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/4/2015 12:50:54 AM



  • The Whole Muslim World Will Sink In Darkness If ISIS Version Of Islam Takes Root. This Will Obviously Have Catastrophic Repercussions For The Muslims In Particular And The Broader Humanity In General. 

    The following article debunks ISIS ideology and outlaws it.

    “The Heinous Crimes That ISIS Is Perpetrating is Totally Opposed To Islam And Those Killed Fighting For ISIS May Earn Divine Wrath Instead Of Paradise And ‘Hurs’ – An SOS To All Mosque Imams.”

    http://www.newageislam.com/radical-islamism-and-jihad/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/the-heinous-crimes-that-isis-is-perpetrating-totally-opposed-to-islam-and-those-killed-fighting-for-isis-may-earn-divine-wrath-instead-of-paradise-and-‘hurs’-–-an-sos-to-all-mosque-imams/d/102227

    Those who do not want the Muslims of the world - a third of its population with more than quarter of a billion male adults to be identified with the ISIS version of Islam (that could rock the whole world) must read it (hardly a page) and if they think it has merit, circulate it around the mosque Imams and perceptive Muslims in their circle.

    By muhammad yunus - 4/3/2015 11:46:55 PM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    For the sake of exposing those with “Unclean Hearts, kindly allow me to share my own observations as follows:

     

    The boundaries of civility.” What is the meaning of civility? Polite act of expression. How can such an act take place when a person who claims to possess civility is relentlessly engaged in mocking another religion?

     

    I have felt fearless about expressing myself.” That’s right. Fearless about criticizing Islam, Qur’an and Muslims.  

     

    “To protect the life of a critic.” Whose life is the person referring to? A person with no real name nor any identity? That’s absurd.

     

    Discouraging hate crimes against critics of Islam.” Who is encouraging hate crimes against critics of Islam? On the contrary, those who gleefully criticize Islam cannot dare answer about the evils in their own society. Who is kidding who?

     

    “Stalkers” are the ones who continue to be engaged in smearing Islam. Ever noticed how they will barge in to disrupt a healthy debate? What will these people gain by their insincere tactics? All they are contributing by debating in the New Age Islam forum is to demoralize Muslims. It is as simple as that, folks.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/3/2015 11:39:14 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Subject: BRACE YOURSELF FOR THE INEVITABLE CONSEQUENCES

     

    “Do something to change things or brace yourself for the inevitable consequences.”  Concerned Muslims do not have any choice, but to whole-heartedly agree with Naseer Ahmed’s cautionary words.

     

    Reuter News Agency reported today, “Two New York city women accused of planning ‘terrorist attack’.” One of them is Asia Siddiqi. Do we think for one second that these two women were well versed about the secondary Islamic sources? They are not Muslim men who wanted to die to attain 72 virgins. Not a chance. They were brainwashed by the ISIS political propaganda, I emphasized the word, “Political, in order to wage the war against the West.  

     

    Furthermore, let’s take a quick glance at an article titled, Muslim leaders, Tech

    Companies work to Counter Militants, which was published in The Wall Street

    Journal on March 22, 2015. Here’s what the article states:

     

    “ISIS has called for the assassination of two American imams, including Mr. Qadhi, of Rhodes College, who have spoken out against the group’s ideology on social media.

     

    Mr. Qadhi has argued that “the root cause of all violence from Muslim groups is the political grievances caused by American foreign policy,” and he said he has received threats from some from non-Muslim extremist groups in the U.S. But he also has condemned the deadly attack on the French satirical weekly Charlie Hebdo, and he said the threat from ISIS is proof that his online campaign is making a difference. “ISIS is scared of a moderate Muslim who can live in the 21st century,” he said.

     

    Crucial to countering ISIS, Muslim leaders say, is creating a robust online presence to provide religious and social guidance for young Muslims, who can struggle with feelings of isolation and fears of anti-Muslim sentiment.”

     

    This article should be a wake-up call for the Muslims, that along with the deadly Islamic ideology followed by the “Muslim Jihadists, one simply cannot flatly ignore the political grievances that goes along with it.

     

    Repeatedly inviting the “Intellectual Bigots, to smear Islam and mock Holy Qur’an only helps to defeat the very purpose of reformation which the Moderate Muslims, continue to talk about. Negative thoughts will always bring negative results. The sooner we grasp this fact of life, the better.

     

    Finally, what is so baffling is that certain commentators on the New Age Islam forum do not reveal their identity out of the fear of being physically attacked by some fanatics. However, they sure are stupid enough to continue to do all in their power to find faults with Islam. Though, is it ironic that they are the ones who will never support “Moderate Muslims, point of view, as that’s not their ultimate agenda.      

     

    Thanks again for reading, I remain

     

    Very truly yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/3/2015 11:13:51 AM



  • Yes, we should set our own house in order, instead of railing at others and instigating our community's hotheads to use their meat cleavers. By Sultan Shahin - 4/3/2015 6:45:48 AM



  • There is no denying the fact that there is something  called the "Bernard Lewis Plan" according to which the US and Israel have methodically exploited Islamic extremists for their own political ends starting with Afghanistan. 

    However, they could  not have succeeded if there wasn't a fault line in Islamic society/ideology that could be exploited. This has always been the case.

    If the Meccan polytheists were peaceful rejecters, Muhammad (pbuh) would have come and gone making little difference. It was the fault line of arrogance, greed and haughtiness that was exploited by "the greatest of planners" to annihilate polytheism in Arabia in complete justice by secular standards. In this process, an Ummah was built who could stand upto the two Imperial powers of the day and defeat them.  Else, Hijaz would have been under these powers by turns as fortunes fluctuated between the two powers and Islam would have floundered.

    Islamic society is going through troubled times because of its own flaws and serious fault lines. There is no external power that can harm any "Muslim" as long as he is totally attuned to his Maker. 

    The sooner we realize this and set our own house in order the better it is for us. Otherwise it will be forced on us just as it was forced on the Jews. The Muslims today are in the same position as the Jews were a few centuries ago.

    Do something to change things or brace yourself for the inevitable consequences. Allah is most certainly against all the so called Islamic countries  where religious persecution is practiced and will humiliate them just as the polytheists of Mecca were humiliated. 

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/3/2015 5:44:17 AM



  • Mr Shahin,

    I am now going to point out how people like Avijit Roy get killed.

    A certain gentleman here spews personalised hate speech against me. I have never overstepped the boundaries of civility in any of my comments on this site. My comments have never been targetted at any person, or the Prophet Mohammad, or indeed the entire religion. I have only stuck to facts and criticism that I consider valid. Yes, I am perseverent. But that is our culture. In Indian culture, there is a tradition of healthy debate at the end of which positions become clear, and audience and particpants may or may not decide  upon the outcome. Some things remain unconcluded, to be taken up another day, perhaps by other people. Nobody is vilified for his views, and nobody is crucified for being outspoken. If  both sides make valid points, two acknowledged streams of thought develop. Most people on this site also come from the same cultural ethos, and hence I have felt fearless about expressing myself. 

    Now think if we were located in Bangladesh and if this person frothing at the mouth were venting. How much time would it take for some hothead reading his comments to pick up a meat cleaver and go for me? And what are you doing about it? You have exercised your editorial rights in the past to excise abuse. But you will not exercise them to protect the life of a critic, because you happen to dislike the critic, too? 

    In this case, your avowed high principles on discouraging hate crimes against critics of Islam seem to evaporate. I am not asking for a ban on anybody. Nor am I asking that you stop people from expressing their dislike of my person or my views. But speech that would incite the kind of violence typical to such  issues should certainly be kept off your site. People who condone such speech by ignoring it or offering mild and vague rebuke are as guilty as the ones who indulge in such rabid rabble rousing behavior. 
    By secularlogic - 4/3/2015 4:01:48 AM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum,

     

    Subject: FOR THE SAKE OF BLEEDING HUMANITY

     

    Civilized Example.” These two appropriate words which you used made me think of reminding you of the concerns of Rabindranath Tagore. It is amazing that those who are all too anxious to point out how bad is Islam deliberately ignored reading the worldly wisdom of Tagore. What was truly surprising is that you did not paid, any attention to the very spirit of Tagore’s concerns either. It is as follows: 

     

    “We cannot afford in this heart-breaking time of crisis, to indulge in mutual recrimination; but let us appeal to all God-fearing Mohammedans for the sake of their own great religion and culture and for the sake of bleeding humanity, to join hands with us in dealing with evil which may grow into a permanent source of futility bringing upon our unfortunate country the disgust and derision of the whole world.”

     

    Rabindranath Tagore

    Calcutta Statesman

    September 5, 1931 

     

    What I was expecting is for the “Avowed Bigots,” on the New Age Islam forum who simply brush aside any “Civilized Reasoning,” given to them, to carefully read it. They chose not to. You have been reading all the rebuttals. Now, I am beginning to doubt whether, we the Muslim readers, possess “Civilized Minds,” or, are we too eager to get carried away with all the negative as well as nasty comments about Islam and our Holy Qur’an. Since the last quarter of the year 2013, I have been noticing that the mudslingers are encouraged more and more to such an extent that “Moderate Muslims, find it rather distasteful to enter into any debate on New Age Islam forum.   

     

    Tagore’s very spirit of calling God-fearing people to join hands in a “Civilized Manner,” in shunning the evil is something handful of commentators like “Secular Logic,” and “Ex-Tablighi,” should take lesson from. Your continued belief in encouraging those who are relentlessly engaged in not appreciating “Good Words,posted by learned Muslims on your forum, is profoundly disappointing. Every sincere comment is rebutted by nasty comments directed against Islam, Holy Quran and our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).

     

    Sultan Saheb, let me draw your kind attention to the five points which you listed as follows:  

     

    Islamic Prayer Is A Hate Speech

     

    Islam Is Naked Communalism

     

    ISIS Represents the Islam

     

    Jihad: Destruction Of Non-Muslims

     

    Islam Is A Religion Of Terror Due To Abrogaton

     

    Guess what! Are you trying to convey the message to all of your readers of New Age Islam forum that the majority of the ordinary Muslims believe in the five points listed above? If you went through the trouble of posting it, then it can also be assumed that you, as an Editor of New Age Islam also believe in these five points too. In case, you are not aware, many sane and educated Muslims are equally aware of all such headline news, but what they are seeking is, to read something enlightening and not disheartening.

     

    Circulating and re-circulating such news will not help reform Islam. Nor by encouraging the “Intellectual Bigots, who despise Islam to help open the windows to the world. The only window that I know as an ordinary Muslim is in the correct translation of our Holy Qur’an, without any references from the Islamic secondary sources, period.

     

    Now, let all the readers collectively read the following sentences:

     

    Have you ever wondered why so many times Muslims come out of mosque after their prayer and start violence ?

     

    You posted it, Sultan Saheb. Can you elaborate how many Indian Muslims, or for that matter, any Muslims in the Islamic countries, who goes out after their prayers from their neighborhood mosques to instigate violence on a daily basis? Kindly, be specific and provide the readers with facts only.  

     

    It is time that non-muslims start paying Muslims in the same coin unless they leave the evil religion of Islam.

     

    Now let me ask you, Sultan Saheb. For “The Sake Of Bleeding Humanity, would you recommend your fellow humans to take the path of vendetta?

     

    Most muslims have never read their scriptures from cover to cover and rely on LIARS like Zakir Naik and semi-literate mullahs who misguide them by hiding the truth.

     

    That’s a correct statement, indeed. Well then, Sultan Saheb, don’t you think that acting as an Editor and Moderator of New Age Islam forum, you should call upon the educated Muslims to express their respective viewpoints of what they have personally learned from the Holy Qur’an. The reason many walked away from your forum is mainly owing to reading the insulting remarks against Islam and the Prophet of Islam. That’s an undeniable fact which you cannot refute on any count. No Jews, nor Christians, nor Hindus, nor Buddhists will appreciate someone insulting their religions. There is such a thing as human sentiments. I get a feeling that you are somehow not taking this factor into account while heaping the praise on the demonizers of Islam on your forum.

     

    May be, it will help to attentively read the comment of one of your ardent well-wishers, who cautioned you by writing that, “if used to malign other’s faith or mock a rival group of people, it can open a floodgate of unhealthy discussions that will conduce to ill will among people, spawn evil and render this website into a vicious gossip forum.”       

     

    Islam is a threat to humanity and it must be banned in the world.

     

    Here is a real serious sentence which only you can answer. You want your fellow Muslims to read and reread such sentences, but did it, occurred to you, that before the Iranian revolution of 1979, the name of Islam was nowhere in the headline news? Ask yourself, how did Islam, all of a sudden became a major threat to humanity at large? Aside from the doctrine of “Wahhabi and/or Salafi,” which so many are obsessed with, can you outline another root cause of such a dramatic change in Muslims’ behavior? Let’s be honest, Sultan Saheb.

     

    No matter how you look at Islam, you will come to only ONE conclusion that Islam is a religion of hatred, bigotry and terrorism.

     

    Let’s presume that it is, then what about other religions? Is there such a thing as “State Sponsored Terrorism” as we all know has been going in the Holy Land since the past forty-five years? Is Islam responsible for such humiliation and brutality? You attend the United Nations Human Rights seminars. Did you ever thought, that the so-called “Human Rights,” must also be applied to the Palestinian people too? Are you going to tell me that Jews in Israel do not hate Arabs? Better get your facts straight, Sultan Saheb.

     

    No nation or followers of any religion should possess “Carte Blanche,” to terrorize another people for so long. What you and so many members of the “Muslim Intelligentsia, miss out is that, while posting all the bad news about the “Muslim Terrorists, sadly, most of the elite and educated Muslims, turn a blind eye  towards the sufferings of their fellow Muslims imposed upon by the Jewish and Christian world. Certainly, you are not going to argue that the continued immoral action on part of Judaism and Christianity in the Holy Land is justified, or, are you? Please do not tell me that, all the chaos and mayhem in the Middle East region got nothing to do with the “Brutal Military Occupation” imposed by the State of Israel. Hatred breeds hatred just like respect begets respect. The million dollar question is, “How long will the “Civilized World,” continue to ignore the utter misery of the Palestinian people?”

     

    Sultan Saheb, by posting all such news, by allowing “Intellectual Bigots, to reign in to insult Islam, by ignoring the earnest pleas of commentators, namely Muhammad Yunus Saheb, may I ask, “Why are you having such a difficult time drawing a boundary line?” You might not believe it, but Muslims readers would be more than delighted to read “Civilized Debate,” which is free from the “Joy Of Provocation, by people belonging to another religion. That’s uncalled for and definitely not a “Civilized Behavior.” You might well think that those Muslims who are outspoken like me, tend to act in an uncivilized manner, if we make harsh comments. We will, if the bigoted person acts arrogantly and continue to smear the religion of Islam without taking all the facts into consideration.

     

    Last but not the least, it will be wise on your part to calmly reflect upon the wise words of Muhammad Yunus Saheb as follows:

     

    “I have sounded you in the past that a boundary line must be drawn between freedom of speech and libel, calumny and abusive, and if a Muslim reader feels that somebody is virtually abusing his Prophet (quoting sexually provocative and apocryphal hadith as historical truth) or scandalizing his wife or profaning the Qur'an like saying that it is full of pornography and that somebody has a Muslim name, and he is being supported by a group of such people like a band of like-minded demonizers of Islam, I assure you, he is bound to give up on your site. Not surprising the participation of Muslim commentators has reduced considerably over the recent years.”

     

    Thanks again for reading, I remain

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia    

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/3/2015 1:47:59 AM



  • Dear Lodhia Saheb, since you seem to think SecularLogic is such a unique creature, let me introduce you to some more of your more civilised neighbours, people among whom you are destined to live till you are on this planet unless you manage to change their opinions through the work we are doing at New Age Islam.

    It is important for you and, of course, all of us Muslims to know, kahti hai tujhko khalq-e-Khuda ghaibana kya. In this, of course, it's not so much ghaibana, but very much in your face. Try and do something about it, not just rail against them, stalk them, abuse them.  

     I was posting this news of the latest outrage from our co-religionists: Al Shabaab militants kill 147 at university in Kenya.

    At the time I saw this news, the figure was 15, and I came across some comments in the Times of India from our neighbours, our outraged brothers in humanity. Of course, a lot of them talk nonsense, but this nonsense is based on what early Muslims, our salaf, themselves talked about and wrote down and which most of us Muslims revere in the same way as we revere the Holy Quran.

    I am giving you only a sample here, rather "civilised" ones, but you better go to that page yourself and millions of others like that to see what the khlaq-e-Khuda thinks of you and me and all us Muslims and our religion and our prophet. They derive most of this "knowledge" from early Muslim sources. Christian crusaders and other Islamophobes exaggerated some of these stories and describes them in their own hateful style, but they are all based on early Muslim Arab narrations revered by us.

    And please don't tell me that Times of India is an Islamophobic newspaper.

    Sun to sahi, jahan men hai tera fasana kya?
    Kehti hai tujh ko khalq-e-Khuda, ghaibana kya?
    --- Aatish Lakhnawi

    ----------

    Acrobat•9288
    ISLAMIC PRAYER IS HATE SPEECH: Have you ever wondered why so many times muslims come out of mosque after their prayer and start violence ? One would assume that going to a religious place should make one more peaceful and tolerant but there is a reverse effect on muslims. In order to understand this mystery, you should know that Islamic prayer is loads of hate speech. Rather than filling one with peace, Islamic prayer creates agitation and hatred in the mind of a muslim. Let us look into this in detail. In their daily prayer, muslims have to repeat the following Quranic verse multiple times: "Guide us to the straight path, the path of those whom you have favored, Not of those who have incurred your wrath, nor of those who have gone astray" [Quran 1:6-7]. It looks innocuous but it is not. Muslims understand "those who have incurred your wrath" to be Jews and "those who have gone astray" to be Christians and of course, it is muslims who are on the straight path, and thus have Allah's favor. In short, this daily prayer reiforces a hateful idea in a muslim's mind that Allah hates Jews and Christians and favors muslims. And if Allah hates them, how a muslim can ever love them ? If you are a polytheist and feeling relieved that you have been spared, your happiness will be short lived. Your turn comes of Friday when Muslims also have to recite Sura 62 (The Friday Congregation) and Surah 63 (The Hypocrites). Surah 62 specifically condemns polytheists as being in "gross error" and Jews are compared to "a donkey laden with books" [Quran 62:5]. Suran 63 condemns "hypocrites" (those who have renounced their Muslim faith) as: "They are the enemy. Guard yourself against them". Comparing people to "donkeys" is appalling type of hate speech and racism. So muslim prayer, whether daily prayer or Friday congregational one, are horrible sorts of hate crime and bigotry which deserves censure and even a ban in civilized societies. After reciting these communal prayers, only riots can be expected from muslims which happens so often.
    ---
    Acrobat•9288
    ISLAM IS NAKED COMMUNALISM: Many people innocently believe that Islam, like most religions, teaches peace, brotherhood and respect for other religions. The truth, on the contrary, is that Islam preaches NAKED COMMUNALISM. Allah Himself asserts in the Quran that He sent Islam to abrogate and replace all other religions: "He (Allah) has sent His Apostle (Muhammad) with the guidance and the (only) true religion that He may make it prevail over all the religions" [Quran 48:28]. Muslims believe that after the birth of Islam under Muhammad, pre-Islamic civilizations became recognized as the age of ignorance (Jahiliyah). Muslim believe that the vestiges of the pre-Islamic Jahiliyah age must be replaced by the perfect religious, political and cultural civilization of Islam. This is the reason whenever muslims gain majority in a country, they start destruction of the non-muslim culture which they consider as ignorance (Jahiliyah). From India to Spain, the destruction of countless numbers of Pagan temples, Buddhist monasteries, Christian churches, Jewish synagogues, and so on bears testimony of the widespread destruction of non-Islamic cultures by Muslim invaders. This urge for obliterating their pre-Islamic past is not just an idle desire amongst Muslims. In their respective homelands, they have been actively and violently working on destroying the vestiges of non-Islamic residues of their pre-Islamic Jahiliyah heritage. For example, the Taliban Islamists demolished eighteen centuries-old Bamiyan Buddha statues in Afghanistan in 2001; Islamists bombed a first-century rock carving of Buddha in the Swat valley in northwest Pakistan in September 2007; they bombed the wondrous ninth-century Borobudur Buddhist temple in Central Java (Indonesia) in January 1985; Islamists in Egypt attacked world’s oldest monastery at Deir Abu Fana in June 2008. For the same reason, Babur built the Babri mosque over Ram temple. A determined effort to obliterate all that is NOT Islamic is also witnessed in the continued Muslim ethnic-cleansing of Hindus in Bangladesh and Pakistan. Following the Partition of India in 1947, Hindus constituted about 25–30 percent of the population in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh), while about 20 percent in Pakistan. Today, their numbers have dwindled to about 10 percent in Bangladesh and 1 percent in Pakistan. It is sheer hypocrisy that these muslims demand equal rights, Sharia law and job reservation when in minority, just the opposite of how they treat minority. It is time that non-muslims start paying muslims in the same coin unless they leave the evil religion of Islam.
    ---
    Acrobat•9288
    ISIS REPRESENTS TRUE ISLAM: ISIS, an Islamic terrorist organization is now world famous after it unleashed a wave of terror in Iraq and Syria. Muslims apologetics have been quick to declare its activities as against Islam. It is unbelievable how much muslims lie to fool non-muslims in order to hide the evil of Islam. I challenge muslims to name EVEN A SINGLE cruel act of ISIS which is NOT supported by Islam. I will now provide reference to Islamic scriptures which support all the evil activities of ISIS (1) Female Genital Mutilation: [Sunan Abu Dawood 41.5251], [Sahih Muslim 3:684] (2) Forced conversion of non-muslims to Islam: [Quran 9:5] (3) Imposing Jizyah: [Quran 9:29] (4) Murdering people for refusing to convert to Islam: [Quran 9:29],[Quran 9:5] (5) Enslaving women and children for use as sex slaves: [Quran 33:26-27], [Quran 70:29-30], [Quran 23:5-6] (6) Selling enslaved women and children: [Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, (translation A Guillaume), Oxford University Press, Karachi, 2004 imprint, p.465] (7) Destroying religious structures of other faiths: [Ibn Ishaq, The Life of Muhammad, (translation A Guillaume), Oxford University Press, Karachi, 2004 imprint, p.552, 562]. These muslims think non-muslims are fools who do not know these things. In fact, non-muslims know the evil truth about Islam more clearly than practicing muslims. Most muslims have never read their scriptures from cover to cover and rely on LIARS like Zakir Naik and semi-literate mullahs who misguide them by hiding the truth. ISIS is following Islam word by word as per the teachings of its evil founder Muhammad, who was a champion in all these activities.
    -------
    Arrowhead•4247
    JIHAD: DESTRUCTION OF NON-MUSLIMS: There is extreme Islamic violence in the world in the name of Jihad. So what exactly is Jihad ? Most muslims do not have a precise answer to this. A deep study of Quran and Hadiths provides the shocking truth about Jihad which muslims either don't know or lie about. There are three components in Jihad 1) Imperialism of Islam over non-muslims: Allah gives sanction to muslims to impose Islamic Imperialism over non-muslims in the Quranic verse. "(Allah) hath made you (Muslims) His agents, inheritors of the earth’ and ‘promised to…make them rulers in the earth" [Quran 24:55, 6:165]. Guided by this verse, muslims are continuously waging wars against non-muslims and killing them to establish Islamic rule 2) Forced Conversion of muslims: This is sanctioned by the following Quranic verse "slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush, then if they repent and keep up prayer and pay the poor-rate (i.e., they become Muslim),leave their way free to them"[Quran 9:5]. Guided by this verse muslims have been persecuting non-muslims to convert them into Islam 3) Enslaving the non-muslims: Allah guides Prophet Muhammad on HOW to enslave the infidels, in the following verse: "And He (Allah) brought those of the People of the Scripture (i.e., Banu Qurayza) who supported them (i.e., the Quraysh) down from their strongholds, and cast panic into their hearts. Some (adult males) ye slew, and ye made captive some (women and children)" [Quran 33:26–27]. The whole Islamic history is filled with muslims enslaving Kafirs and exploiting them. So according to the doctrine of Jihad 1) muslims must attack non-muslims to rule over them 2) forcefully convert them to Islam and 3) enslave them (including women and children) by treating them as chattels. AND JIHAD IS MANDATORY FOR MUSLIMS. Prophet Mohammed set an example of HOW to follow Jihad by doing all these three things repeatedly in his life, which is a template for all muslims to follow. An Indian ex-muslim M.A. Khan has brilliantly described the ideology of Jihad in his classic book "Islamic Jihad: A legacy of forced conversion, imperialism and slavery". Islam is a threat to humanity and it must be banned in the world.
    ---
    Acrobat•9288
    ISLAM IS A RELIGION OF TERROR DUE TO ABROGATION: Muslim apologetics quote the peaceful verses in Quran to claim that Islam is a religion of peace. Critics of Islam quote the militant verses in Quran to claim that Islam is a religion of hate and terror. So what is the truth ? Luckily, Quran provides a clear guideline to sort out this dilemma. According to Quran, if two verses conflict each other then the later verse cancels or abrogates the earlier verse. This is called the doctrine of Abrogation or "al-Nasikh wal-Mansoukh" (the Abrogator and the Abrogated). This doctrine is based on the following Quranic verses: [Quran 2:106],[Quran 16:101],[Quran 13:39] and [Quran 17:86]. Abrogation is also confirmed in another important and reliable source of Islam, Sahih Muslim; it reads: “The Messenger of Allah (Muhammad) abrogated some of his commands by others, just as the Quran abrogates some part with the other.” [Sahih Muslim, Book 3, number 0675]. Let us now apply this guideline to understand the FINAL message of Quran. We refer to the last chapter of Quran Bara'a (Chapter 9) to see what it contains. Shockingly, we find this unbelievably horrible verse: "Fight those who do not believe in Allah or in the Last Day (of Judgement) and who do not consider unlawful what Allah and his messenger have made unlawful [Quran 9:29]....". This verse gives unambiguous guidance to muslims to butcher anybody who does NOT believe in Allah or his messenger Prophet Muhammad. This is the FINAL message of Quran and according to the law of Abrogation it supersedes or abrogates any peaceful verse that conflicts with it. After reading this when I hear from muslims that Islam is a peaceful religion, I WANT TO GIVE THEM A TIGHT SLAP. No matter how you look at Islam, you will come to only ONE conclusion that Islam is a religion of hatred, bigotry and terrorism.

    timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/rest-of-world/Islamists-seize-Christian-hostages-in-Kenya-university-attack-at-least-15-killed/articleshow/46785038.cms.

    By Sultan Shahin - 4/2/2015 8:15:41 PM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Nasreen Ahmed Saheb’s observation about “Secular Logic,” is right on the mark. If His Secular Holiness,” desires that Muslims should disown their faith and scriptures, then why is the person not offering any alternative? It seems like all this person is after is nothing but a downright confession from the “Moderate Muslims, come hell high water. Why is this person so much obsessed with an immense hatred of Islam and Muslims? If there be a valid reason, then what is it?

     

    Think about it, my fellow Muslims. Avowed bigots like “Akbaruddin Owaisi” spew his hatred in an open air, whereas, “Secular Logic,” spew his/her hatred in the cyber space. The only difference is that, one is brave enough to come out in the open using his own name, and the other act like “Chicken George,” with a concealed identity. Mind-boggling, isn’t it? Did I not tell each one of you that “Secular Logic,” will be back.     

     

    I am a critic, and that’s not going to change.” No, “Secular Logic,” we the Muslim readers welcome any critical commentator. It would be nice to make comment against any religion with a “Clean Heart,” and not with an “Unclean Heart, which has been the case with “Secular Logic.” Does this person realize that his/her mission has been only to criticize Islam and Qur’an? Why does he/she maintain a pin-drop silence when asked about the rape and oppression of women in India? Oops! I forgot the person has the full “Freedom of Speech,only to smear Islam, mock Qur’an and insult Muslims, as per the guidelines set forth by New Age Islam forum. 

     

    One confession which “Secular Logic,” made is, “it is easy to see through fakeness at some point.” I am sure that many readers have seen the naked fakeness, except for Sultan Shahin Saheb, Editor of New Age Islam. That’s pretty sad. Now we are left wondering as to how many good Muslim commentators have left the New Age Islam forum? As long as “Secular Logic,” shows Muslims, “a window to the world or one of the worlds, an essential world with which we have to live in constant touch,” then we all have to respect Sultan Saheb’s reasoning. Apparently, he knows best, how all of his fellow Muslim readers can learn from “His Secular Holiness.”

     

    Finally, the secular verdict is, “Criticism is logical.” Then the Muslim readers must openly ask, if “Muslim Terrorists,” are acting as “Ruthless Barbarians,” then how about the “Brutal Military Occupation,” of the Palestinian people by the Israeli Defense Forces? Here again, the person’s “Unclean Heart, will make his/her turn a blind eye, as if everything evil that is happening in the world is all due to the followers of Islam only. What a “Perverted Logic”!

     

    Very respectfully yours,


    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/2/2015 6:54:13 PM



  • While speaking at the UN Human Rights Council, I had expressed my satisfaction at the head of Sunni Islam's oldest seat of learning, Jamia al-Azhar admitting in a counter-terrorism conference in Mecca that extremism was caused by “corrupt interpretations of Quran and the sayings of Prophet Muhammad.” The Azhar head Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayyeb had said that Islamic curriculums teaching Quran and Hadees needed to change. However, while expressing my gratification, I had also warned that a half-hearted approach to reform will not work.

    Now it seems that either Sheikhul Azhar was simply playing to the counter-terrorism gallery at Mecca or was speaking as an individual scholar, not as head of Al-Azhar. For, in just a few weeks, Al-Azhar has started batting for all the gossip that found its way in the vast body of so-called ahadees narrated and recorded by a disparate group of people over centuries. And it's not just harmless gossip that ahadees contain. They also have stories that can be called pornography, character-assassination attempts of the Prophet (pbuh), narrations and statements attributed to the prophet (saw) encouraging intolerance, xenophobia, instigation to terrorism and violence and so on. One has to want to defame Islam and Prophet Mohammad (saw) to take an uncritical position towards so-called ahadees, as the Jamia al-azhar does, perhaps seeking to atone for the remarks made by Azhar head Sheikh Ahmed al-Tayyeb in Mecca last month.

    Egypt's Al-Azhar files complaint accusing TV show of twisting Islam

    Controversial TV presenter Islam El-Behery has been referred to official complaints body for 'questioning what is certain in religion' and stirring sectarian strife

    Ahram Online , Wednesday 1 Apr 2015

    Egypt's pre-eminent Sunni Islamic institute Al-Azhar took a swipe on Wednesday at TV presenter Islam El-Behery's show for what it described as a fierce and elusive campaign against the foundations of Islam and Islamic legacy.

    El-Behery, an Islamic researcher, has been providing his understanding of Islamic doctrine on his TV show and has stirred controversy for questioning the credibility of the sources of Prophet Muhammed's sayings, a prime reference for Islamic teachings next to the Quran.

    Al-Azhar filed a complaint to the General Body for Investment and Free Zones requesting for TV channels not to air El-Behery's show, also saying it has known that the authority planned to send a warning to Al Qahera Wal Nas, the channel which airs his show.

    El-Behery's show, the Al Azhar statement says, deliberately makes people question what is certain in religion and that it threatens social peace. Al-Azhar also accused the show of stirring sectarian strife.

    Egypt's President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi has more than once called on Al-Azhar to fight what he labelled as faulty Islamic teachings and extremism, amid a crackdown against Islamists across the nation following the ouster of Islamist president Mohamed Morsi in 2013.

    http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/126667/Egypt/Politics-/Egypts-AlAzhar-files-complaint-accusing-TV-show-of.aspx

    By Sultan Shahin - 4/2/2015 1:32:24 PM



  • "The primary motive of Secular Logic appears to be to see Muslims disown their faith, scriptures etc"
    :D No, Mr Ahmed. I am not Rajnikanth.
    " but he also tries his best to appear fair and not a rabid hater of Islam."
    Hate is illogical. Criticism is logical. I am a critic, and that's not going to change. Nobody can appear fair. It is easy to see through fakeness, at some point. I see through so many people. 
    By secularlogic - 4/2/2015 10:07:55 AM



  • Sad state of affairs as described by Sultan Shahin sahib. It seems Indian Muslims are Sufis in name only. Intolerance levels in the subcontinent among both Muslims and Hindus are probably at a higher level now than they ever have been before. Murders of  Pansare, Dabholkar, Masum Akhtar and Washiqur Rahman show a worrisome trend. Take good care of yourself, Shahin sahib. By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 4/2/2015 1:47:08 AM



  • There is nothing in this world without a reason. The behaviour of Secular Logic and Rational is not without reason. What Tagore, Sri Aurobindo and a host of others said about Muslims and Islam is not without a reason. 

    Satbir Singh Bedi, in another thread says "Quran does sanction bloody Jihad against disbelievers." I could have asked him to read part 4 of my article "the story of the prophetic mission of Muhammad (pbuh)" which covers the Medinian period and all the early battles of Islam to show that the battles  were not against disbelief but against Religious persecution. I did not, because the Muslim readers of this website themselves are not convinced. How can I then convince Mr Bedi who apparently has many Muslim friends and is familiar if not with the "authentic" Quran but with the Muslim mind and what they themselves think about the battles of Islam?

    The primary motive of Secular Logic appears to be to see Muslims disown their faith, scriptures etc but he also tries his best to appear fair and not a rabid hater of Islam. He tries every trick in the world to extract some "confessions" and "admissions". Being human, this exchange is a two way street. While he is trying to influence the Muslims, he is not free from being influenced either. So engage him if you can or must or just leave him alone. He does not stalk you if you ignore him.

    Rational has not behaved badly in the recent past and yet some commentators, keep on about him, trying to provoke him into saying something. To his credit, he is ignoring them. He is not a stalker either.

    If I were to ask Shahin Sb to intervene, I would ask him to ban the stalkers from this website because stalking is criminal and not just physical stalking, but also stalking on the Internet.

    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/2/2015 1:39:06 AM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin Sahab,

    If a commentator likes "nothing about Islam", I wonder why should he take the trouble to post comments, however flowery and impeccably phrased, on this website, which I believe has the sole objective of taking Muslims forward, and bringing peace, progress and harmony in the society. And if, as you said, this fellow's remarks are 'hate-filled', he can do more harm by hurting the sentiments of the Muslim commentators, who will then give up on this site rather than read hateful materials, leaving it to only those commentators whose singular object is to find fault with Islam and Muslims. I have sounded you in the past that a boundary line must be drawn between freedom of speech and libel, calumny and abusive, and if a Muslim reader feels that somebody is virtually abusing his Prophet (quoting sexually provocative and apocryphal hadith as historical truth) or scandalizing his wife or profaning the Qur'an like saying that it is full of pornography and that somebody has a Muslim name, and he is being supported by a group of such people like a band of like-minded demonizers of Islam, I assure you, he is bound to give up on your site. Not surprising the participation of Muslim commentators has reduced considerably over the recent years.

    The following is extracted from my related article referenced below

    "The universal notion of ‘Freedom of speech’ empowers the oppressed to speak against the oppressor, the subject against the King, the holder of one set of doctrine (sect, religion, politics etc.) to question or criticize its opponents and so forth. The objective is to open up human mind to new thoughts, allow it to explore fresh ideas, scan new horizons and rise to new heights. But if the freedom of speech is used in a calculated way to

    insult other’s deities and ii) demonize a group of people, a website that has the rubric of Islam attached to it, must not entertain it as the Qur’an, which is the highest authority on all matters in Islam does not permit either of the above attitudes (6:108, 49:11).

    Besides, if used to malign other’s faith or mock a rival group of people, it can open a floodgate of unhealthy discussions that will conduce to ill will among people, spawn evil and render this website into a vicious gossip forum. Let us take a few examples fresh in mind to illustrate this point, without meaning any offence to anybody.

    Re:

    Use and Misuse of Freedom of Expression on this Islamic website (New Age Islam) and need for a Clear Agenda

    http://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/use-and-misuse-of-freedom-of-expression-on-this-islamic-website-(new-age-islam)-and-need-for-a-clear-agenda/d/8997

    I appreciate, as an Ace journalist you want to give the stage to everyone regardless of what he says, but as stated in my above article, that can go beyond the spirit of 'Freedom of Speech.' Besides, a 'hate-filled speech may be returned by a hateful speech and stall any fruitful discussion in your forum and repel many good and brilliant people who do not want to read hateful materials.

    By muhammad yunus - 4/1/2015 10:29:17 PM



  • The way things are developing in India, I think, my Foundation will have to come up with another urgent project. As graveyards and namaze-janaza are closing down for progressive, cultural Muslims who are not what is called "practicing" Muslims, praying five times a day, acquiring a black mark on their forehead by the time they reach the graveyard, an arrangement will have to be made for separate graveyards for what are called in the community dahriya musalmans.

     Fear of Islam has been growing among Muslims who have opinions even slightly varying from the madrasawala. The equation is a multitude of unthinking, irrational,  madrasawala versus one thinking, rational Muslim. Will his rationality save him/her.  It couldn't save Masum Akhtar of West Bengal and Washiqur Rahman of Bangladesh. Of course, it couldn't save American/Bangladeshi/Avijeet. Maybe Poor Avijeet had been writing with a pseudonym of Secular-Democracy or Logic or hats off, he would be alive today. And at such a time, Observer Saheb has outed his name and sent us his pictures too. I had stopped asking him to do so and stopped using his name along with Observer in my own comments too. After Avijeet's assassination, it had become necessary to keep rationality under wraps.

    What are my chances of survival? God, of course, is the final arbiter. But on earth my two maulana interlocutors have told me that they consider me kafir but not gabil-e-gardanzadni (worthy of the honour of beheading) yet, Why? Because I am a kafir only by virtue of not calling Ahmadiyas kafir. That's all, there is no specific charge against my conduct. But there is a warning, coming from someone who was a friend 30 years ago. I don't know who he is but for old time's sake, he will not get me killed, until, yes, there is a condition, until, I confine my work to websites and books, magazines, etc. If I start going out in the field, talking to Muslims, showing them what I consider the right path, I would have crossed a red line and then I am on my own or on the mercy of those who think they decide our fates on the ground, without permission from God.

    By Sultan Shahin - 4/1/2015 3:47:04 PM



  • In some of the comments posted recently some of us Muslims have expressed our usual contempt for all other religions, indeed, all those who do not agree with us hundred per cent. None of us has gone through a madrasa education which directly or indirectly teaches us to stay away from kuffar, mushrikeen, munafiqeen. ghairmuwahhedeen, muawahhedeen, muqalledeen, ghairmuqalledeen, and of course, Shias, Sunnis of some schools like Wahhabi-Salafi, and of course, Ahmadi, etc. And yet, we too feel contempt for other religions. Contempt for others must run through our blood. Maybe an exchange of blood from and uneducated Hindu - educated are very confused - who bows down to every place of worship he happens to pass by, regardless of which religion or denomination it belongs to, might help. But we should not give him our blood.

    I hope SecularLogic continues to provide us with a window to the world or one of the worlds, an essential world with which we have to live in constant touch.

    I already miss hats off's incisive, hate-filled barbs, written in an impeccable British English, sometimes giving the taste of satire, sometimes humour, sometimes contempt, but always readable. I may have inadvertently caused his departure, but I had only asked him if he ever liked anything about Islam or Muslims; he could have ignored me, given a diplomatic reply, yes, but, although, so, etc. or given a blunt truthful reply: "No, I don't." Either way, he could have moved on.

    In any case I do not like separations and divorces. Have just celebrated our 35th wedding anniversary.

    I promise to not ask such uncomfortable questions, if hats off comes back.

    By Sultan Shahin - 4/1/2015 3:45:14 PM



  • How Interesting!Rabindranath Tagore's remark dated Sept. 1931 "We cannot afford in this heart-breaking time of crisis, to indulge in mutual recrimination" is so true today.Rafiq Sahab's remark, 'respect begets respect' is axiomatic.Secular Logic's assertion: "I strive to have nothing but the purest thoughts in my mind and pray for peace, tolerance and brotherhood of all mankind" mirrors the vision of Islam: "a universal brotherhood of humanity that will allow people of diverse faith, culture, color and language to live together, to know each other and to assist each other to make life easy and peaceful for all human beings."

     [Ch. 9.7, Essential Message of Islam]

    All is well that ends well.

    By muhammad yunus - 4/1/2015 8:13:27 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Subject: HIS SECULAR HOLINESS

     

    Secular Logic,” seems to have reached the end of what he calls, “Fruitful Discussion. Not sure, what he means by it, but with all the circling around, what did the Muslims learn from this person? Zero Knowledge.

     

    Too bad that a single word, “Unclean, bothered the hell out of the person. Just ignore the remarks. In fact, the person was truly describing his own character, and as Muslims, we can say that, we are indeed honored to be insulted by a person of his/her eminence, good breeding, impeccable manners, vast intellect, unwavering secular values  ,,,,,,  blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.”

     

    For a person with good breeding in the Hindu culture, deliberately avoided to make a sincere attempt, in acknowledging that, there are major social problems in India. We all saw his vast intellect of repeatedly ignoring any reasonable explanation. Of course, how can we forget his unwavering secular values, who intentionally called out Muslims as, “the most biased, rabid, brainwashed, churlish and irrational people on this planet.   

      

    Secular Logic,” will be right back on this forum to thrash another comment. He cannot live without the so-called joy of provocation. This person was quick to quote Rabindranath Tagore, but failed to appreciate the following:

     

    FOR THE SAKE OF BLEEDING HUMANITY

     

    We cannot afford in this heart-breaking time of crisis, to indulge in mutual recrimination; but let us appeal to all God-fearing Mohammedans for the sake of their own great religion and culture and for the sake of bleeding humanity, to join hands with us in dealing with evil which may grow into a permanent source of futility bringing upon our unfortunate country the disgust and derision of the whole world.

     

    Rabindranath Tagore

    Calcutta Statesman

    September 5, 1931 

     

    We the “Moderate Muslims” have already noticed the irrational behavior big time. Respect begets respect. That’s one of the main reasons, I, Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia,” lost respect for a person who literally turned out to be nothing but an arrogant “Intellectual Bigot.” Yes, my comments were harsh to which I have no regrets. If a person constantly barge in the Islamic Forum to demoralize the Muslims, then any sensible Muslim must not act like a “Coward,” and put up with the insults. One needs to be bold enough to speak out and defend the religion of Islam.  

     

    All in all, let’s wait for another grand episode to commence. Sit back and relax till “Secular Logic,” comes right back to assault Islam, mock Qur’an and insult Muslims again. That’s his life’s mission, and not to mention, he is blinded with the hatred of Muslims, period.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/31/2015 11:53:23 PM



  • Mr Yunus,

    It is alright. I am not offended. "Believers" and "Muslims" has become so synonymous that one has to make a special effort to remember that others are believers too. :)

    Mr Naseer Ahmed, 

    I did read your explanation of 'spiritually impure' both times that it was posted. 

    Its religiosity or non religiosity apart, the fact that the Quran calls polytheists and idol worshippers spiritually impure makes it seem like a declaration from God.

    Not being allowed to enter the mosque is a lesser issue than declaring people of other faiths to be spiritually impure. 

    To both gentlemen:

    I think we have reached the end of fruitful discussion. Let's move on.

    To Mr Lodhia: You wish me to say some nice things about Muslims and Islam. Let me say some nice things about you, if that will do. I am honoured to be noticed by a man of your eminence, good breeding, impeccable manners, vast intellect, unwavering secular values, mild, beguiling and concise speech, superlative discernment of social ills vs religious ills, sleuthing abilities, an uproarious sense of humour..... indeed, the list will ever remain incomplete. You are a credit to your faith. 
    By secularlogic - 3/31/2015 10:54:46 PM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Talking about “Flip-Flop, here are some of the quotes which will help enlighten all of my fellow Muslims about a mysterious personality named “Secular Logic”:

     

    My being an atheist has nothing to do with whether I find your answer satisfactory or ridiculous, because though I don't personally believe in God, I empathise with people's need for belief in God. Some of the people I love most dearly are believers. Hindu, of course.

     

    By secularlogic - 3/31/2015 10:18:47 AM

     

    I do perform the rituals associated with idol worship. At that time, I strive to have nothing but the purest thoughts in my mind and pray for peace, tolerance and brotherhood of all mankind and say, if you exist, God, make the earth worthy of being called your creation.

     

    By secularlogic - 3/30/2015 12:35:50 AM

     

    I shall certainly worship all the idols that exist in the world, whether you like it or not.

     

    By secularlogic - 3/28/2015 12:13:02 AM

     

    I do not think it is a sin to worship idols or several gods. One may worship, one, many, or none so long as it brings him peace of mind and does not trouble others.

     

    By secularlogic - 3/27/2015 7:04:12 AM

     

    Respect, sir, has to be earned. I cannot force myself to respect anything. I do not place any religion to be exempt from critical examination. Most religions, after a point, require you to suspend disbelief, and believe in something because some Prophet, some book tells you it is so. This does not appeal to me.

     

    By secularlogic - 3/26/2015 11:48:00 PM

     

    Well, I do love stone metal wood idols, because they are a part of my culture, many of them are beautiful, and it is belief which endows them with godliness. Those who don't believe that God pervades every atom in the universe will see the idols as mere stones. Which is OK with me. The point is, if there is a religion that has idol worship as a part of its belief system, secularism demands that you respect it. Islam doesn't.


    By secularlogic  - 3/26/2015 11:22:58 PM

     

    Guess what! Talking about “Insanity, here is a classic example of how “Secular Logic,” twist and turn using his “Unclean Heart. That’s exactly where the problem lies. Forget spirituality. Focus on insincerity on his/her part. Then he/she confirms that, “some of the people I love most dearly are believers. Hindu, of course.” Why not? Nothing wrong with having immense love for your own people. Though, I did not read any comment on this particular forum that forced “Secular Logic,” not to worship idols or to change his religion, or for the lack of better word, “Secularism.” Hence, why is this person carrying nothing but a personal vendetta against Islam and Qur’an?   

     

    What’s so remarkable is that he/she is relentless to compel Muslims to abandon Holy Qur’an. Ask yourself, why would a person who boast about, “I strive to have nothing but the purest thoughts in my mind and pray for peace, tolerance and brotherhood of all mankind,” smear the religion of Islam and continue to make insulting remarks about Muslims? After all, “What does all these quotes tells us about ‘Secular Logic’ own moral character?” Your guess is as good as mine, ladies and gentlemen.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/31/2015 11:39:11 AM



  • Sir, Your oft-repeated mantra that someone has not understood Islam and as such, he or she is ignorant, is an insult to other's intelligence.

     You gave the impression that you are the only person on earth who has understood Islam. It is an outright arrogance on your part and arrogant people live on earth with Allah's curses!

    By Mohammad Asghar - 3/31/2015 11:36:26 AM



  • Dear Secular Logic,

    My opening words in the last comment; 'believers and Hindus' are technically incorrect and offensive as Hindus are also believers. Sorry for the Freudian slip. What I meant was I love believers regardless of religions and the unbelievers as well.

    There is a lot in my mind and I am not infallible either, so you cannot blame me for an inadvertent slip in putting my thoughts.

     
    By muhammad yunus - 3/31/2015 11:02:39 AM



  • Dear Secular,

    I love both believers and Hindus and all mankind. My (jt) exegetic work which is duly approved and authenticated and under posting at this website incorporates this statement:

    "Pieced together, the foregoing verses and those in the last two chapters bring across the Qur’anic vision of a universal brotherhood of humanity that will allow people of diverse faith, culture, color and language to live together, to know and respect each other and assist each other, to make life easy and peaceful for all human beings. Some Muslim scholars, however, advocate that the non-Muslims (in its present day sense), who do not believe in the Prophet Muhammad, will not qualify for God’s mercy. They interpret the generic word islam (submitting/ orienting oneself to God, Ch. 7) in the verse 3:85 (underlined below), in its popular restrictive sense as the religion of the followers of the Prophet Muhammad. This is misleading as the preceding verses (3:83-84), demonstrate the generic character of the word islam appearing in 3:85. ....
    Ch. 9.7 Essential Message of Islam.
    We have to move forward and
    turn enemies into friends for common good. God bless you and make you a good and righteous human being.

    By muhammad yunus - 3/31/2015 10:54:54 AM



  • Yunus Saheb,

     

    Fear and Hate drives “Secular Logic,” to continue to thrash any sensible explanations which you submit to him/her attention. Isn’t it a complete insanity?

     

    Beware that the “Intellectual Bigot,is working in any one of the journalistic bureaus. He/she is way too smart. You should by now try to understand his pattern of communicating. Nothing satisfies the person, until and unless, there is some sort of confession to his/her will. His/Her task is to extract confession from Muslims. In short, “Secular Logic,” is out to get any of the learned Muslims to fall into his/her trap so that he/she can use it somewhere down the road.

     

    May I humbly ask, “How many times you will continue to respond to the person?” At the end of the day, you will again be knocked off, all owing to the lack of confession, and that also, the way which will only satisfy “Secular Logic.” What he/she is literally trying to do is to confuse someone in a deceptive manner. In other words, you as a “Moderate Muslim, must confess to all the crimes committed by the “Muslim Terrorists. That’s what he is after, and that’s the exact reason why he/she continues to give a signal that we must do away with our Holy Qur’an, as it is the root of all the evils in the world. That’s just the bottom line.

     

    Sadly, Sultan Shahin Saheb has not been able to realize that “Secular Logic,” ultimate motive for the past two years has been based upon his insincere actions using his unclean heart. If he/she was sincere and pure in heart, then one could at least read a comment here and there that give examples of good Muslims around the world. He/She is extremely selectively in passing on such remarks so that the readers would think continue to think that he/she is truly a genuine person and passionately concerned about the welfare of Muslims at large.

     

    Finally, the problem is, New Age Islam forum’s “Commentary Section, has to run by those who spit out hatred of Islam and insult Muslims. Look at “Ex-Tablighi,” how he engages in the debate and does his own sweet song and dance by insulting not only Qur’an, but also the Prophet of Islam. Someone has to keep the comments running. Sultan Saheb is powerless and cannot say “Enough of Insults.He cannot even draw a line of how the debate should be conducted. The constant insults poured on the comment section of the forum, is all well and good according to him. Therefore, I personally request you to continue to submit good articles as you always do, but try to address to the “Respected Muslim Readers,only. The word to the wise is sufficient.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/31/2015 10:53:06 AM



  • Secular Logic,

    Just scroll down and see. I have answered the question on uncleanliness twice. 

    The other points are best taken up in greater detail in an article.
    By Naseer Ahmed - 3/31/2015 10:50:52 AM



  • Mr Naseer Ahmed,

    I believe I have read that article and we had some discussion about how many people agreed with that definition of Kaafir. I am satisfied with your definition, but I so long as a critical mass of Muslims does not endorse it, the word and the recommended behavior towards Kafir associated with it will remain a cause of inter-religious disharmony. 

    Also, with such a nice definition of Kaafir, I fail to understand that how come the polytheists are then called spiritually impure. They believe in their religion, hence they are as spiritually pure as the nearest Muslim, I should think. And why they are subjected to Jizya by the Quran; and why a Muslim may not marry a spiritually pure polytheist without converting her/him. It makes no sense. 
    By secularlogic - 3/31/2015 10:24:43 AM



  • Mr Yunus, I am sorry if pointed questions are making you uncomfortable. Actually, it is pointed questions and pointed answers that are usually more clear than the roundabout ones that you are wont to give. I do read your lengthy responses most of the times, but have to hunt for what you actually mean. 

    In the answer you have given, I think you mean that the Quran frowns on the above mentioned modes of worship, but you hesitate to make a judgement because your conscience tells you that it is the actions of a person that make him a sinner, not his mode of worship. But in deference to the Quran, you prefer to leave it to God to decide. Am I right?

    My being an atheist has nothing to do with whether I find your answer satisfactory or ridiculous, because though I don't personally believe in God, I empathise with people's need for belief in God. Some of the people I love most dearly are believers. Hindu, of course. 

    I respect your desire to finish this discussion because as you say, it is not going anywhere. We are just recyling old arguments. This process will continue with other participants, on other forums, though you and I decide to quit. Thank you for your time, Sir.
    By secularlogic - 3/31/2015 10:18:47 AM



  • Secular Logic,

    My article " who is a kafir in the Quran? Part 3 gives a very direct answer.
    By Naseer Ahmed - 3/31/2015 9:04:39 AM



  • “Satyamev Jayate - Truth alone triumphs” By muhammad yunus - 3/31/2015 8:48:21 AM



  • Dear Secular Logic,

    Your asking me pointed question: "to unequivocally say that those who worship idols and who practice polytheism commit no sin?" 

    I am no one to make any such judgmental statement.

    All my comments are drawn on the Qur'an and you must make your own interpretation - if indeed you read the comments seriously.

    I never make any judgmental statement about any category of people for the entire human race is the creation of God and blessed with divine spirit.

    No doubt the Qur'an regards any association with God as the gravest sin, but it also declares:

    "....the abode (of wrong doers) will be hell - an evil refuge (4:97); except those among men, women and children, who are helpless, have no means (for any guidance), and are not guided on (the right) way (4:98). Those God may pardon, for God is Most Forgiving and Pardoning” (4:99)

    “Those who believe, and those who are Jews, and Sabians and Christians and Magians, and those who associate (others with God) (idol worshipers) - God will judge between them on the Day of Judgment. Indeed, God is Witness to all things” (22:17).

    Once again I will say, God and only God knows who all will earn sin and who all are rightly guided.

    I think I cannot add any further value to our debate for we seem to be getting nowhere.

    As a parting note, I quote the following extracts from my articles drawn on the Qur'an. :

    "The Qur’anic broader notion of Taqwa (Moral Uprightness) and its association with the deeper impulses of all humanity demolishes any distinction of people on religious ground. A Muslim person (regardless of gender) most visibly given to religious symbolism or devoted to religious rituals, may lag behind or even fail in Taqwa and disqualify for divine rewards, while a non-Muslim person, probably even an atheist, who has no lesser share of divine inspiration in his/her subconscious soul, may excel in Taqwa and earn divine reward despite his lacking in religious symbolism and visible or regimented devotion – though God knows best who all will earn divine reward."

    You have to make your own judgment by reading the article for I cannot claim infallibility in interpreting the divine speech and that is precisely the reason I say, God knows best - an expression that will sound absurd to an atheist that you claim to be

    The Quran's Broader Notion of Taqwa – An Irrefutable Testimony to Its Universalism

    This is to dispel the myth of Islamic exclusiveness propagated by the foursome of its ignorant detractors - the Mullas, the orthodoxy, the propagandist scholarship and the Islamopath intellectuals.

    The work is inspired by the Poet Laureate Muhammad Iqbal’s outburst: 'Phul Ki Patti Se Kat Sakta Hai Heere Ka Jigar - Marde Nadan Par Kalame Narm O Nazuk Be Asar' [“The petal of flower may pierce the heart of the diamond – but the Noble Words have no effect on the ignorant.”]   

    The Quran's Broader Notion of Taqwa – An Irrefutable Testimony to Its Universalism

    http://newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/the-quran-s-broader-notion-of-taqwa-–-an-irrefutable-testimony-to-its-universalism/d/7889

    It had been enlightening exchanging views with you. Thank You.

    By muhammad yunus - 3/31/2015 8:46:26 AM



  • Hello Yunus Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Subject: WHERE IS THE COMMON SENSE & HUMAN DECENCY?

     

    I keep cautioning you that the “Grand Prosecutor, like “Secular Logic,” will never ever be convinced with any answer which you and Naseer Ahmed Saheb give him/her pertaining to Islam and our Holy Qur’an. I am not sure whether he is a man, woman or simply a plain old coward. No Muslim readers know this person’s real identity. Think about it, if the person is a real “Man, he would be willing to answer some tough questions and not act like sissy.

     

    It is obvious that this person is totally and absolutely convinced that it is unwise to address the wrongdoings in his own backyard. “Secular Logic,” full-time task is to poke his nose in the New Age Islam forum and gleefully smear the religion of Islam and on top of it, insult Muslims. You and Naseer Saheb on the other hand, go an extra-mile to try to give answers, only to realize that he will shun it altogether. Why do we allow ourselves to be humiliated? Are we the Muslims that unworthy?

     

    It is time for wise Muslims like you and Naseer Saheb to come to a forgone conclusion that “Secular Logic,” mission is to “Demoralize Muslims” and nothing else. I am afraid Sultan Shahin Saheb feels that is it all fair game. What is beyond my comprehension is, why would an editor of the New Age Islam forum encourage such “One-Sided” debates. Perhaps, he must be living under the false impression that, we the Muslim readers, must continue to absorb more insults in order for us to learn the civilized way.        

     

    In any case, I continue to wonder when will Sultan Shahin Saheb wake-up? Apparently, he still believes that the Muslim readers can learn a whole lot from “Secular Logic,” who has shown nothing but contempt for Muslims. Where is the common sense and human decency?  

     

    Very sincerely yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/31/2015 5:59:39 AM



  • Mr Yunus,

    You yourself are not convinced about whether idolatory is a sin or not. How are you going to convince all Muslims to not hate present day idol worshippers?

    Do you unequivocally say that those who worship idols and who practice polytheism commit no sin? 

    Don't give me the "God knows best" line. Tell me what you think. 
    By secularlogic - 3/31/2015 12:52:18 AM



  •  Dear Secular Logic,

    Your statement that all Hindus believe the God is unseen and one lends credence to my following article that had received some criticism:

    The Hindus Are Not ‘The Mushrikin’ Mentioned In the Qur’an

    http://www.newageislam.com/interfaith-dialogue/hindus-are-not-‘the-mushrikin’-mentioned-in-the-qur’an/d/5655

    Talking about the issue of spiritual 'impurity' believe in Oneness of God 'technically' renders one spiritually 100% believer in God - that is spiritually pure. However, I dug out my article on the theme referenced below which tables the following conclusion based on arguments backed by the Qur'an and Reason that the Qur'an asks us to use:

    "In consideration of the foregoing Qur’anic illustrations, any suggestion to regard polytheists and atheists and any other category of unbelievers post the revelation era as spiritually unclean (Rijz) stands untenable. This demeaning word was directed to the highly recalcitrant pagan Arabs of the Prophet’s era, who, for more than 20 years at a stretch, violently resisted his mission to establish Islam as an historical reality and are described as the enemies of God as well as the Prophet (8:60). Islam became a historical reality as the revelation came to a close and with this closed the history of its mission. Hence, any community paralleling the Arab pagans of the Prophet’s with the divine stigma of Rijz are no more to encountered, and if so God alone knows the pure from the Rijz - it is not for the Muslim to claim moral purity (Zakah) (53:32) by slapping this stigma on the ‘Mushrikin’ and atheists of their era.

    This opens up the question of allowing the Mushrikin and atheists to pay a visit to the Sacred Mosque if they so desire, despite the incongruity of their religious thoughts/ intellect with this ancient symbol of monotheism (9:17). This certainly needs deep reflection. Notwithstanding the verse 9:28, literally barring the Mushrikin from approaching the Sacred Mosque, the engineering, design, construction and beautification of its superstructure may have received considerable inputs from the atheists and Mushrikin. What sin may be there to allow these people to visit the Sacred Mosque, which the Qur’an describes as a resort for all humanity, a sanctuary (2:125)? God alone knows! This writer has attempted to draw the best meaning of the Qur’an (39:18, 39:55) and if he has gone overboard, for all its warnings in the Sura al Tawbah, God also promises to turn in mercy to whom He wills for God is Most Forgiving and Most Merciful (9:227).

    The arguments tabled on the strength of the Qur’an can also help in expanding the horizon of Islamic thoughts to include the atheists and polytheist, dead or alive, in their prayers despite the prohibition that a literal reading of the verse 9:80 imposes. This is urgently needed to enable the Muslims to play their role as scripturally the most balanced community (2:143). 

    Ref:

     Are All The Mushrikin For All Times “Spiritually Unclean” (Rijz) (Literal Reading Of The Verse 9:28 Of The Qur’an)?

    http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/are-all-the-mushrikin-for-all-times-“spiritually-unclean”-(rijz)-(literal-reading-of-the-verse-9-28-of-the-qur’an)?/d/14192

     Thanks!

    By muhammad yunus - 3/30/2015 10:46:55 PM



  • Secular Logic,

    I did not talk about either physical or spiritual uncleanliness. This is what I said which is materially different.

    As far as being clean/unclean is concerned, it has nothing to do with religion. I take the verse in its historical context as referring to a specific set of people with practices inside the Kaba that were considered unclean.

    The same people are not banned from any other mosque except the “Sacred Mosque” because they did not practice anything in the other mosques.

    Whether banning them was proper? Well the pagans had banned Muslims from worshiping in the Kaba before and severely persecuted those who did.

    By Observer - 3/30/2015 1:36:23 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam forum

     

    Make a careful note of this statement of “Secular Logic,” as follows:

     

    “I strive to have nothing but the purest thoughts in my mind and pray for peace, tolerance and brotherhood of all mankind and say, if you exist, God, make the earth worthy of being called your creation.”

     

    Bravo! Isn’t he/she the same person who made a disrespectful remark about Muslims being “the most biased, rabid, brainwashed, churlish and irrational people on this planet.

     

    May be one day, after sincere worshipping of idols, the person will finally realize that there is such thing in life as, “the uncleanliness of the hearts.” This applies to those who brags about tolerance and brotherhood on one hand, and then with the same breath, spit out hatred straight from the unclean hearts about his/her feelings towards fellow humans.

     

    Good for Sultan Shahin, Editor of New Age Islam, to continue to respect the person who has openly insulted Muslims at large. I once question, the “Journalistic Integrity.” Now, I am afraid, the question will soon turn into “Moral Integrity.

     

    Have a blessed day.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/30/2015 1:27:10 AM



  • Hello Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Just as predicted the response from “Secular Logic,” is explicitly clear. Your continued “Faith, in advising all the Muslim leaders that one can learn a whole lot is now seriously questionable.

     

    Respecting your firm belief in “Freedom of Expression, but at times there has to be an ending of a given debate. It is obvious that the question that bothers the person will continue to haunt him/her, and the same old subject will be discussed for many more years on this forum.

     

    You just wait till, “Ex-Tablighi,” comes charging with the same old subject matter too. From one song and dance to another, it continues on and on and on. “Secular Logic,” believes that Islam has insecular values, therefore, you are likely to agree with him. That’s fine and dandy, too.

     

    Trust me, for the “Intellectual Bigots,” no answer, no matter how convincing will never be satisfactory. Imagine how he avoids making the so-called “Secular” statement, about the world’s most brutal system of oppression in India. Why should he/she? A bias person has only one target. Islam and Qur’an. That’s all I have noticed since October 2013, when I entered into New Age Islam forum. What is truly amazing is that, you continue to believe that Muslims can learn so much from such bigoted person.

     

    Let’s hope that you will finally come to realize that with the latest response to Muhammad Yunus Saheb and Naseer Ahmed Saheb, you should now try to explain it the best way you know. “No Political Correctness, please.

     

    Very sincerely yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com   By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/30/2015 1:09:57 AM



  • Mr Yunus, 
    Thank you for your intervention on the idol worship issue. 

    I have indeed not declared myself an idol worshipper. But I come from a community that believes in idol worship. The issue of idol worship has been debated threadbare in Hindu philosophy itself. I will not belabour you with the details, but the consensus that was reached at the end of these deliberations were extremely gratifying, and accomodative. All Hindus agree that God is unseen, and one. However, the human mind works in myriad ways, and for some, it is useful to have an image before him to focus his devotions on, so for us idol worship is an aid to spirituality, not a sin. This is acceptable to me. 

    I am a part of a society and it follows that I make myself agreeable to my friends and family. When the occassion calls for it, I do perform the rituals associated with idol worship. At that time, I strive to have nothing but the purest thoughts in my mind and pray for peace, tolerance and brotherhood of all mankind and say, if you exist, God, make the earth worthy of being called your creation. 

    If people think this is spiritually unclean they are welcome to their bigotry. 
    By secularlogic - 3/30/2015 12:35:50 AM



  • Why are so few Hindu religious leaders campaigning loudly against this demeaning and unhealthy job assigned to the lowest castes?

     

    Untouchability, manual scavenging and dry latrines may well be on their way out. Perhaps prime minister Modi’s “clean India” campaign will help. Change for India’s manual scavengers is painfully slow, however, and many Dalits are still forced to clean the waste of their upper-caste “betters” with few tools, compensation or protection.

     

    Change would go much faster if prominent Hindu religious leaders were willing to play a louder, and more active, role.

     

    Seema Guha

    To end manual scavenging in India, Hindu religious leaders must speak up

     

    Open Democracy 

    November 27, 2014

     

    Link to the Article

     

     

    THE WORLD’S MOST BRUTAL SYSTEMS OF OPPRESSION

     

    “Women suffering from caste-based violence in one of the world’s most brutal systems of oppression are asking for global solidarity in their struggle,” said Rikke Nöhrlind, director at the International Solidarity Network (IDSN). “The world that so strongly supported the fight against apartheid must now tackle caste discrimination with the same commitment.”

     

    UN Rights Council: End Caste-Based Rape, Violence Link to the Article

    June 17, 2015

     

     

    ONE OF THE LOWEST LEVELS OF FEMALE LITERACY IN THE WORLD

     

    Girls who survive pregnancy and are kept by their parents often suffer mistreatment and neglect. Many are malnourished (India has the highest rates of child malnutrition in the world – Unicef) and denied medical treatment; girls are breast fed for a far shorter period than sons and feed less well “because they fear good nourishment will speed the advent of puberty and the need for a costly wedding. While boys are taken immediately to hospital, sick girls are kept waiting because their families do not have the same interest in their survival,” states Ranjana Kumari of the Council for Social Research. If limited food is available it’s the girls who go hungry and suffer malnourishment, often leading to anaemia and stunted growth – leading to maternal and infant deaths, as well as low birth weight infants. Parents of girls are reluctant to send them to school fearing, if the school is some distance from home and the teachers are male, they may be sexually assaulted, so they are often kept at home and forced to carry out domestic chores. This has led to India having, at 67% (compared to 82% of men) one of the lowest levels of female literacy in the world. Lack of education directly affects the woman’s parenting skills and leads to poor child-care. Malnutrition and high infant mortality is a consequence as illiterate mothers fail to understand and exercise good health-promoting behavior, such as immunization and good personal hygiene.

     

    Graham Peebles

    The Tragedy Of Being A Girl In India Link to the Article

     

    Eurasia Review

    January 31, 2015              

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/30/2015 12:35:30 AM



  • Mr Yunus,

    Your explanation of the last line of the Surah Fatiha sounds really acceptable. 

    But the question is:
    1. Do all Muslims understand it that way? Or is it your understanding? A subjective understanding can hardly be accepted to be definitive. Al Baghdadi, in his only public appearance when he declared himself Caliph of the IS, definitely used the verse to mean non-Muslims and prayed for military defeat of these 'others' at the hands of the ISIS.
    2. Was it really meant to be that way? If one takes an overall view of the Quran, "others" may mean many other groups of people, and considering the aversion of Quran to idolators, polytheists, and other people who do not accept the Quran as the word of Allah and his messenger, it could equally well mean these. In fact, it seems more logical these are the people meant, for I think the next few verses ask for victory over these others. 

    I remain unconvinced, but pray that your explanation gets wide acceptance in the Muslim community. It will reduce the antagonism towards the 'others'.
    By secularlogic - 3/30/2015 12:22:06 AM



  • @Mr Yunus and Mr Observer

    Permit me to club my response to your patient explanations as there is considerable overlap in the issues involved.

    If I understand correctly, "Polytheists are unclean" refers not to their physical uncleanliness, but to their spiritual uncleanliness. Maulana Azad, Mr Yunus, Mr Observer, and Mr Lodhia seem to think that polytheists should feel flattered by this statement because it does not refer to they physical state. On the contrary, I find it even more obnoxious to say a person is spiritually unclean just because he is a polytheist/idol worshipper. 

    This is because it has multiple implications. If it were merely something Prophet Mohammad said, it could be dismissed as the pronouncement of a human being with biases against polytheism. But the Quran is supposed to be the word of God. If Islam claims that God says polytheists are unclean, they become a matter of unquestionable fact for the believers. 

    It is preposterous to claim that a person can be spiritually unclean merely based on his manner of worship. Hence my assertion that Islam has unsecular values stays. I do not wish to be truculent. But your explanations dont wash, and I feel sorry about that. 
    By secularlogic - 3/29/2015 11:46:23 PM



  • Dear Secular Logic,
    I just saw your comment to me as I had been busy drafting some critical comments already posted, Besides, I am not really a very speedy writer and only devote limited time to this site - visit it once or twice during the day when I pick the article of interest or look at the commentary section and respond: 
    Your question is: 
    As for the Surah Fatiha, all of it is fine except the last sentence. Who are those who have gone astray? 
    Ans. The Qur'an by definition is divine speech so only God knows who go astray.
    The Qur'an spells out its moral code in it comprising among others, (as commented by me recently)  " doing of good deeds, excellence in lawful pursuits, collaborating with the rest of humanity in all lawful avenues of life, cultivating exemplary conduct and behavior, social, moral and ethical awareness, eschewing of all kinds of mental defilements - greed, gluttony, obsession for possession, over-consumption, excessive suspicion, hatred of others, lust, lassitude, temptations for exceeding limits and so forth. It calls for empowering, respecting and caring for women, sharing of wealth with the community, shunning exclusivist, supremacist and triumphalist notions, making fair payment for goods and services, maintaining integrity in financial dealings, upholding justice, and cultivating all the noble virtues - moderation, tolerance, forgiveness, mercy, compassion, kindness to neighbors and strangers for example that distinguish man from beast."
      These collectively constitute the Upright path of the Qur'an that the Muslims plead to God to guide them to in the Sura Fatiha. So those who defy the Qur'anic tenets of morality which are no different from what a person of any religion or atheist may subscribe to are the one's who go astray. 
    Who are they?The Qur'an answers:
    “Indeed your Lord knows best who is straying from His path, and He knows best the rightly guided” (6:117). [The underlined statement is repeated in the verses 28:56, 28:85 and 68:7.]

    “‘Everyone acts according to what suits him, but God knows best who is guided on the (right) path’” (17:84).

     
    By muhammad yunus - 3/29/2015 9:46:23 PM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Subject: INNAHU KAANA TAWWAABA

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    With all the most valuable contributions coming forth from Muhammad Yunus Saheb and Naseer Ahmed Saheb, I personally feel that the comments should be more or less tilted towards uplifting the spirits of our fellow Muslims. To engage the Muslim minds in the romantic past is not a wise course of action so to speak.  

     

    Candidly speaking, battles, count of those wounded and dead and that also, from the 7th century will not help us resolve the modern day scourge of terrorism that has plagued the entire world in the very name of Almighty Allah. Our learned men know well that there is much to be desired to change the minds of Muslims. It will certainly not help if the references of battles during the living days of the Prophet of Islam are being continuously reminded to our fellow Muslims.

     

    Respected Maulana Wahiddudin Khan’s son, Dr. Saniyasnain Khan once gave me a copy of “The Qur’an, translated by T. B. Irving (Al-Hajj Ta’lim ‘Ali). He specifically mentioned to me that T. B. Irving hailing from American has translated Qur’an in a unique manner. Granted that many Muslims rely on Yusuf Ali’s and Marmaduke Pickthall’s translations, but on Surah Al:Nasr ([Divine] Support) – Chapter: 110; it is important to note that T. B. Irving was careful to plug in the word “Divine. I believe that it merely helps in defining Surah Al-Nasr in the light of God’s ultimate grace.

     

    Well then, the translation and commentary of Surah Al-Nasr by T. B. Irving is as follows:

     

    “These three verses were revealed at Mina on the eastern outskirts of Mecca during the Farewell Pilgrimage, and they, as well as v.281 in The Cow 2 and v. 3 in The Table 5, are dated after the chapter on Repentance 9. They might thus be considered to date chronologically from the late Madinese period, even though the geographical location is the vicinity of Mecca. These verses thus form the very last chapters (along with Plenty 108, which likewise consists of three verses),

     

    The message assures Muhammad that Islam will ultimately be successful. The word ‘support’ exists as both a noun and verb and is thus more effective in rendering such meanings or situations, so I use it in preference to ‘victory’ (which I have retained for the word fath as in Chapter 46).

     

    In the name of God, the Mercy-giving, the Merciful

     

    When God’s support comes

    as well as victory, and you see

    mankind entering God’s religion in droves;

    then hymn your Lord’s praise

    and beg Him for forgiveness,

    since He is so Relenting!

     

    Maulana Wahiddudin Khan’s translation and commentary of Surah Al-Nasr is as follows:

     

    “When God’s help and victory come, and you see people entering God’s religion in multitudes, then glorify your Lord with his praise and seek His forgiveness. He is always ready to accept repentance.”

     

    This chapter is one of the last revelations of the Qur’an received by the Prophet. The placed of its revelation was either the precincts of Makkah at his Farewell Pilgrimage in 10 AH, or Madina soon after his return from the Farewell Pilgrimage.

     

    God’s special succour always accompanies dawah, the spreading of the call of truth. The Prophet and his companions made untiring efforts in the path of dawah. Ultimately, God’s succour came and people began embracing Islam in their thousands. A number of neighbouring countries entered the fold of Islam. However, the victory of believers makes them all the more humble and conscious of their own failings. At such moments the faithful must be overwhelmed with the realization of God’s Grace and Mercy. They must attribute all success to the goodness and mercy of God.

     

    For a believer, victory increases his feeling of humility. Even for his apparently right action, he seeks God’s pardon. Even the success he achieves, seemingly by his own efforts, is attributed by him to the will of God.”

     

    Note that the emphasis is upon “God’s support/help.” Hymn your Lord’s praise translated by T. B. Irving which in reality means appreciating the goodness and mercy of God as explained by Maulana Wahiddudin Khan.

     

    Maulana Wahidduin Khan’s assessment of remaining humble and conscious of one’s failings during the period of victory and to continue to seek God’s forgiveness and/or pardon at all times, “Innahu Kaana Tawwaaba” is what devout Muslims should do. Today, we the Muslims are facing humiliations from all front, therefore, our mutual discussions as well as debates should be to encourage our fellow Muslims to act with “Humility” with those who question the religion of Islam. Of course, as pointed out, the fiercely dedicated “Intellectual Bigots,” whose ultimate aim is to continue with their own crusade to distort the translations of Qur’an must be confronted only by asking them tough questions which they cannot answer. That’s the only way to unmask their “Insincere Actions,” and expose their “Unclean Hearts.” .    

     

    All in all, we must not dwell on negativity. Far worse is to suffer from inferiority complex thinking that the Islam haters can help us in examining as to what went wrong in the Islamic world. Such a flawed thinking will have to be permanently removed, if we the Muslims are to restore the smeared image of Islam back to its original form strictly based upon the moral teachings of our Holy Qur’an. The need of the hour is to continue to the spread the “Truth,” by wholeheartedly passing the correct translations of Holy Qur’an to those who are engaged in insulting Islam.                   

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/29/2015 7:04:25 PM



  • The following article completely demolishes the statement made in the comment section in this thread that implied that all non-Muslims hate or at least dislike Islam. Of course, there are non-Muslims who hate or dislike or fear Islam. But a blanket statement cannot be made in view of the quotations Yunus Saheb has collected in this article:

    Clearing Some Gross Misconceptions about Islam and Its Prophet

    Muhammad Yunus, New Age Islam

    Clearing Some Gross Misconceptions about Islam and Its Prophet
    Muhammad Yunus, New Age Islam

    One may quote ten, a hundred, a thousand or a million writers saying just the opposite things about Islam and its Prophet, but the truth of history is understood far more accurately by the most learned and the most scholarly who spend all their life in pursuit of knowledge and pen down what they learnt in scholarly publications that receive world recognition and shine without fading like a beacon in the night-sky. The authors quoted above are all like beacons of night-sky and not flashes in the pans of history as those clinging to pre-conceived notions and dedicating their scholarship to establish what they want to establish, like the oxen of the traditional oil mill who remain in the same position even after taking a thousand rounds of their circular path or the proverbial ass of the Prophet Jesus, who remained an ass even after crossing the seven seas…..

    Related Article:

    The Radical Intelligentsia of Islam and Its Orthodox Ulema Are the ‘Hypocrites’ and ‘Nomadic Arabs Intense In Kufr’ Of This Era: They Are Its Twin Internal Enemies, and Must Be Resisted

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/29/2015 3:48:51 PM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Subject: “The Pursuit of Goodness”

     

    Good Afternoon Mike,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    First of all, I am delighted to hear that you are heading towards Aligarh Muslim University to attend the conference, “Future of Islam.”

     

    You know well that there are so many Islam haters that cling on to Surah: Al-Tawba to smear the religion of Islam. One famous individual is none other than Robert Spencer, whereas, you are aware of Satya D (Satyanarayana Dosapati), and to add to the list of “Intellectual Bigots, is one mysterious “Secular Logic,” a regular commentator on the New Age Islam forum with an outright hatred directed towards Muslims. Worst of all, having views of Muslims as, “the most biased, rabid, brainwashed, churlish and irrational people on this planet.” 

     

    Your precise grasping and summing up of Maulana Abul Kalaam Azad’s (May Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace) commentary of Surah Al-Tawba – Verses: 20 – 28 is absolutely correct. In fact, my focus also went towards the lessons of “THE PURSUIT OF GOODNESS, wherein Maulana Saheb raises a very important question: “Are we prepared to scrutinize our lives in the light of this verse (Verse: 24) of the Quran?

     

    Though, I am merely an ordinary Muslim with little knowledge of the Holy Qur’an and definitely not a student of Hadith, I can pretty much sum up Maulana Azad’s comments in the following points:

     

    Point No: 1Goodness lies only in the purity of belief in God and sincerity in action. That is the very reason why the three words, “Idolators Are Unclean, are not understood. If there is no sincere belief in what any religion prescribes, that is, sincerity in action, then one can conclude that the hearts of certain followers of that particular religion are not clean. One should then ask: “Why is there such an immense hatred towards Islam without pondering over the faults which lies in their own understanding of their respective religions which people believe in and follow?

     

    Point No: 2 – “To revive in the Muslims the spirit of sincere attachment of their faith,” is another key lesson from Surah: Al-Tawba. Such a spirit of faithfulness towards the moral teachings of the Qur’an is sorely missing in these days and times. With strong emphasis on not displaying an act of “Indifference,” and at the same time, to adhere towards speaking only the “Truth,” to such an extent that Muslims should not even take their fathers and brothers as their friends, if they violate the commandments of Almighty Allah, is what sincerity and faithfulness is all about.

     

    Point No: 3 – “The Qur’an gives the tiding to such “Devotees of Truth” that whatever they might lose in the struggle would be repaid to them when truth shall triumph and bring peace and prosperity to one and all.” That is the very essence of Surah Al-Tawba, which in English language means “The Repentance. One cannot be truthful with hearts being unclean owing mainly to humans insincere actions. What we the Muslims are now facing are those who are an addicted “Devotees of Lies. Many are engaged in propagating false translations of the Qur’an without making a sincere attempt to understand the entire context of why, how and when a given verse was revealed to our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him).

     

    Point No: 4 – “They who believed in God and abandoned their homes for the sake of God and striven with their possessions and their persons in the way of God, shall rank high in the estimation of God. These are they who shall attain success (in life).” This particular verse (Verse: 20) calls upon the followers of Islam to never let go of
    Sincerity” and “Truth” in all of their worldly dealings. Sincerity towards their belief in the commandments of Almighty Allah, and above all, to sacrifice in His way by speaking the “Truth,” even if it calls for abandoning homes and parting relationships with fathers, brothers, and friends.

     

    Point No: 5 – “And it is not in the manner of God to guide the impious.” The word impious means not showing respect or reverence towards Almighty Allah, or a person whose act is wicked. Surah: Al-Tawba – Verse: 24, as outlined by Maulana Azad clearly highlights on rising far above every form of worldly attachments in order to whole-heartedly serve the cause of “Truth.” The spirit of this Qur’anic verse is to warn the Muslims not to fall into the category of “The Wicked.” Today, we the Muslims have drifted far away from the moral teachings of the Holy Qur’an. Our family, our wealth, our dwellings are more so fond and dearer, than to take our precious time to defend the religion of Islam.

     

    Point No: 6 – The spirit of steadfastness and self-assurance is invoked in Verse: 26. Modern day Muslims attitude is to adopt “Aloofness,” and religiously practice “Self-Righteousness.” Little wonder that many of our fellow Muslims are indulged in their own “Self-Serving” interests, having no desire to stand tall and speak out against the evildoers in our midst. We are not even courageous enough to be upfront and truthful in debating with those who are busy maligning the great religion of Islam. For many Muslims, such an act of sacrificing their personal time is not worthy, owing mainly to their holding to the false belief based upon the Hadiths, which outlines the coming of 72 Signs, 72 Sects and 72 Virgins. Forget “The Repentance.” In short, they have resigned to this man-made “Doom & Gloom” scenario of the world, and are a least bit interested to read the warning signs in the Holy Qur’an.          

     

    Point No: 7 – “It is the strength of will and the determination,” which Maulana Azad refers is what ultimately counts. Unfortunately, the majority of Muslims do not possess the will power to confront the Islam haters, nor are they determined to understand the meaning of Qur’anic verses. The truth of the matter is that countless millions of Muslims in the Indian subcontinent believe that the “Science of Hadiths” must first be referred to instead of the Holy Qur’an. In short, that’s the tragedy of the Muslim minds and there is nothing much we can do to change the long held “Status Quo Thinking.

     

    Finally, what we have in our midst is are “Timid” group of Muslims and not to mention “Hypocrites.” I am truly afraid that it is too late to change the deadly mindset of Muslims hailing from the Indian Subcontinent. Surah Al-Tawba is indeed “A Great Eye-Opener” to those who are mindful of the commandments of Almighty Allah as proclaimed in the Holy Quran. In any way, to end this response to you, kindly allow me to quote another Qur’anic verse as follows:

     

    “O ye Muslims! For the sake of God, stand up to uphold justice and let not ill-will towards any people impel you to deviate from justice. Act justly. This indeed is akin to piety. Be mindful of God; for assuredly He knoweth all that you do.”

     

    Surah: Al-Ma’ida (The Table) – Chapter: 5 – Verse 8

     

    Have a safe trip to Aligarh Muslim University. I wish you all the best in your “Sincere Actions” to defend the religion of Islam, Mike. May Almighty Allah bless you and your beloved family members.

     

    Warmest personal regards,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

      

    ***************************************************************

     

    From: MikeGhouse@aol.com [mailto:MikeGhouse@aol.com]
    Sent: Sunday, March 29, 2015 5:16 AM
    To: Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia; sultan.shahin@gmail.com
    Subject: Re: SURAH: AL-TAWBAH ( THE REPENTANCE) – CHAPTER: 9 – VERSES: 20-28

     

    Rafiq,

    This week I am heading to Aligarh Muslim University for a two day conference about Future of Islam. Links are provided below. Meanwhile, thanks for sharing this enlightening tafseer by Maulana Azad. 

    The clarity of Maulana Abul Kalam Azad's tafseer is incredible. Those of you who may not now the Maulana – he was born and raised in Madinah and moved back to India – his ancestral land. He was a nationalist leader for all of Indians, the Hindu Majority and all minorities, and was the first education minister of independent India and laid the foundation for the educational institutions like IIT’s that rival MIT’s.  I believe Muhammad Yunus, a member and a Muslim scholar listed in the emails is a member of IIT.

    Maulana was a pluralist, and an inclusivist, as is Islam  – the phrases like Rabbul Aalameen, Rahmatul Aalameen should lead us to become Mukhlooqul Aalameen. We need to consciously pull us out of the path of political Islam of self-interest and restore it to Islam for common good.
    It is in the same line of thinking, I believe the purpose of Islam is to build cohesive societies where no human has to live in fear of the other but God (deviation from truth). Islam is about restoring harmonious, peaceful and a well functioning cohesive world, God had created.

    Some of the statements that jumped at me are:

    “It states that they rank the highest who have sacrificed everything in the path of truth and endure steadfastly the trials and tribulations that befell them on the way of truth. That is the criterion of goodness.” – and I will add to this from Sura Hujurat “the best ones among you are those who learn about each other – for knowledge leads to understanding and understanding to acceptance of another point of view.

    In Hindu scriptures there is a powerful phrase “Satyamev Jayate - Truth alone triumphs” and Mahatma Gandhi popularized it, and now it is the national symbol of India... The Maulana has clearly distinguished the purpose of war was not victory or the conquest but bringing forth sustainable peace for “all”.

    He pulled out the essence of the Sura – that is the truth alone triumphs and gives examples, “It therefore behooved the followers of the faith that they should have nothing to do with even their parents and brothers if they belonged to the enemy camp.” And elsewhere in Quran It lays down that you have to tell the truth even it goes against you or your interests. Indeed, there is no 5th in Islam; truth is given the highest value. 

    I am presenting the following papers at Aligarh Muslim University:

    1. http://www.worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2015/03/mike-ghouse-of-world-muslim-congress-to.html

    2. http://www.worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2015/03/can-muslims-lead-conglomeration-of.html

    3. http://www.worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2015/03/is-united-islam-possible-international.html

    4. http://www.worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2015/03/does-islam-need-reform-or-we-just-need.html

    Mike Ghouse, committed to cohesive societies.

     www.MikeGhouse.net

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/29/2015 2:12:51 PM



  • Hindus did no wrong to Buddhists. Muslims did no wrong to non Muslims. Christians did no wrong to Muslims and pagans. 
    All are trying to wash their hands from bloody religious history.
    It is possible in future actions of present Jehadis will be contextualised. Contextualization is a nice tool to cover the ugly past.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/29/2015 9:40:11 AM



  • Hindus did no wrong to Buddhists. Muslims did no wrong to non Muslims. Christians did no wrong to Muslims and pagans. 
    All are trying to wash their hands from bloody religious history.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/29/2015 9:33:28 AM



  • As far as being clean/unclean is concerned, it has nothing to do with religion. I take the verse in its historical context as referring to a specific set of people with practices inside the Kaba that were considered unclean.

    The same people are not banned from any other mosque except the “Sacred Mosque” because they did not practice anything in the other mosques.

    Whether banning them was proper? Well the pagans had banned Muslims from worshiping in the Kaba before and severely persecuted those who did.

    By Observer - 3/29/2015 1:54:39 AM



  • Dear Ekhlaq Ahmad - 3/27/2015 10:32:59 AM
    First of all i am your brother in humanity if you value humanity over religion.
    I am not madarsa educated person though i read madarsa educated and so called moderates/modern Muslims alike. I read islamophobes, enemies of Islam if they can be considered so.
    I beg pardon i could not trust your words that you don't endorse points posted by me as signs of Qayamat. you don't want to be called misogynist but believe it has happen as the prophet predicted. these points are misogynist. if these words are true and said by the prophet as prediction, it shows how the prophet disliked women. it means he disliked trading of women like men.

    His own wife was a trader then how can trading of woman can be treated as sign of Qayamat.
    these signs of Qayamat are not positive remarks. these points only show that near Qayamat society will degrade so much that Allah will blow the trumpet and the world will end..
    I am sorry to say that your believing in these predictions and washing your hands from these points cant go hand in hand.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/29/2015 1:29:23 AM



  • The number of references to idol worship is not many in the Quran. Except for one stand-alone verse, every other reference to idol worship is only when the subject is specifically idols, such as the idols in the house of Ibrahim's (pbuh) father.

    There isn't a single verse in the Quran that speaks about idols in Kaba or the Meccan pagans as idol worshippers. That there were 360 idols in kaba and the Meccans were idol worshippers is what we learn from the secondary sources and not from the Quran. In one of the verses, idols can be inferred but not mentioned directly.  

     Many of the Hindus today are openly polytheistic but not all of them. They range from the monotheist to the monist, the pantheist, the agnostic to the atheist. Many are idolaters without being polytheists. To club all of them under the category of idolater smacks of extreme ignorance and prejudice especially when the Quran does not even refer to the Meccan pagans as an idolater even in a single verse. Why Muslims are so keen to mistranslate God’s word which is mushrikin meaning polytheists as idolater? Are the Jews not severely reprimanded in the Quran for something similar? However, translations of the Quran both in English and Urdu mistranslate mushrik as idolater. This mistranslation itself is a result of a narrow communal mind-set. When the Quran itself plays down idol worship, why do Muslims play it up? 

    The result is that the "ghazis" destroyed idols and thought that they were destroying false beliefs and the Taliban destroyed the Bamyan statues and thought that they were destroying falsehood when all that they succeeded in  destroying was the credibility of their own religion. 

     The removal of idols from Kaba was not done by any outsider but by the very people to whom those idols belonged. The Prophet (pbuh) did not set any bad precedent and those who attribute what they do to the Prophet are the blasphemers.

    The reference to idols and idol worhip in the Quran:

     1. In connection with Ibrahim (pbuh) and the idols in his father’s house (5 references) and in a prayer of Ibrahim 14:35 "O my Lord! make this city one of peace and security: and preserve me and my sons from worshipping idols”.

    2. The story of Moses and Bani Israel (7:138) We took the Children of Israel (with safety) across the sea. They came upon a people devoted entirely to some idols they had. They said: "O Moses! fashion for us a god like unto the gods they have." He said: "Surely ye are a people without knowledge.

    3. Suarh 20 Ta Ha. Bani Israel making a golden cow and worshipping it in the absence of Moses under the influence of Samiri

    4. And a solitary stand-alone reference (22:30) Such (is the Pilgrimage): whoever honours the sacred rites of Allah, for him it is good in the Sight of his Lord. Lawful to you (for food in Pilgrimage) are cattle, except those mentioned to you (as exception): but shun the abomination of idols, and shun the word that is false,-

    By Observer - 3/29/2015 1:26:17 AM



  • Lodhia
    Do you think the Moderator Sultan Saheb is not enough honest in dealing with these two bad apples on his forum?
    Are you a single honest person on this forum? why to appeal again and again for the honesty of moderator.

    So you believe "Idolators are unclean spiritually not physically". you can be praised for this development. but they are unclean you believe and God will punish them for their idolatry.
    why do you think the Quran should not be criticized for this gigantic favor to believers and mean words used for mushriks?
    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/29/2015 1:23:18 AM



  • If Muslims can pray to dead saints and consider the shrine full of blessings why non-Muslims can't consider idols God.
    the fact is idols are not God to idolators.
    if those idolators are Mushriks, Muslims are bigger Mushriks.
     At least grave worshipers which constitute majority of Muslim majority is Mushrik. it makes them spiritually unclean if idolators are spiritually unclean according to the Quran.
    these verses will remain there and will continue to invite criticism no matter how reinterpreted.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/29/2015 12:44:32 AM



  • "Idolators are unclean"
    let us accept the Quran talks about spiritual uncleanness not physical one. even then the problem doesn't end here.
    the fact remains Allah is extreme on Shirk and the Quran uses extreme words for idolators.
    Muslim majority considers them physically unclean too because they don't practice Islamic ways of cleaning.
    However i personally don't think so. Man must be free to not worship, or worship anything. Punishing them either in this world or in that world is an act of jealous God.
    Shirk is not Fasad as Islam consider it.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/29/2015 12:34:55 AM



  • Dear Sadaf,  You stumble in your argument with Secular Logic. I don't remember whether he ever said that he took stones for God but even if he did so, you have no right as a Muslim to insult his deity. The Qur'an makes this absolutely clear in the following verse: 
     “Don’t insult those whom they invoke besides God, lest they ignorantly insult God in enmity. Thus We have made their action seem pleasing to every community; then their return is to their Lord, and He will tell them what they had been doing” (6:108).
    The Qur'an also reminds you:

    Invite (all) to the way of your Lord with wisdom and pleasant counseling, and debate with them in the best manner. Indeed God knows best who is straying from His path, and He knows best the (rightly) guided” (16:125).

    “And do not debate with the People of the Book, but in a way that is better (than theirs), except with those of them who oppress (others); and say ‘We believe in what was revealed to us, and what was revealed to you, for our God and your God is One (and the same), and it is to Him that we (all) submit (muslimun)’” (29:46).
    By muhammad yunus - 3/28/2015 9:43:01 PM



  • Good Morning Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    As a respected and honorable Muslim, along with being a founder and editor of New Age Islam forum, you have eloquently spoken at the United Nations Human Rights Council.

     

    Needless to say that you have always tried your very best to expose the grave concern about the current state of affairs in the Islamic world, but for whatever reason, you are not comparing certain human rights violation in India by ways of referring to the Qur’anic message of “Universal Brotherhood Of Human Beings.”  

     

    One notorious commentator known as “Secular Logic,” has remained adamant in extracting the answer to “Idolators Are Unclean.This same person has now challenged as follows:

     

    “Why do I repeatedly ask you to explain to me what Islam means when it says "Idolators are unclean". So long as that verse exists, and so long as no Muslim comes out and says it is a statement that unfairly humiliates people of other faiths, and that you will work to expunge it from the Quran, this question will be repeated again and again. Not just from me, but from others as well.”

     

    Believe it or not! No explanation will suffice. It is quite obvious that “Secular Logic,” in his/her obsession, somehow feels that one small reference out of 114 chapters of Holy Qur’an does nothing but humiliates people of other faiths. Not only this, he will continue to repeat it over and over and over again till his last breathe on this Planet Earth. The person has undoubtedly displayed a personal vendetta against Muslims and Islam.   

     

    Never mind any explanation given. This person is hell-bent on making Muslims to expunge the verse completely from the Qur’an. The million dollar question is, “Why is the person who claims not to believe in God, be so frantic about the three words, “Idolators Are Unclean”? Something is not right with his/her mental state of mind. Why on earth will the person provoke Muslim readers as follows:

     

    “For the sake of my own sanity, I avoid coming to this site and reading the views of the most biased, rabid, brainwashed, churlish and irrational people on this planet.”

     

    “Yet, because these outpourings fall in the "horror" genre, they seem to hold some morbid fascination for me that I keep coming here to get outraged.”

     

    Sultan Saheb, as an editor of New Age Islam, you should now take over and at least be brave enough to act as a “Moderator.” I know that you have been reluctant to take a stand owing to being rather cautious and polite. I say, it is appropriate time for you to start speaking up for the religion Islam. Mind you that there is nothing to learn from the person who has harshly criticized all of New Age Islam’s Muslim readers as, “most biased, rabid, brainwashed, churlish and irrational people on this planet.” How long as an editor will you tolerate despicable insults coming from a person who totally disrespects the religion of Islam?

     

    Why isn’t “Secular Logic,” outraged on reading about the female infanticide and foeticide which are widespread in India? Gang rapes are common as we all know. A crime against women is committed every three minutes with rapes occurring every 29 minutes. One woman dies every hour because of disputes over dowry payments given by the bride's family to the groom or his family at the time of marriage. Let alone, the saga of “Ram Teri Ganga Maili, or in other words, the recent headlines news about the massive pollution in the Ganges River.     

     

    All in all, I have painstakingly typed Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s commentary of Surah: Al-Tawba – Verse: 28. It will certainly be a “Morally Upright, act on your part to engage with “Secular Logic,” in a healthy debate which should also include highlighting about the violation of “Human Rights in India. It’s about time to show the person a big mirror in order for him/her to realize that the title “Intellectual Bigot,” fits the bill perfectly well. Henceforth, please do the needful and oblige.

     

    Thanks & Regards,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  


    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/28/2015 9:42:35 PM



  • SURAH: AL-TAWBA ( THE REPENTANCE) – CHAPTER: 9 – VERSES: 20-28  

     

    Maulana Abul Kalam Azad The Tarjuman al-Qur’anYear: 1968

     

    The criterion of superiority of one over another in the sight of God is indicated in verse 20. It states that they rank the highest who have sacrificed everything in the path of truth and endure steadfastly the trials and tribulations that befell them on the way of truth. That is the criterion of goodness. It is a lesson for the present day Muslims who have developed an outlook on life and follow a way of living so alien to the teachings of Islam. Even like the pagan Arabs of the Prophet’s time, they prefer the traditional way as against the way of life laid down for them by Islam. Whenever a rich man living a thoroughly un-Islamic life provides booths (sabil) of cool drinks during the days of Muharram and arranges the celebration of the Prophet’s Day (mawlud) on a lavish scale or pays for lightning a mosque or a dargah on a particular day, the entire Muslim community exultingly applauds him, and no one cares to know whether what he did was for the sake of God. One should remember that such deeds do not constitute righteousness in the sight of God. Goodness lies only in the purity of belief in God and sincerity in action and steadfast endurance of trials in the way of God. That is the criterion of goodness sponsored by the Qur’an.

     

    It has been pointed out above that this chapter was revealed in the ninth year of Hijra and that the earlier verses of it were publicly announced during the period of Hajj that year. This was the time when Mecca had already been conquered and strength of the enemies put down for ever on the field of Hunain. For the expedition to Tabuk as many as thirty thousand Muslims, had assembled, so much so that there remained no party in the Arabian peninsula to challenge the supremacy of the followers of the Prophet. Still there lurked in the situation a few weaknesses.

     

    Point A: A large number of Meccans who had opposed the Prophet but had been pardoned by him at the time of his victorious entry into Mecca had joined the Muslim fold. Being new converts to Islam, they could not fit into its way of life quickly. So when war was declared on those who were still opposed to the Prophet in the country and were giving no rest to its followers, a number of new Meccan converts began to feel concerned about their relations who were in the enemy camps. In fact, they could not rise above their sense of kinship with them or their tribal prejudices, and so formed but a weak wing of the Muslim camp.

     

    Point B: There were also in the Muslim camp quite a number of hypocrites and timid people. They raised the cry that now that much had been gained for the Muslims, there was no longer any need for them to engage themselves in further warfare.

     

    Point C: The victories which the Muslims had won on the battlefield had developed in them a general sense of indifference to any possible danger lying ahead of them. The majority of them thought that now that the Arab land had nearly yielded to the call of Truth and that there was left no strength among those who had not yet chosen to yield to the call, there was no imperative need to be on the alert. They hardly could realize at the moment the height of power and influence that destiny had marked them to reach. This development in the situation was clearly a source of danger to the security of the Muslims not only at this hour but in the days to follow as well.

     

    The necessity therefore was felt to revive in the Muslims the spirit of sincere attachment to their faith and bring home to them once again the high purpose for which they were to live and work as earnestly as ever before. They were to be told that the period of trials was not yet over and that on the other hand it was just to begin. Of the task lying ahead of them, what was of primary importance at the moment was the liquidating of whatever opposition that there still was to the mission of the Prophet and to establish perfect peace and order in the land.

     

    It is why verse 16 calls upon the Muslims to reflect over the situation and realize, that that was not the hour when they should relax their efforts to reach their goal. It states that the faith which they professed had yet to be tested in full. So in the succeeding verses after drawing attention to the character that should distinguish the Muslims, a significant observation is made in verse 23 that the sense of sincere attachment to one’s faith and the sense of loyalty to those who were opposed to the faith could not subsist together or felt simultaneously in one’s mind. It therefore behooved the followers of the faith that they should have nothing to do with even their parents and brothers if they belonged to the enemy camp.

     

    Verse 24 is emphatic in asserting that in a conflict between faith and denial of faith, he alone will be regarded as a man of faith or faithful whom nothing in the world, and even one’s love for those near and dear to him, should weaken his attachment or devotion to his faith. It is on this basis that the edifice of a civilized society can be raised. It refers to all the essential ties which one has necessarily to respect in life. But the principle of devotion to an ideology such as that which function for the security and welfare of a society as a whole, demands from everyone professing faith in his ideology that he should rise far above every other form of attachment and let nothing detract him from serving whole-heartedly the cause of truth which that ideology upholds.  

     

    The Qur’an also draws particular attention to the attachment one feels to one’s worldly comfort in life and so might like one’s country not to involve itself in any war. For instance, one might be gaining wealth by pursuing the avocation of commerce. In a state of war, opportunities for commerce may be lessened. That is a fear which is bound to stare in the face of every one living on commerce. Further, in a state of war one stands the risk of losing one’s possessions. The thought of the risk will naturally disturb one immensely. Before such as these who are moved by considerations of this nature, the Qur’an places an abiding truth of life and asks them seriously to reflect over it. The truth is this. When a people are called upon by the force of circumstances to defend the cause of truth and uphold it for the good of men, it should behoove everyone who sincerely believes in the truth to be prepared to sacrifice everything dear to him, so that truth might prevail and bring happiness to one and all.  The Qur’an gives the tiding to such devotees of truth that whatever they might lose in the struggle would be repaid to them manifold when truth shall triumph and bring peace and prosperity to one and all. “Indeed with God lies the great reward,” says the Qur’an.

     

    History has recorded for all times the glorious manner in which the companion of the Prophet stood the test of devotion to their faith in God. It may be asserted without exaggeration that there are few parallels in the annals of man to the devoted support that they offered to the Prophet in his struggle in the cause of truth. They sacrificed all that they had for the love of God, with the result that they reaped in return what the pursuit of goodness always offers for the benefit of man.

     

    But what is our position today? Are we prepared to scrutinize our lives in the light of this verse of the Qur’an.

     

    Verse 26 refers to the battle of Hunain in eight year of the Hijra, when soon after the conquest of Mecca, the tribes of Hawazin and Thaqif in co-operation with the tribes of Bani Nadir and Bani Hilal attacked the Muslims. The Prophet issued forth from Mecca into the valley of Hunain. In this engagement, the Muslims were thrice in number. Naturally, therefore, they felt confident of success. But when the hour of trial arrived, their superiority in numbers could not avail. It was only a handful of staunch adherents of the Prophet, who, inspired by the example of their leader, saved the situation and won the victory for the Muslims.

     

    The Muslim force had to proceed through a narrow pass. The enemy force lay in ambush awaiting the Muslims to enter this pass. They knew that among the Muslims nearly as many as two thousand were new converts from Mecca. A good many of these were allies of the enemy. The moment the Muslims moved into the narrow defile, the enemy force showered arrows over them from their bows. It was a sudden attack. A large section of the Muslim army took to their heels in a state of alarm. The situation seemed clearly to go against the Muslims. It was at this juncture that the Prophet ask, ‘Abbas, his uncle, to cry out to his old comrades of Samra who had sworn allegiance to him at the time of the treaty of Hudaibiya to steady themselves. The cry inspired a new courage in the hearts of the staunch among them who forthwith returned to the Prophet and gave so stiff a fight to the enemy that they had to suffer a defeat at the hands of the Muslims.

     

    This incident was a great eye-opener for the followers of the Faith. It brought home to them that mere numbers do not bring victory. The strength of numbers does contribute to success in warfare. But success does not always depend upon numbers. It is the strength of will and the determination not to yield which ultimately count and help even a small band of determined fighters to rout a force many times strong in numbers. The Qur’an addressing the Muslims points out that there were occasions in the past when though they were few in numbers they had achieved victory over the enemy. But that now at this hour in Hunain when they prided themselves over the largeness of their numbers, mere numbers did not avail. That was a matter for them to reflect over.

     

    In verse 28 the Quran reverts to the order issued in an earlier verse of this chapter prohibiting the polytheists to enter the Ka’ba any further. That House of Prayer had been raised by the Prophet Abraham and his son Ismail for the worship of God, the One, and was meant to serve as a center of spiritual activity for those who believed in the unity of God.

     

    In this verse the reference to the uncleanliness of the polytheists is not to their physical condition but to the uncleanliness of their hearts. Islam does not regard the person or the body of anyone as unclean. Every man as man stands on the same footing as every other human being. It is why it has prohibited untouchability and does not single out any

    section of humanity as untouchable. In fact, it is clear from the recorded history of the Prophet that the Prophet maintained social relationships with not only the People of the Book, the Jews, but with the polytheists of his time. He used to dine with them and accept their invitations and also offer invitations to them. History has recorded that he at times had allowed them to stay in his own mosque at Madina.

     

    The verse under reference has a limited application. It applies to the seat of Ka’ba along and not to any other Muslim place of worship. In fact, after the issuing of this order, the Prophet had allowed the Christians of Yemen, and the polytheists from Ta’if to stay in his mosque.

     

    Surah: 20 – They who have believed in God and abandoned their homes for the sake of God and striven with their possessions and their persons in the way of God, shall rank high in the estimation of God. These are they who shall attain success (in life).

     

    Surah: 21 – Tidings of mercy doth their Lord send them and of His good pleasure and also of gardens in which lasting joy shall be theirs.

     

    Surah: 22 – Therein shall they abide for ever. Surely (for such people) there is a great reward from their Lord.

     

    Surah: 23 – O Muslims! Do not take your fathers or brothers for friends if they prefer unbelief to belief; and whoso of you shall take them for friends they shall be regarded as those who have been unjust to themselves.

     

    Surah: 24 – Say (to the Muslims, O Prophet!): If your fathers and your sons and your brothers and your wives, and your kith and kin and the wealth that you have acquired and the merchandise which ye fear may not have a proper sale, and the dwellings of which you are very don, be dearer to you than God and His Apostle and striving in the way of God, then, wait until God disclose what He wills to do. And it is not in the manner

    of God to guide the impious.

     

    Surah: 25 – (O Muslims!) This is a fact that God had helped you on many a previous occasion (when you were few in number) and on the day of Hunain, when despite the strength over which you had exulted availed you not, and the earth with all its vastness had straitened on your and you to turn back in fight.

     

    Surah: 26 – It was then, God infused into the Prophet and those faithful (to him) the spirit of steadiness and self-assurance and succoured them with unseen hosts and defeated the unbelievers, and that is what the unbelievers deserved.           

     

    Surah: 27 – Yet after this, God will turn in mercy towards whomsoever He pleaseth; for indeed God is Forgiving, Merciful.

     

    Surah: 28 – O ye Muslims! Surely those who ascribe partners to God are an unclean lot. Let them not after this year approach the Holy Place of Prayer, and if (due to lack of opportunity to profit by trading with them at the time of Hajj) you apprehend poverty, (then, do not lose heart for), God, if He please, will soon give you riches out of His abundance. Verily, God knows (your needs) and He will in His Wisdom compensate you for your loss.

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/28/2015 7:32:49 PM



  • The writ of intellect wisdom and knowledge is also not working on you secular logic where in this 21st century you still think stones as God. By sadaf - 3/28/2015 3:13:56 PM



  • READ, SECULAR LOGIC, READ

     

    This week India stands shamed on the world's stage after the airing of the documentary 'India's Daughter', about the infamous Dehli bus rape, exposed shocking levels of misogyny. Female infanticide and foeticide are widespread. Around 100 million women and girls are estimated to be victims of human trafficking and 44.5% of girls are married under the age of 18. Gang rapes are commonplace and often caste based with the result that many incidents are unreported or are simply ignored by the police.

     

    Records produced by India's National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB) reveal that a crime against women is committed every three minutes with rapes occurring every 29 minutes. Nearly one in three of the victims are under 18 and in rural areas this can lead to them being shunned by society, even by their families. This does not include the crime known as "Eve Teasing", a euphemism for the public harassment described by Indian feminists as "little rape".

     

    Lesser known is "dowry crime". One woman dies every hour because of disputes over dowry payments given by the bride's family to the groom or his family at the time of marriage. Last year alone 8,233 women were killed across India and there is no sign of the problem easing.

     

    Trevor Royle

    Women's rights and global wrongs Link to the Article

     

    Herald Scotland

    March 8, 2015

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/28/2015 9:18:34 AM



  • Dear Secular Logic,

    I now read one of the detailed comments by Rafiq Lodhia Sahab and am reassured to learn that the following explanation of the word 'najs' used only once in the Qur'an as interpreted by Moulana Abul Kalam Azad matches with the bottom line explanation of my last historic critical comment:

    Commentary by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad is as follows:

     

    “In verse 28 the Quran reverts to the order issued in an earlier verse of this chapter prohibiting the polytheists to enter the Ka’ba any further. That House of Prayer had been raised by the Prophet Abraham and his son Ismail for the worship of God, the One, and was meant to serve as a center of spiritual activity for those who believed in the unity of God.”

     

    “In this verse the reference to the uncleanliness of the polytheists is not to their physical condition but to the uncleanliness of their hearts. Islam does not regard the person or the body of anyone as unclean. Every man as man stands on the same footing as every other human being. It is why it has prohibited untouchability and does not single out any section of humanity as untouchable. In fact, it is clear from the recorded history of the Prophet that the Prophet maintained social relationships with not only the People of the Book, the Jews, but with the polytheists of his time. He used to dine with them and accept their invitations and also offer invitations to them. History has recorded that he at times had allowed them to stay in his own mosque at Madina.”


    Please understand, we are not reinventing the wheel or fabricating revisionist or apologetic interpretations - though as a non-Muslim you are free to think as you wish and to criticize Islam in an objective manner as you have done.  

     
    By muhammad yunus - 3/28/2015 1:42:57 AM



  • Dear Secular Logic,

    This is to answer to your question, why the Qur'an declared "Idolators are unclean". 

    1. First I will request you to read my commentary addressed to you below on how to comprehend the Qur'anic message. If you haven't as yet, let me copy paste point 3- concluding part, that is relevant to your question and reads:

     "it (the Qur'an) commands humanity to probe its verses (38:29, 47:24) with a positive state of mind (56:79). It calls for focusing only on the definitive verses (ayatum muhkamat) – such as those free from any ambiguity or confusion (mutashabihat) (3:7) and seeking the best meaning in it (39:18, 39:55). It also claims to be a book of wisdom (10:1, 31:2, 43:4, 44:4) made clear and distinct (12:1, 15:1, 16:64, 26:2, 27:1, 36:69, 43:2, 44:2) with all kinds of illustrations (17:89, 18:54, 30:58, 39:27), and claims to be its own best interpretation (25:33), and its own completion and perfection (5:3)."

    Thus, in the spirit of the Qur'anic message, we must probe the Qur'an and seek its illustrations to get an answer to your question. Any such exercise will require a close scrutiny of the historical setting of the last two years of the revelation following the integration of Mecca - as you quoted declaration dates from post Meccan integration (630). It will also need a general but clear idea about the struggle of the Prophet during the preceding 20 years (610-630). Such an exercise may evolve the following explanations: 

    The integration of Mecca had left many old wound fresh.  For the preceding twenty years or so, the Meccan pagan leaders had regarded Muhammad as their archenemy and had done everything possible to finish him off and therefore could not be expected to loving him with all their heart overnight. Besides, the sudden integration also meant an abrupt change in the established norms, social order and inter-tribal political equation and standing. This created a highly heterogeneous mix of people in the broad civil landscape of Mecca-Madina: the diverse pagan tribes of Mecca and Medina, the diverse Muslim groups, namely the early Meccan converts who had fled to Medina some eight years ago (622) (they were known as the muhajirin), the Medinite converts who sheltered them (known as the ansars), and the hypocrites of Medina (munafiqin), with each of these group having vestiges of pre-Islamic tribal ties but united under the Prophet as a single umma. It was like a great big mansion with bricks, slabs, arches and domes of different shapes and designs pieced together with raw glue that needed time to cure.

    The internal volatility apart, Islam had formidable external foes:

    i)                   The desert Arabs who had resisted the Prophet for well over two decades and had seen their number shrink, their strength wane and the Prophet advance in his mission against all odds, steadily gaining converts.

    ii)                The hypocrites of Medina, who actively conspired against the Prophet, and even planned to expel him and his followers from Medina.

     iii)              The neighboring Christian Byzantine (Eastern Roman Empire) that was conceivably threatened by the newly unified Arab power that combined its military skills as fearless tribal warriors with courage, determination and new found religious zeal.

    In the divine scheme, the Prophet had only two years left, and unless the hostile pagans and the hypocrites were integrated and the Byzantine threat diffused, Islam risked extinction soon after the Prophet’s death. The Qur’an thus had to achieve the unachievable in just about two years. 

    The Qur’an, therefore issues a grave warning to the hostile pagan tribes who were repeatedly breaking treaty terms that unless they gave up hostilities and entered the fold of Islam, they could be put to death (9:5). It declares them as spiritually impure (najis) and forbids their entry into the Inviolable House of worship (Kaba) reserving it for only pure worship (of God without any association with idols) (9:28). It commands the Muslims to fight those of the pagans (kuffar) who were around them (in a manner) that they find how firm (ghilza) they (the Muslims) could be (9:123). It also commands the Prophet to be firm (waghluz) against the pagans (kuffar) and the hypocrites (9:73). It warns the believers that there were hypocrites all around them and among the people in Medina, who had grown bold in hypocrisy (9:101) and repeats the aspersions it earlier cast on them. Thus, it curses them (9:68), calls them liars (9:42, 9:107) and deviants (fasiqun) (9:96, 9:67). It charges some of the believing nomadic Arabs to being intense in kufr and hypocrisy (9:97) and forbids the Prophet to pray over any of them who had died, nor to stand by his grave (9:84). As the Prophet may still have prayed for all his followers, including the hypocrites, the revelation warns him that even if he sought forgiveness for them seventy times, God will never forgive them (9:80). Finally, it warns the hypocrites that……

    Accordingly, the peaceful integration of Mecca was followed by a siege of Taif, a nearby settlement (630), the battle of Hunayn (630) and a march to the fringes of the Byzantine Empire. The ninth Sura that is generously quoted above was reveled just before and during this expedition. The Prophet halted at a place called Tabuk, some three hundred miles off Medina, made peace treaties (covenants) with regional Christian and Jewish tribes and returned to his base town. His very presence close to the borders of the mighty Byzantine Empire and the shyness of its Emperor, Heraclius to send down his royal army to challenge Muhammad, was enough to crown Islam as a regional power and a global power to be and thus a historical reality.     

    The critics may argue that this was not a peaceful way of gaining converts. From the angle of Islam as an institution, if the hostile pagans and hypocrites were tolerated, and Heraclius was not challenged, they would have finished it off soon after the death of its Messenger which was soon to happen. The Arabs would then have reverted to their state of Jahilliyah and the world would have remained in the recesses of the dark ages for long. The civilizational cost and demographic impact of such a historical implosion to humanity could be colossal and probably too grievous to reckon. Thus, to save humanity from a disastrous atavism and a demographic disaster as the New Continents witnessed, the Qur’an had to take a firm stand against its inveterate enemies at the fag end of its mission, which was thus politically and morally justified.   


    BOTTOM LINE; 
    1. THE QUR'ANIC DECLARATION CAN LITERALLY TRANSLATES AS "THOSE WHO ASSOCIATE DIVINITY WITH GOD (MUSHRIKUN) ARE SPIRITUALLY IMPURE (NAJS)."  

    2. THOSE PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN GOD AS THE SUPREME AND ONLY CREATOR ARE OBVIOUSLY PURE IN SPIRITUALITY - A TERM THAT CONNECTS MAN WITH GOD.

    Thank You!

    I may not be able to answer any further question due to other preoccupations and will request you to read the Chapter 3 of my jt. publication that gives a wide window on the Prophet's mission based on Qur'anic allusions. It may be posted in the next couple of days.   
    By muhammad yunus - 3/28/2015 1:26:39 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Lo and behold! A person who has always claimed not to believe in any religion is finally going to take a break “In Honor of Lord Rama. That’s indeed delightful news.

     

    “Ramnavami is one of the most important festivals of the Hindus, particularly the Vaishnava sect of the Hindus. On this auspicious day, devotees repeat the name of Rama with every breath and vow to lead a righteous life. People pray to attain the final beatitude of life through intense devotion towards Rama and invoke him for his blessings and protection.”

     

    Leading a “Righteous Life, should also translate into respecting other peoples’ religion also. It should also enlighten the followers of Lord Rama to help do away with the tremendous human sufferings owing to the “Caste System.

     

    Equality towards all humans is what Holy Quran taught Muslims. We, the Muslims, should pray for person like “Secular Logic,” to be fully blessed after performing the necessary rituals on an auspicious day of Ramnavami.    

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/28/2015 1:14:20 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    The question raised is, “Who are those who gone astray?” Those humans who vehemently violates the “Commandments of God, and inflict sufferings upon their fellow humans are the ones who have gone astray.   

     

    Secular Logic,” should be more so focused on addressing the “Caste System, which has caused a lot of misery in his own backyard. Here’s one comment worth reading:

     

    “This is all looked upon as so deep, "spiritual", inspirational and sacrosanct. In reality, India is a very VERY sick demented society - same as the rest of the world - and, in MANY aspects, FAR worse.

     

    Would you want your 9 year old son or daughter in rags, eating scraps, sleeping on a dirt floor, being diddled by their "betters", drinking filthy water and working 12+ hours a day 6 days a week for next to nothing?

     

    Well, WOULD YOU!?

     

    Welcome to India's disgusting and extremely CORRUPT ..."CASTE SYSTEM"!!

     

    The criminal 'priests' are at the top of the pyramid and the "untouchable" POOR at the bottom.

     

    Only "Israel" makes more astoundingly ludicrous claims about it's wonderful "democratic society"!

     

    SLAVERY!! SLAVERY BACKED BY THE ENTIRE SOCIETY!!”

     

    Let’s hope that on an auspicious day of Ram Navmi, “Secular Logic,” will at least reflect upon extremely disgusting and corrupt “Caste System” of India.


    Hopefully, one day, he/she  will be able to come up with a revolutionary formula to eradicate the evil and stop being so obsessed with the great religion of Islam, which has from day one preached equality of mankind.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  

       

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/28/2015 12:46:44 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Leaders @ New Age Islam

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Can anyone on this forum try to translate Maulana Abul Kalam Azad’s commentary in order to let “Secular Logic,” understand the meaning of “Uncleanliness of their hearts. 

     

    Commentary by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad is as follows:

     

    “In verse 28 the Quran reverts to the order issued in an earlier verse of this chapter prohibiting the polytheists to enter the Ka’ba any further. That House of Prayer had been raised by the Prophet Abraham and his son Ismail for the worship of God, the One, and was meant to serve as a center of spiritual activity for those who believed in the unity of God.”

     

    In this verse the reference to the uncleanliness of the polytheists is not to their physical condition but to the uncleanliness of their hearts. Islam does not regard the person or the body of anyone as unclean. Every man as man stands on the same footing as every other human being. It is why it has prohibited untouchability and does not single out any section of humanity as untouchable. In fact, it is clear from the recorded history of the Prophet that the Prophet maintained social relationships with not only the People of the Book, the Jews, but with the polytheists of his time. He used to dine with them and accept their invitations and also offer invitations to them. History has recorded that he at times had allowed them to stay in his own mosque at Madina.”

     

    If “Secular Logic,” is profoundly obsessed, then let all the Muslim readers try to explain to the person in “Hindi” or any other language that can be understood. Thus far, it seems like the “Intellectual Bigot, is totally incapable to understand the spirit of the commentary by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad. It is obvious that a person with a “Clean Heart, will be able to grasp the meaning of the Quranic verse.

     

    Perhaps, Sultan Shahin Saheb, out of his heartfelt sympathy for “Secular Logic,” can put some sense in his head. Let Sultan Saheb continue to learn from those whose business is to insult Islam. I rest my case.

     

    Very sincerely yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

       

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/28/2015 12:29:59 AM



  • Mr Yunus, 
    Thank you for your civilised response to criticism and a confession of bewilderment from a non muslim atheist. That is the only way any sort of dialogue can be expected to take place. 

    I do not believe in personalising any ideological disagreement, and I extend this to the Prophet also. It is difficult to know fully well the character of a man even when he is alive. To pass judgement on someone who lived in another culture, another ethos, another time that is so far removed from mine would be unfair. I may not agree with the religion that the man founded, but I dont have to vilify him for doing what he did in the circumstances he lived in. I am critical, however, by the idolisation of the Prophet that Muslims have achieved. Like we have done to Gandhi, or Shivaji, or Mandela. Placed them above scrutiny. 

    As for the Surah Fatiha, all of it is fine except the last sentence. Who are those who have gone astray? 

    I shall re-read your article at some leisure. It being a weekend, and on the auspicious day of Ram Navmi, I would like to spend the day with my family. 
    By secularlogic - 3/28/2015 12:26:36 AM



  • Mr Lodhia, amidst all that ranting, there is just one point that I consider worth addressing. Why do I repeatedly ask you to explain to me what Islam means when it says "Idolators are unclean". So long as that verse exists, and so long as no Muslim comes out and says it is a statement that unfairly humiliates people of other faiths, and that you will work to expunge it from the Quran, this question will be repeated again and again. Not just from me, but from others as well. Instead of doing a verbal Taandav out here, sit down and think what you are going to do about it.  By secularlogic - 3/28/2015 12:16:22 AM



  • Sadaf, 

    There is one wise witticism that I will employ where you are concerned:

    Do not wrestle in the mud with a pig; you will only get dirty, and the pig will enjoy it.

    The writ of Islam does not extend over the world yet. I shall certainly worship all the idols that exist in the world, whether you like it or not. This is my last address to you, no matter how much you try to provoke me henceforth.
    By secularlogic - 3/28/2015 12:13:02 AM



  • Clarifying and expounding the meaning and essence of the Surah Fatiha for those others, unaware of its meaning or the atavistic Ulema and Radical Muslims who question the singular role of the Qur’an as the fount of guidance, virtually playing mukare Qur’an – though God knows best.

    This follows the ongoing debate on the twin themes:

    “Surah, al-Fatiha” reads:

    Praise is for God – The Lord of All Being!

    The Benevolent, the Merciful!

    Master of the Day of Recompense!

    Thee only do we serve, and Thee only do we ask for help.

    Guide (Ihdi) us to the Upright Path (Sirat al Mustaqim).

                             6. The path of those to whom Thou has been gracious

                              7. Not of those who have incurred Thy displeasure, nor of those who have gone astray.

    As one can readily see, this is simply a prayer to God where the devotee praises Him (1:1-2), acknowledges Him as the Final Judge of all humans (1:3), seeks His protection (1:4) and His Guidance to the Upright Path (1:5) – the path of those who earned His Favour (1:6) and not of those who went astray and earned His Wrath (1:7). 

    The divine voice answers in the very next passage - the opening passage of the second Surah (2:1-2).

    1. Alif, Lam, Meem (mystical expression).

    2. This is (dhalika) the divine edict (al-Kitab), let there be no doubt (la Raiba) it has guidance (Huda) for those who seek the Upright Path (Muttaqin).

    The use of the article ‘al’ in the expression ‘al-Kitab’ denotes the singularity of the divine edict (book) mentioned in the passage. Thus, the passage assures its audience about the Qur’an’s singular role as the divine guidance.

    However, those who are bent on clinging to Medieval misinterpretations of the Qur’anic message, virtually reject the Qur’an’s claim as “Dhalik Al Kita, La Raiba Fihe’ (2:2). God alone knows the faith and fate of such Muslim who deny the very opening claim of the Qur’an. Can they be call Munkar e Qur’an - God knows best.

    By muhammad yunus - 3/27/2015 11:56:48 PM



  • Hello Ekhlaq Ahmed Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Subject: MY MADRASSA BHAI

     

    What’s the obsession with the number “Seventy-Two”? 72 Signs, 72 Sects, 72 Virgins. That’s ridiculous.

     

    Why didn’t Prophet of Islam predicted as follows:

     

    Sign No. 1 - Mankind will one day land on the Moon.

     

    Sign No. 2 – Rovers will be sent to the Mars.

     

    Sign No. 3 – Muslims will be indulged in “Ghetto Thinking, instead of getting modern education.

     

    How long will the “Tablighis of the World, with Madrassa education continue to keep Muslims backwards? Do you believe in the following Quranic prayer::

    http://41.media.tumblr.com/75c31eb417ea5160b5b3c716484b1f6a/tumblr_mri3kaEQLZ1ryt89do1_1280.jpg

    Ekhlaq Saheb, if you do, then for crying out loud, stop with the nonsense about 72 Signs, 72 Sects and 72 Virgins.

     

    Thanks again for understanding, I remain

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia    

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com 

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/27/2015 11:29:29 PM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    At long last, you must reflect upon the impact of “Ghetto Thinking, which has been lingering on with certain commentators on the New Age Islam forum. Take a quick glance at the two similar comments dated October 23, 2013 and March 26, 2015.

     

    As an Editor did you noticed any change? It’s the same old recycling of words by “Secular Logic,” as follows:

     

    October 23, 2013

     

    "Polytheists are totally unclean"!

     

    “What a breathtakingly outrageous statement!”

     

    “For the sake of my own sanity, I avoid coming to this site and reading the views of the most biased, rabid, brainwashed, churlish and irrational people on this planet.”

     

    “Yet, because these outpourings fall in the "horror" genre, they seem to hold some morbid fascination for me that I keep coming here to get outraged.”

     

    March 26, 2015

     

    “How then are you going to reconcile the “Idolators are unclean", and other anti Kafir, anti apostate, anti atheist, anti polytheist aspects of Islam with the more accomodative modern milieu?”

     

    Knowing your die-hard belief that, we the “Moderate Muslims, can learn from the Islam haters, then why there is a constant urge on their part to take delight in what they gleefully call “Joy of Provocation”? That doesn’t make any sense, or, does it Sultan Saheb?

     

    Interestingly, it was Hats Off (S. Jeelani), who made an astute remark as follows:

     

    ps: i really do not bother about a persons's education. for it is my lived experience that education rarely changes a man. or a woman for that matter. education merely provides us with the sophistry and the tools to justify our prejudices. i have come across highly educated people who say stupid things and illiterate people who have said some of the wisest things.

     

    By hats off!  - 11/1/2013 12:13:15 AM

     

    No doubt, “Secular Logic,” is a living proof of how stupid can an educated person get. Yes indeed, those who are certified “Intellectual Bigots, are absolutely beyond cure. There is no need to look any further. “Perverted Logic,” makes me think that the person belong to a mental asylum. Hate of Islam drives him back to the New Age Islam forum every single morning, only to make a fool out of himself. Yet, you continue to believe that this very person can teach the “Moderate Muslims, about Islam.

     

    By the way, what was he/she smoking while commenting, “My quarrel with the Quran is that in its very first opening verse, it begins with a partition of mankind.” That’s simply amazing for a person who openly declares that, we the Muslims, are people indoctrinated with ideology that are beyond cure.

     

    Kind personal regards,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  

     

    ************************************************************************************

     

    To: Sultan Shahin Saheb – Editor – New Age Islam

     

    Subject: A Sweeping Verdict Against Surah: Al-Fatiha.

     

    One can expect such a sweeping remark from none other than a first-class bigot named “Secular Logic,” who hangs around the “New Age Islam” forum. Perhaps, it will be wise for your forum’s regular readers to ponder over the following remark:

     

    “My quarrel with the Quran is that in its very first opening verse, it begins with a partition of mankind - the believers, who are the favoured, and the unbelievers, who are the scum of the earth who must be vanquished.

     

    People indoctrinated with this ideology are beyond cure.”

     

    Sultan Shahin Saheb, acting as a “Moderator,” can you ask this “Coward,” to enlighten you and the rest of the Muslim readers about his verdict? Apparently, he alone must be reading certain books about Islam that 1.6 billion Muslims are not aware of. It will be all the more appropriate to find out from this man who is nothing but a dedicated hate-monger.

     

    For crying out loud, try not to remind the readers with your oft-repeated belief that Muslims can learn from the reasoning of “Perverted Logic.” The man hit and then run away without answering any questions. To put it on record, that’s all he is capable of doing.

     

    Always remember, bigots do not want to hear the “Truth, therefore, they resort to such a despicable tactic to promote their agenda. Henceforth, I am sure that your fellow Muslims will expect you to clarify such “A Sweeping Verdict Againt Surah: Al-Fatiha. Bear in mind that this man is a regular commentator on your forum, and as such, it is your personal responsibility, acting as an “Editor,” to get a clarification from him. In short, do not give him a pass like you have been doing in case of “Ex-Tablighi.”

     

    All in all, maintain a “Fair and Balanced” approach towards the debate. If someone steps out of line, then it is you who must ask relevant questions to those who are in the business of what “Secular Logic,“ termed it as “Joy of Provocation. Now the question of the day is, “Are you going to play the role of an honest moderator, or are you going to sweep this remark under the carpet?”

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia     

     

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia  - 2/8/2015 1:17:26 PM

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/27/2015 10:53:34 PM



  • Dear Secular Logic,

    Frankly I have not followed the exchange of views between you and others, though cursorily looked at some of them. What really pleased me is that you have not said a word that demonizes the Prophet of Islam – a common tendency among Radical Muslim scholars as well as others who have little knowledge of the Qur’an. So instead of raising questions about the apparent inconsistencies in the Qur’an, they pick at its Prophet like vultures sweeping down at the offal and entrails of dead animals in the pit of the valley – unable to scale the heights of mountains. So, in the first place, you earn my admiration – this is no double talk please for God knows what is at the back of human mind and I am the last person to proselytize a faith that stands in a petrified form today (I have done an article which I don’t want to load you with).

    I agree with the inconsistencies you pointed out that stand out on constant time reading of the Qur’anic text. The Qur’an, in Arabic or translated form is indeed a very challenging text. Sultan Shahin Sahab has done the right thing to refer my related article to you. I am encouraged to read the last sentence of your last comment: “I will read whatever I can understand, though.

    As the article is somewhat exhaustive and will undoubtedly scare any outsider, let me just quote some abridged extracts below that may tell you that there is more to the faith of Islam than what one can gather from what the eye meets in this era:

     1.      Opening para: “Any person reading a translation of the Arabic Qur’an line by line for the first time is bound to be perplexed if he/she is a believing Muslim and simply bewildered and alienated if he is Qur’an-sceptic Muslim or a non-Muslim. He can neither connect one verse or passage with the next, nor can he find any beauty, coherence and subtlety in its diction. Stark ignorant of the subtlety and nuances of the Qur’anic Arabic, and confronted by literal translation of its idioms and poetical and eschatological imageries, he is angered and frustrated.” – Indeed, if I am not mistaken, you seem to be angered if not and frustrated.

     2.      2nd para. “The revulsion that it can evoke in an unsympathetic, uninitiated mind is best expressed by the great scholar of the Enlightenment era, Thomas Carlyle, otherwise a great admirer of the Prophet Muhammad [2]; he charged the Qur’an of being ‘a wearisome, confused jumble, crude, incondite, endless irritation, long windedness, entanglement, insupportable stupidity in short.’ [3]

     3.      Para.3, “They (The Prophet’s immediate audience) found it strange and unbelievable (38:5, 50:2), a jumble of dreams (21:5) and legends of the ancients (6:25, 23:83, 25:5, 27:68, 46:17, 68:15, 83:13). However, as direct witnesses to the revelation in the live backdrop of its contexts, and under direct guidance of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), they could comprehend the broader dimensions as well as the smaller but critical caveats of its message.”

    Concluding part: As though cognizant of the immense complexity of its textualized form, the Qur’an offers a set of clues to humanity to vault over its textual complexity and get to the crux of its message – its tenets of guidance. Thus, it commands humanity to probe its verses (38:29, 47:24) with a positive state of mind (56:79). It calls for focusing only on the definitive verses (ayatum muhkamat) – such as those free from any ambiguity or confusion (mutashabihat) (3:7) and seeking the best meaning in it (39:18, 39:55). It also claims to be a book of wisdom (10:1, 31:2, 43:4, 44:4) made clear and distinct (12:1, 15:1, 16:64, 26:2, 27:1, 36:69, 43:2, 44:2) with all kinds of illustrations (17:89, 18:54, 30:58, 39:27), and claims to be its own best interpretation (25:33), and its own completion and perfection (5:3).

    The foregoing enunciations imply that the best way to interpret the Qur’anic message is i) to focus on its definitive – that is clearly stated and unambiguous verses, ii) to use its vocabulary – how a word or root is used across the text; iii) to cross reference the verses bearing same or similar themes which may appear under different Suras of the Qur’an; and iv) to use the Qur’anic themes and illustrations to extrapolate its broader message, rather than quoting any verse or passage in isolation. These clues, which collectively epitomize the most preferred methodology of exegesis – explaining the Qur’an by the Qur’an [11] can greatly assist any sympathetic reader of the Arabic or the translated Qur’an to comprehend the broader trajectories of its guidance despite the historical gap of some fourteen centuries between its advent and this day and the immense complexity of its text when read line by line in its entirety. A recently published focused exegetic work [12] attempts to probe the verses of the Qur’an following the above listed Qur’anic clues.  

    By muhammad yunus - 3/27/2015 10:40:40 PM



  • Dear Rafiq Lodhia Sahab,

    Yours comment under "Ghetto Thinking" in which you have quoted comments from three commentators seem to have caused you profound distress because each of them is designed to derail the serious discussion that the featured article merits and each of them purports to question the divinity of the Qur'an and thus aims at cutting the very roots of Islamic faith. 

    Ironically, instead of shocking me, it has pleased and reassured me, I had attempted to capture the minds of the Radical Muslims of Islam - the likes of those you cited. Their comments you quoted assures me I did not go overboard for I, as the author (jointly) of an exegetic work, as well a Muslim   tread a razor's edge and cannot be forgiven for making false statements. I agree, I have to allow full freedom of expression to those opposed to Islam but if Muslims or those who have inadequate of distorted knowledge about the Islamic faith as enshrined in the Qur'an or commit the shirk (God knows best) of conflating or pairing it Hadith, I cannot remain silent as a witness to the Qur'anic revelation.

    This is what I wrote in the concluding Para of my article referenced below:

    "Finally, a parting message is due to the Muslim intellectual front of the modern counterparts of the hypocrites and believing nomadic Arabs, intense in Kufr, of the Prophet’s era. They must understand, it is too late in history to dislodge Islam from its spiritual bastion. As there is no compulsion in religion all those sceptical of the divinity of the Qur’an must feel free to exit Islam, rather than create division and disorder within its ranks or conspire against it with the non-Muslims bent on trivializing the Qur’an and maligning the Prophet. No wonder the Qur’an referred to them as rijz (abomination) (9:95) like the pagan Arabs (9:28), and the Prophet readily agreed to exempt them from taking part in both the Uhud battle (3:167) and Tabuk expedition (9:47)."

    The Radical Intelligentsia of Islam and Its Orthodox Ulema Are the ‘Hypocrites’ and ‘Nomadic Arabs Intense In Kufr’ Of This Era: They Are Its Twin Internal Enemies, and Must Be Resisted

    http://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/the-radical-intelligentsia-of-islam-and-its-orthodox-ulema-are-the-‘hypocrites’-and-‘nomadic-arabs-intense-in-kufr’-of-this-era--they-are-its-twin-internal-enemies,-and-must-be-resisted/d/34621

    By muhammad yunus - 3/27/2015 10:01:13 PM



  • Discussion Thread: GHETTO THINKING OF THE MUSLIMS IS APPALLING

     

    Dated: October 23, 2014

     

    To Everyone participating in New Age Islam forum.

     

    Ladies & Gentlemen,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Candidly speaking, I was dumbfounded to read the comments of so many pertaining to Maulana Wahiddudin’s article titled, “Muslim Separatism is Un-Islamic. The spirit of Maulana’s message was to enlighten us about how the Muslims of modern days have drifted towards “Identity Conscious” ways of living which has helped to trigger the defeatist mentality. Maulana Saheb has correctly pointed out that such an unnatural identity-consciousness has produced “ghetto country, colony, institutions and society.

     

    I say “GHETTO THINKING” is what we the Muslims are skillfully applying in many of the Islamic forums across the world. This particular on-going discourse on New Age Islam has pretty much gone out of context. Muslim minds are now very deeply entrenched into focusing only on the bifurcated versions of “Hadiths. The Sahih or Genuine; the Hasan or the Fair; and the Da’if or the Weak. Though, I have not extensively studied the “Hadith, nonetheless, I respect the sayings of our beloved Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him). In fact, after reading  some of the truly derogatory remarks coupled with a personal request by the Editor, Sultan Shahin, I decided to participate by making a handful of comments only to be frightened by the onslaught of unruly and unintelligent remarks that struck back.      

     

    Having said that, I find the current discourse to be truly mind-boggling. A few comments have taken me aback as to make me to simply wonder about what has been filtered into the minds of Muslims in these days. At times I wonder if the participants are merely Muslims or they are converted into Christianity or merely they belong to other faiths. Respecting the “Freedom of Speech, I would say that there seems to be a mixed blend of debaters on this forum who are engaged in back and forth rebuttals. Spirited debates should always be welcomed and that is what Sultan Shahin is striving for. For instance:

     

    Khalid Suhail’s comments are as follows: 

    “Quran is unintelligible without the Hadith.”  

    “He (Prophet Muhammad) was the first to violate the treaty of Hudaibiya.” 

    “Islam is a journey from peace to violence. The early writings of prophet Muhammad are very distinct from latter ones. When prophet Muhammad started his prophetic career, he had no earthly powers and the verses that he wrote during that period are all conciliatory and tolerant.”  

    Rational Mohammed Younus comments are as follows:

    “He is caught between who tells the Quran can't be understood without Hadith and one who says the Quran can be understood by the common man like you.” 

    “He is caught between "submitters" and who open the chapters of philosophy and rationality behind the every verse. So let us close the Madrasas, Universities or any other institutions those award scholarship and shoot the scholars as they have become godhead of their sects. Do you think Islam produced so many blasphemers including Sufis. Can you tell me some Sufis who rejected the Ahadith? Bokhari was smarter than Hz Mohammed in this case. Millions of Muslims are believing in Ahadith. You need not to run into search you will find some of them here in so called moderates.”  

    Hats Off (A fellow human hailing from a different religion) comments are as follows:

    “gandhi was doing exactly what the moderate muslim apologists do today. the moderate muslims hold candles for their violent brothers, who quote the exact same verses for murdering, which the moderates use for whitewashing. so you have these fantastically flexible verses, which one may use either for general slaughter or general peace. multi idol worship and personal hygiene are not at all connected either by cause and effect or by association. the surprise is that you are constrained to say you feel sorry for asserting that polytheists do not wash. this is derogatory and actually rather coarse.” 

    “Someone somewhere needs to wake up. The eternal text is dead. The ephemeral text has come to stay.”  

    Mr. Hats Off. You are absolutely right. Someone somewhere needs to wake-up big time. Whilst the Muslim minds are muddled way too much by the “Science of Hadiths,

     

    I would like to respectfully point out to you the summary of Quranic verse 28 in Chapter 9 – Repentance (Al-Tawba) as follows:

     

    “O Ye Muslims! Surely those who ascribe partners to God are an unclean lot. Let them not after this year approach the Holy Place of Prayer, and if (due to lack of opportunity to profit by trading with them at the time of Haj you apprehend poverty, (then, do not lose heart for), God , if He pleases, will soon give you riches out of His abundance. Verily God knows (your needs) and He will in His Wisdom compensate you for your loss.”     

     

    Commentary by Maulana Abul Kalam Azad is as follows:

     

    “In verse 28 the Quran reverts to the order issued in an earlier verse of this chapter prohibiting the polytheists to enter the Ka’ba any further. That House of Prayer had been raised by the Prophet Abraham and his son Ismail for the worship of God, the One, and was meant to serve as a center of spiritual activity for those who believed in the unity of God.”

     

    “In this verse the reference to the uncleanliness of the polytheists is not to their physical condition but to the uncleanliness of their hearts. Islam does not regard the person or the body of anyone as unclean. Every man as man stands on the same footing as every other human being. It is why it has prohibited untouchability and does not single out any

    section of humanity as untouchable. In fact, it is clear from the recorded history of the Prophet that the Prophet maintained social relationships with not only the People of the Book, the Jews, but with the polytheists of his time. He used to dine with them and accept their invitations and also offer invitations to them. History has recorded that he at times had allowed them to stay in his own mosque at Madina.”

     

    Note the emphasis is strictly on but to the uncleanliness of their hearts.” How about this translation that debunks all the jibber jabber of what little many know about the actual meaning of the Quranic verses. No, Mr. Hats Off, the eternal text is not dead. The ephemeral text is alive because there are those who have been misled to believe that “Quran is unintelligible without the Hadith.” Just like you remain flabbergasted, and so do I. The ignorant among Muslims do not have a clue, but sadly, your comments are way off the chart too. Yes, we have our fair share of “Misunderstanders” of religion, nevertheless, the grossly mislead misinterpretations by people of other faiths do not help either. This very discourse is enough of a proof that even a learned man like you do not, perhaps, have enough knowledge of Islam. Need I say more, Mr. Hats Off? 

     

    Most importantly, while writing this note, another rebuttal was posted by “Secular Logic” as follows:

     

    "Polytheists are totally unclean"!

     

    “What a breathtakingly outrageous statement!”

     

    “For the sake of my own sanity, I avoid coming to this site and reading the views of the most biased, rabid, brainwashed, churlish and irrational people on this planet.” 

     

    “Yet, because these outpourings fall in the "horror" genre, they seem to hold some morbid fascination for me that I keep coming here to get outraged.” 

     

    For the sake of my sanity, I remain baffled at many irrational comments posted by my fellow Muslims. I feel embarrassed to read absurd comments, and all such baseless thoughts are nothing but the consequences of “GHETTO THINKING. Trust me, Sultan Shahin Saheb and I also are horrified at the thought process of Muslim minds. We both are fully aware of the extent of the damage that has been done, All we can do is to encourage the young Muslim youth to ponder over what people hailing from other religions are thinking about our repulsive attitude.

     

    Honestly speaking, the only “Moderate Muslim” who has displayed a whole lot of common sense in this on-going discourse has been Ghulam Mohiyuddin whose astute remarks were as follows:

     

    “The essential message of the Quran is, "be good, do the right thing, do good deeds, be just, be kind, do not kill, be rational". Do we need to know where Masjide-Aqsa is? The life of the Prophet and his parables are interesting reading but they are not an essential part of Islam. God's entire message to Moses could be accommodated in one page. Jesus's Sermon on the Mount is only four pages. Was Islam created for the ordinary man or for scholars? All I am saying is that let common sense rule.”

     

    All in all, I, Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia, earnestly recommend every Muslim to remind himself/herself of a saying of our Prophet Muhammad (Peace Be Upon Him), that “Disputation about the Quran constitutes unbelief. Let us then deter from continuing to keep on compiling more versions of Hadiths in order to understand the simple and basic commandments of our Holy Quran. One only needs to reflect upon the powerful fact that if an “Unlettered Prophet” and his companions many of whom being “Unlettered,clearly understood the verses of Holy Quran, then why do we the 21st century Muslims have to apply our minds deeply into the so-called “Science of Hadiths” consisting of ample confusions? Not to mention, for a Muslim to dare suggest that Quran is unintelligible without the Hadith” is a starting point of disputation. The word to the wise is sufficient.

     

    Thanks again for reading, I remain

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia       

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/27/2015 8:42:47 PM



  • Convent educated secular doesn't mean that you have got licence to worship stones believing those as God and thus remain very much like those illiterates are but who can go about questioning other's beliefs.

    When you have no logic to prove those stones as God, you start defending those as your belief. And then you advocate that others should respect your rubbish beliefs because that is what secularism demands from them. 

    While you do not respect what Islamic beliefs are yet you expect Islam should be respecting non senses. Isn't it ironical? 

    But let me tell you to your surprise, Islam does ask to respect other's beliefs however nonsenses those may be. There are specific verses in Quran saying that.

    As far as your assertion about Prophet demolishing other's temple is, that is factually incorrect.  
    By sadaf - 3/27/2015 2:29:29 PM



  • "The 72 Signs of Doomsday" . . .

    All bogus! One more reason why we should pay no attention to the Hadiths.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 3/27/2015 1:19:40 PM



  • 3,000 madrasas affiliated to Darul Uloom shun govt financial aid

     

    By Mohd Faisal Fareed | Lucknow | Published March 26, 2015 2:29 am

     

    Darul Uloom says not in favour of mixing religious and modern teachings.

     

    Nearly 3000 madrasas affiliated to country’s largest Islamic seminary, Darul Uloom, Deoband, have decided to shun any government aid for modernisation and to stay away from modern teaching. In its maiden budget, the Narendra Modi government had announced Rs 100 crore for modernisation of madrasas.

     

    The decision was taken during a two-day ((March 23-24) conference of Rabta-e-Madaris-e-Islamia — an organisation of nearly 3,000 madrasas affiliated to Darul Uloom. The advice for the same came from Rector, Darul Uloom, Maulana Abul Qasim Nomani, who also heads the Rabta-e-Madaris-e-Islamia. Nearly 4000 clerics from across the country attended the conference held at Masjid Rashidia on Darul Uloom campus in Deoband.

     

    “We are not in favour of mixing religious teachings with modern teachings. We are devoted fully to religious teachings. We are for ‘deen ka ilm’ and ‘deen ki hifazat’ (religious teachings and protection of religion). For other modern subjects, there are other institutions,” Nomani told The Indian Express on Wednesday.

     

    Nomani also said that Dars-e-Nizamia — the pattern of teaching at madrasas affiliated to Darul Uloom — does not believe in seeking employment and making money after education. “We only make religious people. Other subjects such as English literature or computers can be pursued only after completing religious teachings,” he said.

     

    To hammer home his point, Nomani said, “We are not going to mix a little bit of Quranic education in courses like law, engineering and medical. Then why shall we allow little knowledge of these streams in our courses?”

     

    Nomani, who holds considerable clout among Deoband sect of Muslims, also asked the madrasas to shun government aid. “It is the will of our alma mater that if we take any aid from anyone, that person will be interested in applying his system in our madrasas, which cannot be allowed. We are not bound to accept government aid. We are running our religious institutions as per our constitutional rights, so why should we follow the system of government education,” Nomani said.

     

    Link to the Article

     

      mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/27/2015 12:14:38 PM



  • I think Secularlogic's apprehensions may dissolve a bit if he were to read the following article:

    Challenging, And Shed Of Its Literary Glory in Translation, the Qur'an Offers Clear Clues to Exploring Its Core Commandments - Now Obscured, Corrupted and Distorted By Secondary Theological Sources
    Muhammad Yunus, New Age Islam

    Any person reading a translation of the Arabic Qur’an line by line for the first time is bound to be perplexed if he/she is a believing Muslim and simply bewildered and alienated if he is Qur’an-sceptic Muslim or a non-Muslim. He can neither connect one verse or passage with the next, nor can he find any beauty, coherence and subtlety in its diction. Stark ignorant of the subtlety and nuances of the Qur’anic Arabic, and confronted by literal translation of its idioms and poetical and eschatological imageries, he is angered and frustrated. With no background knowledge of the Qur’an’s historical and Biblical allusions, he is completely at a loss to make any head or tail of what comes under his eyes. With turning of each page he confronts, often in the midst of disjointed and abstruse themes, divine threats and altruistic commandments, both of which he loathes to swallow. Who wants to be told that his wealth is not entirely his own (4:32), or to spend for the needy at every opportunity (2:274), or to write off debt to a poor debtor (2:278), or not to expect any return for a favour bestowed (74:6), or to shun greed, arrogance, back biting and other temptations and cravings of mind? He soon gives up.

    The truth is, read pedagogically verse by verse, the Arabic Qur’an – let alone its translation is mind boggling. It is like a literary kaleidoscope that encompasses an exhaustive array of themes, mixes the spiritual with the mundane, the abstruse with the concrete and maintains a sketchy diary of the Prophetic mission with no dates, no names of people or places, no historical details of any kind, scattering all its data in bits and pieces in a random fashion across its text. In the midst of this wide array of themes, it interjects the diverse elements of its guidance and reverts to some of them repeatedly. The matter becomes far more complex in translation.


    http://www.newageislam.com/ijtihad,-rethinking-islam/challenging,-and-shed-of-its-literary-glory-in-translation,-the-qur-an-offers-clear-clues-to-exploring-its-core-commandments---now-obscured,-corrupted-and-distorted-by-secondary-theological-sources/d/9039


    By Sultan Shahin - 3/27/2015 11:53:47 AM



  • Secular Logic,

    Avoid paraphrasing what I said. If you want to discuss anything I said, quote my exact words and better in the same thread the subject was discussed.

    Your paraphrasing is what you think I meant and not what I said.


    By Observer - 3/27/2015 10:47:42 AM



  • I don't endorse these or any other points. I merely see that all the signs of Kheyamat as predicted by the prophet have almost come true or there are trends showing in that direction:

    42. Women will trade along with men

    43. Women will imitate men

    44. Men will imitate women


    I am only worried about your fate. Come back home before Kheyamat actually starts. You are a learned person, my madrasa bhai.

    By Ekhlaq Ahmad - 3/27/2015 10:32:59 AM



  • Secular Logic,

    It is a truism that you can prove anything by ignoring half the data. Therefore, by choosing the verses you wish to ignore, you can distort the message and try to prove your view point. But who can argue with a literalist and fundamentalist who ignores nothing and the meaning he derives contradicts no verse? Now if you have a problem with such a literalist and a fundamentalist and would rather listen to those who hold many of the verses to be abrogated and those who mix the Quran with the ahadiths,  then that is your choice.
    But why does it bother you so much that a literalist and fundamentalist understanding of the Quran leads to the conclusion that Islam is truly literally and fundamentally a religion of peace, moderation and secular justice?

    By Observer - 3/27/2015 7:39:22 AM



  • Mr Observer, 

    I have to make references to you when I feel that Mr Shahin, in his most admirable quest to seek moderation in the practice of Islam, is supporting the kind of analysis that will not stand the test of proof. If there are peaceful verses in the Quran, they stand abrogated by the more violent verses; if there is a commonsensical observation that there are different tribes with different beliefs in the world, there are exhortations to followers to spread Islam with such profligacy that the only God worshipped in the world is Allah. If there are verses saying slaves should be released as an act of charity, there are verses saying sex with enslaved women is permissable in Islam. If there is a verse saying to you your religion and to me mine, there are verses heaping abuses on non believers and cursing them to the horrors of hell; if there are verses recommending just behavior with the enemy, there are accounts of battles where opponents were given the choice of accepting islam or death. Indeed, it is difficult to make sense of the religion. 

    You ask if your account of what the Quran really means will not lead to moderate Islam. I do not think it will. For one, it is open to refutation. I do not have the scholarly wherewithal to refute you, but those who have have not endorsed your reading of the Quran. Secondly, your reading of the Quran is not supported by the Hadith and I do not think any power on earth can convince your fellow men to allow the Hadith to slide into obscurity. 

    So at best what your articles can do is make a few people feel good about Islam. I have stopped commenting on them because 1. they are very technical in nature and I do not think I am qualified to comment on the nitty gritties. 2. I disagree with your basic assumptions - that there is God, that Quran is a divine product, that it, in its entirity, is a faultless philosophy. I do not think people sign any 'covenant' with god that they must then follow because they are born into a certain religion. I do not think it is a sin to worship idols or several gods. One may worship, one, many, or none so long as it brings him peace of mind and does not trouble others. At how many levels can I disagree with you? And how often? How can I even find a common ground with a person who thinks imposition of Jizya does not mean non muslims were treated unequally? How can I find common ground with a person who is all gung ho about non Muslim men/women converting to Islam at the time of Marriage to a Muslim, but will not allow conversion the other way round? Finding this basic incompatibility of views, I have decided to leave your articles unchallenged as they just lead to a load of back and forth with each of us as trenchant in our beliefs as we started out. I will read whatever I can understand, though. 
    By secularlogic - 3/27/2015 7:04:12 AM



  • The 72 Signs of Doomsday

    The Prophet Muhammad (Salallah u Alaihi Wassallam) foretold 72 signs that would appear near Doomsday:

    1. People will leave prayer

    2. People will usurp Ama'naat.

    3. Lying will become an art

    4. There will be murders on the slightest of disagreements.

    5. Usury will become common

    6. There will be very tall buildings

    7. People will sell Religion for the world

    8. People will treat relatives badly

    9. Justice will become a rarity

    10. Lies will be considered truth

    11. Clothes will be of silk

    12. Persecution will become common

    13. Divorces will become common

    14. Sudden deaths will increase

    15. The usurper of Ama'naat will be considered honest and honourable

    16. The keeper of Ama’naat will be called an usurper of things given to him

    http://www.islamicity.

    com/forum/printer

    _friendly_posts.asp?

    TID=4825

    By rational muhammad yunus - 3/27/2015 6:57:47 AM



  • Dear Ekhlaq Ahmad - 3/27/2015 3:48:41 AM

    May I request you to post your comments on following points?

    42. Women will trade along with men

    43. Women will imitate men

    44. Men will imitate women why Allah or his messenger is misogynist or bothers about genders?

    From your comment it seems that you endorse these all points.

    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/27/2015 5:06:04 AM



  • Rational and Secular Logic,

    Hold me to what I say in:


    against any of my articles where you think that I am being an interpretationist.

    By Observer - 3/27/2015 4:59:59 AM



  • Dear Ekhlaq Ahmad - 3/27/2015 3:48:41 AM

    "Dear" if an apostate can call an imanwala. I felt that most condemnable person in Islam is an apostate. I also know what Muslims crave for.
    Many bigger minds were not Muslims. Many bigger minds didn't believe in prophet-hood. God is just a probability.
    If so many imanwalas can go wrong in understanding a supposedly clear guide book, i think i should not go for it. i am averse to mental gymnastic that is needed to understand the book.

    the signs of Qayamat i posted not because i believe in them, but to show that majority of Muslims believe in them including so called moderates. These signs are based upon Ahadith literature a thing which is a key to many Muslims to understand the Quran.
    no matter how much some Muslims want to pull down the hadith, majority will keep clinging to it. we have scholars right on this forum who will keep the flag of Hadith high.
    there is a hadith saying "Qayamat will not come till an imanwala is present on the earth". Qayamat will come when there will be no imanwala how dear imanwalas are to Allah and how much Allah hates unbelivers.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/27/2015 4:42:45 AM



  • Secular Logic,

    You may ask your questions in the 4th part of the article " the story of the  prophetic mission of Muhammad (pbuh)"

    And stop sniping from the sidelines making oblique references. If you have a problem with any of my articles comment under it.

    I don't have to invent and impute motives. The problem you have with my articles is that my articles show Islam to be a moderate, and peaceful religion that stands unambiguously for secular justice. Now who can have a problem with that?  If Muslims end up believing that to be true, then they will be secular, peace loving and moderate. Why are you an enemy of that and yet claim that you are with the moderates? 
    By Observer - 3/27/2015 4:23:49 AM



  • "Half the Muslims of the world are telling us that the Quran must not be taken literally; the other half says it must be taken literally and go on to wreak havoc in the world. You, in the middle, say it must be taken literally, but as per your understanding of the words. forgive me for being confused and unconvinced."

    I endorse it fully.
    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/27/2015 4:17:02 AM



  • Correction: almost every prediction of the Prophet has come true. 
    I fervently hope Rational Yunus Saheb comes back to Islam. Gharwapsi please. Kheyamat is clearly very close. You are more knowledgeable than most on this forum. Better become more Imanwala also.
    By Ekhlaq Ahmad - 3/27/2015 3:48:41 AM



  • Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi Saheb, you will render a great service to Islam and Muslims by giving the contexts and current status and meaning of Quranic verses and ahadith quoted by Secularlogic and Rational. By Shakeel Ahmad - 3/27/2015 3:43:25 AM



  • The signs of Kheyamat seem to show that Judgement Day is indeed close. Time Rational embraced Islam. May Allah set save him from dying as an apostate. Please, rational be quick about it. See almost prediction of the prophet has come true and is indeed happening. Have faith now. By Ekhlaq Ahmad - 3/27/2015 3:38:47 AM



  • Dear, commentators, I don't see any point on harping on our preconceived notions of hadiths being credibile or unauthenticated. What can be fruitful is finding the right context and background for both verses of Quran and prophetic sayings which are deemed authentic and Quran compatible. So that we can help impede their misuse and misinterpretation by the jihadists and extremists. Merely discarding and rejecting all hadith corpus is not the solution. By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/27/2015 3:18:24 AM



  • Mr Observer, you have duly fulfilled your mandatory religious obligation of humiliating a critic and imputing motives to why a person may hold the views he does. Now would you like to tell me how a non Muslim and a person who does not believe in the existence of God, nor that Mohammad was God's messenger, nor that the Quran was dictated by God, and a polytheist atheist :) is supposed to feel about the following:

    Quran in chapter 9 says,

    "Freedom from (all) obligations (is declared) from Allah and His Messenger to those of the Mushrikun(polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah), with whom you made a treaty.[1]

    So travel freely (O Mushrikun) for four months (as you will) throughout the land, but know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah, and Allah will disgrace the disbelievers.[2]

    And a declaration from Allah and His Messenger to mankind on the greatest day (the 10th of Dhul-Hijjah — the 12th month of Islamic calendar) that Allah is free from (all) obligations to the Mushrikun and so is His Messenger. So if you (Mushrikun) repent, it is better for you, but if you turn away, then know that you cannot escape (from the Punishment of) Allah. And give tidings (to Muhammad) of a painful torment to those who disbelieve.[3]

    Except those of the Mushrikun with whom you have a treaty, and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor have supported anyone against you. So fulfill their treaty to them to the end of their term. Surely Allah loves Al- Mattaqun (the pious — see V.2:2).[4]

    Then when the Sacred Months (the Ist, 7th, 11th, and 12th months of the Islamic calendar) have passed, then kill the Mushrikun wherever you find them, and capture them and besiege them, and prepare for them each and every ambush. But if they repent and perform As-Salat (Iqamat-as-Salat), and give Zakat(charity), then leave their way free. Verily, Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.[5]

    And if anyone of the Mushrikun (polytheists, idolaters, pagans, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah) seeks your protection then grant him protection, so that he may hear the Word of Allah (the Quran), and then escort him to where he can be secure, that is because they are men who know not.[6]"
    Muhsin khan translated Quranverse 9:1-6

    "O you who believe (in Allah's Oneness and in His Messenger (Muhammad)! Verily, the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah, and in the Message of Muhammad) are Najasun (impure). So let them not come near Al-Masjid-al-Haram (at Makkah) after this year, and if you fear poverty, Allah will enrich you if He will, out of His Bounty. Surely, Allah is All-Knowing, All-Wise. [28]

    Fight against those who

    (1) believe not in Allah,
    (2) nor in the Last Day,
    (3) nor forbid that which has been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger
    (4) and those who acknowledge not the religion of truth (i.e. Islam) among the people of the Scripture (Jews and Christians), until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. [29]
    And the Jews say: 'Uzair (Ezra) is the son of Allah, and the Christians say: Messiah is the son of Allah. That is a saying from their mouths. They imitate the saying of the disbelievers of old. Allah's Curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth! [30]"
    Muhsin khan translated Quranverse 9:28-30

    Quran chapter 8 says,

    "(Remember) when your Lord inspired the angels, "Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved, so strike them over the necks, and smite over all their fingers and toes."[12]
    This is because they defied and disobeyed Allah and His Messenger. And whoever defies and disobeys Allah and His Messenger, then verily, Allah is Severe in punishment.[13]"

    Muhsin khan translated Quranverse 8:12-13

    "Say to those who have disbelieved, if they cease (from disbelief) their past will be forgiven. But if they return (thereto), then the examples of those (punished) before them have already preceded (as a warning).[38]
    And fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief and polytheism: i.e. worshipping others besides Allah) and the religion (worship) will all be for Allah Alone [in the whole of the world]. But if they cease (worshipping others besides Allah), then certainly, Allah is All-Seer of what they do.[39]"

    Muhsin khan translated Quranverse 8:38-39

    In his tafsir, Ibn Kathir, one of the most well-renown Islamic scholars, explains the verses further:

    "Allah then commanded fighting the disbelievers when He said:

    (...until there is no more Fitnah) meaning, Shirk. This is the opinion of Ibn `Abbas, Abu Al-`Aliyah, Mujahid, Al-Hasan, Qatadah, Ar-Rabi`, Muqatil bin Hayyan, As-Suddi and Zayd bin Aslam.

    Allah's statement:
    (...and the religion (all and every kind of worship) is for Allah (Alone).) means, `So that the religion of Allah becomes dominant above all other religions.' It is reported in the Two Sahihs that Abu Musa Al-Ash`ari said: "The Prophet was asked, `O Allah's Messenger! A man fights out of bravery, and another fights to show off, which of them fights in the cause of Allah' The Prophet said:
    (He who fights so that Allah's Word is superior, then he fights in Allah's cause.) In addition, it is reported in the Two Sahihs:

    (I have been ordered (by Allah) to fight the people until they proclaim, `None has the right to be worshipped but Allah'. Whoever said it, then he will save his life and property from me, except for cases of the law, and their account will be with Allah.)"

    Should I take this literally or should I look for some nice interpretation of these verses?

    Half the Muslims of the world are telling us that the Quran must not be taken literally; the other half says it must be taken literally and go on to wreak havoc in the world. You, in the middle, say it must be taken literally, but as per your understanding of the words. forgive me for being confused and unconvinced. 

    And oh - the material is taken from wikipedia and not any islamophobic site.
    By secularlogic - 3/27/2015 3:17:41 AM



  • "9.   It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslim unless he (or she) openly declares disbelief."


    what if one wants to leave the islam? What is fatwa of 147 scholars who wrote open letter to Al-Baghdadi?

    By rational mohammed yunus - 3/27/2015 2:02:04 AM



  • Secular Logic is like that woman who hated Muhammad Ali (the boxer) so much that she attended all his fights.

    "I come to all your fights," the woman said to him. "I will keep coming," she continued as she neatly folded the paper containing the autograph he had given her, "until I see them take you out on a stretcher. God won't always let evil win."

    Secular Logic thinks that the only good Muslim is an apostate. He visits the website to see the "destruction" of Islam.
    By Observer - 3/27/2015 1:13:26 AM



  • Secular Logic,
    I am sure you did not miss reading my article:
    I have a healthy disdain for all interpretationists. If I wasn't such a literalist and a fundamentalist, I wouldn't have been able to defend what I write.
    Can I help it Islam is fundamentally and literally a religion of Peace, Moderation and Secular Justice, and it is the interpretations that distort the message and not the literal meaning of the verses?However, it must be clearly understood what it means to be a literalist and a fundamentalist. A literalist and a fundamentalist ignores nothing while arriving at the meanings and once he has arrived at the meaning, there is neither any need nor scope for interpretations nor does such meaning then contradict any other verse of the Quran.
    By Observer - 3/27/2015 12:58:09 AM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    Every one of you must read the following sentence:

     

    Sometimes I ask myself why I come here at all to indulge in such futile interactions.”

     

    Good to know that the “Chicken George,” who always duck answering about the social ills of his own community, is now thinking about why he is involved in the New Age Islam forum. I say, it’s about time.

     

    At long last, the “Twisted Logic,” should retire in a mental asylum. The smart-aleck have nothing worthwhile to contribute, but only to worry about, “How Muslims behave will determine the nature of the world my children and grandchildren live in.”

     

    Oh well, he/she should be worrying more about how much damage “Intellectual Bigots” are doing to insult other religion. How many times, we have to keep on telling that sane and educated Muslims know our own problems? How stupid can a person get?  

     

    Nope! Obviously, there is something mentally wrong with a person. I only wonder, “Sharam Jaisa Koi Cheez Hai Ka Nahin?” It is quite apparent that he/she does not have any. Let’s face it, no one knows the identity of the person, hence, I have no choice but to write, “He/She.     

     

    Finally, the demand is, “Respect, sir, has to be earned. I cannot force myself to respect anything.” That’s just great. How can one expect to earn respect for continuing to assault a religion at every single turn? Simply, ignore a person who has proven beyond a shadow of doubt that he/she is nothing but a downright bigot.    

     

    Have a blessed day.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia     

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/27/2015 12:52:59 AM



  • Comment-3 for Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi Sahab

    This commentary demonstrates that those Ulamas of this day who are bent on venerating the Hadith as an inextricable component of Islamic faith complementary or supplementary to the Qur’an may be committing a grave error verging on shirk though God knows best.

    In the Qur’an, the divine voice declares:

    “I swear by the Stations of the stars.

    It is an oath, if you only knew, that is tremendous.

    It is a noble Quran.

     In a well-protected Book.

    None can grasp it except the purified (those who approach it with a positive frame of mind).

    A revelation from the Lord of the Worlds.

    Is it this discourse that you take so lightly?

    And you make it your livelihood to deny it?”

    [56:75-82]

    This passage, like all others passages of the Qur’an were simultaneously heard by a group of the Prophet’s companions, memorized by them and remain in the memory of the huffaz ever since as a lyrical litany that, like any lyrical composition, is linguistically protected against any tampering. Hence, the claim of the Qur’an to protect its text, made in the above passage, in full light of history, witnessed by scores of Prophet’s companions, memorized by hundreds of them remains true to this day.

    Now compare with the Hadith. As Ghulam Ghous Sahab – who is well groomed in hadith sciences mentioned in one of his recent comments, and is otherwise known in scholarly circles, about 5000 out of  some 20,000 ahadith in the Sahih compilation are reported by one single person – Imam Abu Huraira. He cites no witness. He simply made a verbal imagery by listening or watching an episode only once, for it is most unlikely that the Prophet or any of his wives would have told him or did anything repeatedly for him to make an accurate verbal imagery. Since he was a post Meccan integration Muslim, he had hardly three years to hear and memorize all these ahadiht. Given that the period saw a high level of mobility of the Prophet, it is most unlikely that he verified the truth of a single of these narrations with the Prophet. Besides, scholars agree that the fabricators of hadith in later era found it convenient to trace their isnad to his name. So, whether, the ahadith attributed to him were at all narrated by him remains in doubt. Now, how any Muslim man who can understand the Arabic language of the Qur’an and so can feel the force of the above divine declaration, and is cognizant of the truth of its collective witnessing, memorization and incorruptibility (owing its lyrical format) can dare to bring Abu Hurayra’s narrations, none recorded in light of history (first recorded some 200 years after they were first introduced), none witnessed by anyone else, none told him or witnessed by him more than once, none verified by him, none commanding any lyrical format, and each liable to be altered as people orally cited them across the length and breadth of the regions in which they grew  for some eight generations.  

    Is there any need to table any further argument to convince anyone groomed in Islamic scholarship that it may be an insult to the Qur’an, a shirk of high order, to pair or compare it in any way with the Hadith as illustrated by the above example. It is an outrage and God alone knows how He will judge those Ulamas and scholars of this day who are bent on venerating the Hadith as an inextricable component of Islamic faith complementary or supplementary to the Qur’an.

    By muhammad yunus - 3/27/2015 12:03:30 AM



  • Mr Shahin,

    You seem to believe that people who, after reading the Quran and the Hadith, and after being a part of an online Islamic forum for two years, form an unflattering opinion about Islam must be psychopaths. You really must divest yourself of this misconception. It is entirely possible to review literature dispassionately and form an adverse opinion about its contents. We do it on a daily basis when we analyse even news reports filed on a daily basis by reporters.

    Respect, sir, has to be earned. I cannot force myself to respect anything. I do not place any religion to be exempt from critical examination. Most religions, after a point, require you to suspend disbelief, and believe in something because some Prophet, some book tells you it is so. This does not appeal to me. 

    There are other parameters on which one can judge religious ideology - humane values, logic, egalitarianism, propensity to evolve with time, leeway for individual freedom, system of reward and punishment built in, and proportion of blind faith required to be a part of that religious grouping, and the kind of society that will be built if a particular religion is followed in toto as per its religious texts.

    While some of Islams teachings regarding moral behavior have eternal value: truthfulness, respect for elders, moderation in use of things of pleasure, avoidance of vices, and many more, Islam is a religion that is kind to the in group but vicious to the out group. 

    Its various lacunae have been spelt out in mind numbing detail and prolificity by various people, I will not go into that again. 

    As for moderates, you have to be really daft to think I wish them failure. Of course I wish Islam to march into modernity. Muslims comprise 25 percent of the world's population, a proportion that is bound to grow as the population growth rates of other communities drop off or become negative. How Muslims behave will determine the nature of the world my children and grandchildren live in. My contention is that the manner in which you are attempting to do this is faulty. On the one hand you call for reform, on the other you say not a single word in your religious texts can be wrong. How then are you going to reconcile the 'Idolators are unclean", and other anti Kafir, anti apostate, anti atheist, anti polytheist aspects of Islam with the more accomodative modern milieu? You will have to go into contortions like Mr Observer is doing, which are not convincing anybody. Thats all. If you still insist on holding the opinion you have of me, there is nothing I can do about it. You drove Hats Off away, eventually you will drive me away too. Sometimes I ask myself why I come here at all to indulge in such futile interactions. 


    By secularlogic - 3/26/2015 11:48:00 PM



  • All the warriors of Islam have come crawling out of the woodwork as soon as Secular Logic spoke his mind. Let me address them one by one.

    Mr Lodhia: Go back to your asylum, sir. They are looking for you.

    Sadaf: He did indeed destroy the idols that people worshipped, usurped the place for his own religion and forbade them to enter a place that was formerly their place of worship. People may worship stones and believe what they want to. Nobody, not even the Prophet has any right to stop them from doing that. That is what secularism means, and the Prophet committed a blatantly unsecular act that was repeated all through history all over the world by his followers: ref: Hagia Sophia and Babri Masjid. You seem to have some sort of chip in your shoulder about my convent education. Well, I do love stone metal wood idols, because they are a part of my culture, many of them are beautiful, and it is belief which endows them with godliness. Those who don't believe that God pervades every atom in the universe will see the idols as mere stones. Which is OK with me. The point is, if there is a religion that has idol worship as a part of its belief system, secularism demands that you respect it. Islam doesn't.
    By secularlogic - 3/26/2015 11:22:58 PM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin You admitted "secular people, or let me say atheists, do not hate religion. At least in India secularism simply means respect for all religions, which you clearly don't have." Islam doesn't respect atheists specially if they have come from Islam? It is the good on part of atheists not believers. Believers in one or another way disrespect atheists. If the Islam is so good there is no need of reform in it. The Quran says good deeds of unbelievers are useless in hereafter. If somebody says that the Quran is not a revealed book, what is wrong in it? after all he is not a believer. Are not the jehadis believers? By rational mohammed yunus - 3/26/2015 11:04:48 PM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin Saheb,

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Glad to see you speaking out. You are right that person like “Secular Logic,” only focus is to portray the religion of Islam as evil. How long has this person commenting on the New Age Islam forum? What did so many of your readers learn? This skillful bigot has long been masquerading as “Mr. Know-It-All, about Islam. Living in his/her own imaginary world of denial is something they all do best. There are so many social ills in India, such as, rapes, caste systems and what not. Why not shift the attention towards Islam? To so many of these bigots, everything that is wrong in this world has mainly been caused by the followers of Islam.

     

    Sultan Saheb, what struck me the most in your rebuttal, was your statement as follows:

     

    “I want to make one thing clear. I have absolutely no problem with you and other Islam-haters or Islamophobes posting comments on my website. Your presence, as that of ex-Muslim haters of Islam, is essential to keep Muslims on their toes. Your comments make us better informed about the kind of world we live in.”

     

    What is puzzling is to continue to think that there is a lot to learn from the “Intellectual Bigots,” who have proven beyond a shadow of doubt that they are indeed, dedicated Islam bashers. They are in the habit of squashing any spirited debates. You read what “Secular Logic” wrote:

     

    “I wish I could make you feel good by accepting the BS that is currently being dished out by the great reinterpretionist. The angel Gabriel seems to have resumed his whispering, this time into the ears of this gentleman. But I can't. Sorry.”

     

    Now the question is, which gentleman was he referring to? That’s important to know.

     

    Furthermore, you gave another example of “Hats Off,” by calling him an honorable man. What Muslim readers of New Age Islam must come to realize is that honorable commentators should respect honorable comments from “Moderate Muslims. That has not been the case as far as I know. You felt sorry, but don’t you think that it is high time to feel sorry for those who are dedicating their valuable time and enormous energy to set the record straight about Islam? Why would you want some bigots to constantly throw “A Money Wrench” right in the midst of healthy debate?

     

    Last but not the least, Muslims will never find any moral courage to come out of denial. The reason being that the haters and bashers are being encouraged to continue with their assault on Islam. As a respected Editor, you must DRAW A LINE. Bear in mind that the main aim of Islam haters is to “Demoralize Muslims,” and nothing else. I am sorry that there is nothing to learn from them, Sultan Shahin Saheb.

     

    Very sincerely yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia   

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/26/2015 3:31:36 PM



  • The Prophet did not destroy other's temple, Secular Logic. He just demonstrated that all such grotesque looking stones which people revere thinking those to be God cannot defend even itself, much less, it could have power to defend those people believing in such things.The Prophet had inherited one such temple and it rightly belonged to him and his family. He simply chose to walk away from believing things which 1400 years ago was unimaginable for others to do. You may claim yourself how much ever a logical person, but you can't find the stones you believe in move from its position on its own. Believing in illogical things even in 21st century after having studied in convents is utterly ridiculous.  By sadaf - 3/26/2015 3:05:22 PM



  • To: Respected Muslim Readers @ New Age Islam

     

    As-Salaam Alay-Kum

     

    Guess what! “A FIERCELY DEDICATED INTELLECTUAL BIGOT, strikes again by stating, “I am secular, with a caveat.” Vow! The person pops in to continue to give all the Muslims his own twisted warning, and yet, ignores to answer the tough questions related to the culture, which the person hails from. Isn’t this a sign of a first-class bigot?

     

    Here is what the “Mysterious Person,” wrote:

     

    SL: You have to be a non-Muslim and see how those verses affect us.

     

    MRL: Can anyone ask how this secular person is personally being affected by the Qur’anic verses?

     

    SL: Ayaan Hirsi was saying the same thing in her article.

     

    MRL: Why not click on: Heart-wrenching to see how women are treated in India.Let the “Run-Away Artist,” ponder over how the women are treated in India. Perhaps, Ayaan Hirshi can assist in speaking out about the rape victims of India too. After all, the world’s oldest civilization should teach mankind how to treat women. Am I right or wrong?

     

    SL: What are you going to reform?

     

    MRL: Why not reform the issues of one’s own religion, and then become a critic of another? Why is this “Simple Logic” so difficult to understand for the “Intellectual Bigots?”

     

    SL: The violence was certainly not recorded in the New Testament.

     

    MRL: Can the so-called “Secular with a Caveat,” be able to elaborate further about his/her concluding remarks? May be, the person will decide to evade answering as always.

     

    SL: You feel good by accepting the BS that is currently being dished out.

     

    MRL: This person is so full of BS that he/she can’t even muster enough courage to confront the “Truth,about the very culture which he/she brags about.

     

    SL: This time into the ears of this gentleman.

     

    MRL: This time, let’s see if the “Misguided Logic,” will read with his own naked eyes, an article titled, Modi is no ally for India’s women.Let the person not worry about the Muslim ears. Merely ask the person to open his/her own eyes and stop acting as “A FIERCELY DEDICATED INTELLECTUAL BIGOT, whose sole aim is to smear the religion of Islam. 

     

    I say to Sultan Shahin Saheb, not to continue to surrender to the insulting remarks of the commentators who have nothing good to write about Islam. Be bold enough to question the person’s intellectual integrity. As a Muslim, it will be wise on his part to at least respect those fellow Muslims, who are being assaulted by the bigots, who constantly poke their nose to disrupt, distort and insult the learned Muslim thinkers and scholars who are trying hard to post their sincere viewpoints on the New Age Islam forum. Simply put, the need of the hour is to rethink about the following paragraph: 

     

    “We Muslims have to take such ex-Muslims as well as self-styled secular rationalists in our stride and create a coherent narrative and theology of peace, pluralism and co-existence along with gender justice and all the humane values taught to us by all Islamic prophets whose guidance is still available.”

     

    Finally, may I ask, “Why would ex-Muslims or self-styled secular rationalists, be interested in joining hands with “Moderate Muslims”? I am afraid the humane values taught to us by Biblical/Islamic prophets, can only be created in a coherent manner by a handful of like-minded learned Muslims, whose core belief lies strictly upon the teachings of the Holy Quran and not the secondary Islamic sources.      

     

    Very respectfully yours,

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    cid:image001.jpg@01D051C4.AC28A890  mohammedrafiqlodhia

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com

    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 3/26/2015 2:38:42 PM



  • Dear secularlogic, secular people, or let me say atheists, do not hate religion. At least in India  secularism simply means respect for all religions, which you clearly don't have. You too don't really hate Islam. You only hate moderate, progressive, peaceful, pluralist, spiritual, mystical Islam, that has been peacefully co-existing with other religious communities, giving shelter in many cases to those persecuted, for instance, in Christian lands. And, of course, the behaviour of many Muslims through centuries, right from the beginning, has also been disgusting. If you don't know that I am the one who keeps criticising Muslims constantly for their denial of historical and contemporary facts, that is simply because you think I am a moderate and so you don't need to read anything I write. 

     You only read what appeals to your pre-conceived notions or perhaps what you were taught in early life. There has to be some early pre-conditioning. Otherwise a hiughly educated person like you won't have said: "Perhaps, to understand a non-Muslim's aversion to Islam, you have to be a non-Muslim and see how those verses affect us." You are implying that all non-Muslims hate Islam. This is patently absurd. Great minds among non-Muslims, as aware as you or me, of Quran and Hadees and Islamic history, have loved Islam and have praised the prophet without any reservations. And, of course, there are many Muslims themselves who hate and fear Islam. 

    I want to make one thing clear. I have absolutely no problem with you and other Islam-haters or Islamophobes posting comments on my website. Your presence, as that of ex-Muslim haters of Islam, is essential to keep Muslims on their toes. Your comments make us better informed about the kind of world we live in. I miss Hats Off's incisive comments. I had just asked him once, if my memory is serving me right, if he ever found anything good in Islam or Muslims, or something like that. Obviously, he couldn't reply in the affirmative and, the honourable man that he was, left posting. He could have just ignored me and carried on spewing hatred. I felt sorry. I should have just believed my assessment and kept quiet. You see, I believe, it's absolutely imperative for Muslims to know how vast sections of humanity are responding to Jihadi as well as progressive versions of Islam.

    You seem a bit rattled by the "the conclusions that" my (?) "latest pet reinterpretors of the Quran" are drawing. Do you feel these conclusions have the potential to convince Muslims to throw out extremist Jihadis from their midst? Maybe so. But I can assure you heavens will not fall if a moderate version of Islam once again became acceptable to common Muslims.

    Please revisit your attachment to Jihadi Islam. I can assure you we will defeat it. It is an unnatural form of Islam. Muslims will one day find the courage to come out of denial, accept the need for change and reformulate their understanding of Islamic scriptures and the legitimate role they should play in their lives. But wait, this will not be the end of the road for you. There will always be some evil you can love, some good you can hate.

    By Sultan Shahiin - 3/26/2015 12:51:52 PM



  • Comment-2 for the sight of GRD.    

    THOSE MUSLIMS WHO UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY RECITE IN EACH CYCLE OF THEIR DAILY PRAYER WILL HAVE NO DOUBT IN THEIR MIND THAT THEY ARE COMMANDED TO SEEK GUIDANCE FROM THE QUR’AN AND QUR’AN ALONE.

    This elaborates the concluding remark of my comment -1 addressed to Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi  Sahab.

    Each Muslim recites the first Sura of the Qur’an, “Surah, al-Fatiha” in each cycle of his / her daily prayer.

    The Sura, comprising seven verses is simply a prayer from man to God and has this supplication to God: “Guide (ihdi) us to the Upright Path (sirat al mustaqim), the path of those to whom thou has been gracious, not of those who have incurred Thy displeasure, nor of those who have gone astray (1:4-7).

    Conceivably, the divine voice responds in the immediately succeeding verses that appear in the beginning of the second Sura, al Baqara: “Alif Lam Mim (mystical term), this is the divine edict (dhalik al kitab) – let there be no doubt (la raiba), its has (fihe) guidance for those seeking the Upright path (hudal il muttaqin) (2:1-5).

    The use of the article ‘al’ in the expression ‘al-kitab’ denotes the particularity of the divine edict (book) mentioned in the passage. Thus, the passage assures its audience about the Qur’an’s singular role as the divine guidance. If a supplementary source of guidance like the Hadith (sayings or traditions of the Prophet) was needed as an essential, divine or quasi-divine adjunct to the Qur’an, it may have omitted this article and instead stated ‘Zalika Kitab.’ The use of the article ‘al’ thus rules out any possibility of God’s sending another tier of guidance, and affirms this through it following pronouncements:

       “… In what discourse (Hadith) other than this will they believe?” (7:185).

       “These are God’s revelations, which We recite to you (O Muhammad) in truth. But if they deny  God and His revelations, in what discourse (Hadith) other than (the Word of) God and His messages will they believe?” (45:6).

      “This assuredly is the Truth – so celebrate the name of God the Most Exalted (56:96)

    Hence, the Muslims must seek guidance from the Qur’an and Qur’an alone – though of course they can read hadith to know the Prophet’s way of doing prayer, athan, wadu, hajj, fasting and to have a window on his life and mission though any hadith that conflicts with the Qur’an must be regarded as apocryphal or specific to an existential circumstance and not accepted on face value. Guidance must be distinguished from the methodology of strictly religious obligations. The former relate to huquq al ibad – “man’s rights upon man” and the latter “huquq al Lah”: man’s obligation to man. The Qur’an’s directives on man’s obligations to man constitute the huquq al ibad – the steep path of the Qur’an as touched under Coment-6 below. A Muslim does not have to read the hadith to know what he is supposed to do and to shun as a Muslim. The Qur'an was the singular fount of guidance in the Prophet's era, when there were no ahadith. The jurists in the first century of Islam did not consult ahadith to give verdicts on legal issues of the era:

    “The seven jurists of Madinah were primarily fuqaha as their epithet suggests, and it was only secondarily that they related to ahadith. They were Sa'id b. al-Musayyib (d. 93 A.H.)... These were the people who laid down the foundations of Madinese fiqh. They were not strictly traditionalist, and the majority of them preoccupied themselves with juridical opinions and fiqh, rather than hadith.” - Yusuf Guraya, Origins of Islamic Jurisprudence, Delhi 1992, p. 29/30.

    Hence, the Qur’an and Qur’an alone is the eternal fount of guidance for all humanity.

    By muhammad yunus - 3/26/2015 11:55:47 AM



  • Mr Shahin,

    You could have made your observations without resorting to personal comments, but I now realise that it is a tendency common to all defenders of Islam - to attack the critic before addressing the criticism. I am secular, with a caveat. I cannot extend the courtesy of secularism to a religion that is so blatantly antagonistic towards other religions in theory and practice. I have no problem with any other religion, except with aggressive Christian proselytisation. I do believe Islam is violent, in theory and practice, no matter what spin and context you put on the Medinan verses. The Hadith, whether authentic or not, make matters even worse. It is impossible for a rational and unbiased reader to draw the conclusions that your latest pet reinterpretors of the Quran are drawing about the secularism of the Quran. Perhaps, to understand a non-muslim's aversion to Islam, you have to be a non-muslim and see how those verses affect us. Just as to understand what it is to be of the Backward Caste, you have to be one to understand the sense of inferiority that sticks to you since birth. There is no way I can get you to see that. I think the Prophets act of destroying the temple at Kabaa is a defining act, it set the path for his successors - that it was ok to humiliate and annihilate the other. Not just OK, it was religiously appropriate. That is my understanding of the Quranic attitude towards idolators and polytheist. Coming from the latter community, and having seen Islam in action in history as well as in current times, you can hardly expect me to feel very secular about Islam. It is not a question of siding with the Jihadist. It is a matter of truth. Ayaan Hirsi was saying the same thing in her article, which you recently carried. I find those who are trying to bury this aspect of Islam under a thick layer of reinterpretation and untruths masquerading as scholarship are doing Islam as much disservice as anyone else. No reform can come on a foundation of denial. If you say nothing is wrong with the Quran, what are you going to reform?

    As I said earlier, persecution is a common phenomenon whenever any new religious ideology springs up. Islam is unique in the way it recommends the persecution be dealt with. Buddhists have no violent side, they were persecuted. Early Christians retired into catacombs - though later christian history is not edifying, the violence was certainly not recommended in the new testament, so they were able to course correct.

    You have to decide whether you want to defend all that is wrong with Islam for the sake of pride, or whether you want to accept the truth and make practice of Islam more compatible with other cultures and religions. You cannot change the verses of the Quran that inspire Jihadists, that is for sure. You can only say they were wrong. But you can't say that, can you? Because you believe god said those things, and how can god be wrong.

    That is why I think Islam is doomed to be stuck in this endless rut, and all because self styled moderates and reformers are unwilling to accept that Jihadists do draw from authentic Islamic injunctions.

    I wish I could make you feel good by accepting the BS that is currently being dished out by the great reinterpretionist. The angel Gabriel seems to have resumed his whispering, this time into the ears of this gentleman. But I can't. Sorry.
    By secularlogic - 3/26/2015 9:00:43 AM



  • I wholeheartedly agree with you , Mr Ghulam Rasool Delhavi. your talks are prettier. so please preach true message of Islam as you are doing without worrying about the acceptance from the opponents. Your work is nothing but to preach.  By Asif Ahmed - 3/26/2015 7:51:39 AM



  • There is no way one can disagree with the very sensible and rational conclusion reached by Yunus Saheb in his response to GRD's comment: "...rather than mounting a gigantic exercise to dig into the real meanings of hadith – which even if concluded will hardly reach the common Muslims, let us singularly focus on the Qur’an and Qur’an alone for seeking divine guidance."

    However, what is sensible and rational for some maybe insensible and irrational for others. So it is imperative that we continue this discussion. I would request GRD to respond. Among all the classical scholars on the site, he seems to be the only one so fat to at least accept obliquely that contextual verses and ahadees are no longer applicable to us as guidance in the present and vastly different circumstances from the seventh to tenth century AD when the holy Quran was revealed and hadees narratives were written and compiled.

    We already know that nearly six hundred thousand of these were concocted and were rejected by the greats imams Bukhari, Muslim, etc. Only around four or five thousand were found to have a possibility of being correct. So it's the credibility of the left-over ahadees that is in question. Even the Quran-compatible ones need not be actual sayings of the Prophet. Imam Bukhari, Muslim, etc. had discovered that even some otherwise pious Muslims, with only the motivation of helping Islam do good, concocted ahadees, put words in the Prophet's mouth that were not his. Anyway, a substantive, meaningful discussion with the ulema is a must.


    By Sultan Shahin - 3/26/2015 6:18:14 AM



  • You are right secularlogic, we Muslims "must fight the beast within." But you are making our task harder by not accepting some facts. One, we Muslims have learnt our humane values from Islam, as propounded by prophets of God from the time of the first prophet Hazrat Adam a.s. to Hazarat Krishna, Ramchandra, Buddha, Mahavir, Moses, Jesus, Mohammad (peace be upon all of them). Over 124,000 prophets are supposed to have come in between, known in the languages of the time as saints, mystics, rishis, munis, avtars, etc. For us humane values are Islamic values, no matter, practised or preached in which civilisation. Personality, I learnt humane values as a child from my maulvi father early in my life almost entirely from what are known today as exclusively Islamic sources.

    Two, war had indeed been imposed upon the prophet. For the first thirteen years of his prophethood, the Muslims were under great pressure, persecution of all sorts was practised against them, but they were not allowed to fight and defend themselves with arms. When the situation became so dire that they had to flee Mecca, they ran away. But they were pursued there too. Muslims were permitted to fight only when there was no option left.

    However, there are Muslims who seem to feel we are still fighting the battles of Badr and Uhud and the guidance given then is still applicable in the same way. Some claim, like ISIS, that we are fighting end-times battles, the al-Malhama, before the Armageddon, and the Qeyamat which, according to their calculations, is only two years away. This has created the rush for participation in the "forthcoming final battle at Dabiq, Syria." It's not difficult to see the irrationality and inhumanity of it all. But the Muslims' task becomes harder when those who have left Islam and those who claim to be secular and on top of that rational as well, side with the irrational Jihadi narrative.

    However, we Muslims have to take such ex-Muslims as well as self-styled secular rationalists in our stride and create a coherent narrative and theology of peace, pluralism and co-existence along with gender justice and all the humane values taught to us by all Islamic prophets whose guidance is still available.

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/26/2015 5:39:48 AM



  • Dear Ghulam Rasool Sahab!

    In your last comment you cite a Hadith, quoting the Prophet, "I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslims" [Muslim].

    Then after demonstrating that actually the Jews were not expelled from Medina you conclude: “This explains how the Companions understood the Prophet’s command to expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula.”

    So what you actually imply is that we have to take all such Hadith that sound controversial today as carrying a real or concealed meaning for the Prophet’s companions.” Thus, to understand each such Hadith which on the face value are contrary to the Qur’anic message or ground realities of the Prophet’s era, we have to evaluate them against the ground realities of the Prophetic mission or the Qur’anic message and then accept the ground realities or the Qur’anic message and conclude ‘this is what is meant by this Hadith’ even if it stated or sounded the contrary to the present day listener.

    This is indeed a novel way for interpreting all such Ahadith which are contrary to reason or the ground realities of the Prophet’s era or the Qur’anic message.

    Thus, without burdening with examples of such Ahadith (which as you will know are numerous), your argument demonstrates that we must not take such ahadith as “they sound” on the face of it.

    As noted in my detailed article on the subject referenced below [1], the authenticated (Sahih) Hadith compilations contain some accounts that sound most bizarre and purport to provoke sexuality, induce terrorism, foment inter-faith hatred, and stand deeply misogynist, scientifically untenable, self-contradictory and Qur’an-incompatible [1].” So based on your suggestion, each of such Ahadith should be contextualized to get their real meaning.  

     The next logical question that comes to mind is if such an exercise has not been mounted for the last millennium, what are the chances of embarking on such an exercise in this era or any time in future, given that it will require a large team of Islamic scholars to work together on a mega-project for may be years.

    As you know the ‘batn’ of the Hadith is generally short as illustrated by the one you quoted. But the arguments that is need to dig out the real meaning will occupy several paragraphs and need an in-depth knowledge of the Prophetic mission, Qur’anic message and an almost open window on the personal life of the Prophet. And the singular object of this mega exercise will be turn what appears apocryphal (unreliable) to what is established as fact otherwise.  

    This leads to the obvious question: why not hold on to “what is established” and simply set the Ahadith which contradict it or which mean one thing to us and another often conflicting thing to the Prophet’s companions. Such Ahadith, numerous in number, are quoted by both Muslim Ulema and those critical Islam conveying a meaning quite different from what they actually conveyed to the Prophet’s companions, creating much confusion in religion and giving a false notion about Islam.

    In a nutshell, the proposed interpretation or contextualization of Ahadith that sound apocryphal is something like trying to learn a language from someone speaking an antiquated language that his audience understood and are unintelligible to the present day listeners – virtually a mission impossible. So let us be honest to our faith and accept the Qur’an and the Qur’an alone as the perfected divine writ of guidance (5:3) – a book of Wisdom (10:1, 31:2, 43:4, 44:4) that guides to the upright path (sirat al mustaqim)– the path to taqwa (36:1-3) – a book that makes things clear and distinct (12:1, 15:1, 16:64, 26:2, 27:1, 36:69, 43:2, 44:2) with all kinds of illustrations (17:89, 18:54, 30:58, 39:27), and claims to be its own best interpretation (25:33). It was the Qur’an and Qur’an alone that guided the Prophet through his Prophetic mission and it was its social, moral, ethical, intellectual, enlightening and liberating trajectories that enabled the early Muslims to establish themselves as the most just, respected, peace loving and caring people – just the opposite of their present day profile. It is not surprising that the Hadith which on the face of it contradict the Qur’an and the ground realities of the Prophetic mission have contributed to this inversion in the image of the Muslims and Islam for the obvious reason that they are understand inversely or in a distorted manner in relation to how the Prophet’s companions comprehended them. So rather than mounting a gigantic exercise to dig into the real meanings of hadith – which even if concluded will hardly reach the common Muslims, let us singularly focus on the Qur’an and Qur’an alone for seeking divine guidance – a proposition elaborated in Comment-2 below:

    Defending the Hadith and Its Compilers – The Great Imams Who Are Sometimes Misunderstood and Even Reviled

    http://newageislam.com/islamic-sharia-laws/by-muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/defending-the-hadith-and-its-compilers-–-the-great-imams-who-are-sometimes-misunderstood-and-even-reviled/d/8011

    By muhammad yunus - 3/26/2015 2:12:13 AM



  • No strife was 'imposed' upon the Prophet. It was just his new religion against an old faith. Both locked in a mortal combat for existence, the desire of each to exist as valid as the other's. Christianity also went through a similar struggle to establish itself, but there are no christian verses espousing armed conflict against non believers. Islam has a violent side, and no amount of rationalising is going to justify it. It is upto the Muslims who have been humanised by other civilisations who must fight the beast within. No outsiders can do it for you.  By secularlogic - 3/26/2015 1:40:02 AM



  • One more instance of the need for contextualizing the hadith reports is the Prophetic saying reported in Muslim’s authentic collection of hadiths: "I will expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula and will not leave any but Muslims" [Muslim]

    Despite the above hadith, the Prophet (pbuh) allowed the Jews to stay in Khaybar, which is also a part of the Arabian Peninsula (جزیرۃ العرب).  The Prophet had good relations with the Jews to the extent that at the time of his death, he had no money and his shield was being held in mortgage by a Jewish man.

    In fact, the Prophet talked about particular Jews and Christians who breached the treaty and he meant only a specific region in the Arabian Peninsula. The Prophet (pbuh) used the terminology and the language that his companions understood in the proper context and applied accordingly.

    Hazrat Umar Ibn al-Khattab (r.a) relocated the Jewish tribes of Khaybar and Fadak and sent them to Tayma and Ariha. While these two regions are also considered part of the Arabian Peninsula, but still the Jewish tribes were allowed to settle there.

    When Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) became the Caliph, the Jews were at Khaybar, the Christians were at Najran and the Jews of Yemen were at Yemen and are still there until today since they were never expelled by Muslims.

    This explains how the Companions understood the Prophet’s command to expel the Jews and Christians from the Arabian Peninsula. Thus, we have to know the background and context of each narration reported from the Prophet (pbuh).

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/26/2015 12:07:50 AM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin sahib,

    by the need for contextualising Hadees reports, I meant relaying and understanding the Prophetic traditions and sayings in their contexts, confined and limited to them only, without giving them wider universal application. Generalization of hadith reports is not always recommended. Each case has its own circumstances and what can be applied in a certain area cannot be applied literally in another. For instance, there is a Prophetic tradition in which he is reported to have forbidden his Companions to greet some pagans. It was forbidden because those pagans would mock and revile the Prophet and his Companions whenever they greeted them with peace (Salaam). Having generalized and misconstrued this hadith, many Muslims of today consider greeting non-Muslims with “Assalamu Alaikum” as forbidden (haraam).

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/25/2015 11:48:13 PM



  • Dear GRD, I don't understand what you mean by the need for contextualising Hadees reports. I  thought that Hadees claims to provide context to Quranic verses. I would request you to explain the following in some detail. Maybe Yunus Saheb needs to step in and help better our understanding. Pardon my ignorance, but do we need some other literature to contextualise Hadees as well?

    GRD: "I strongly feel that Islamic reformation can only be possible when Muslims gear up to embrace the notion of contextualising verses of the Qur’an and hadith reports, except for those stressing universal values and essential messages of Islam.  All Qur’anic injunctions and Prophetic traditions can only be understood properly when they are kept relevant and confined merely to their particular contexts. However, the essential messages of the Quran and hadith can be applied, anytime and anywhere, to bring about Islamic reformation and renewal in Muslim societies."

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/25/2015 3:02:26 PM



  • Ameen

    By observer - 3/25/2015 11:34:27 AM



  • Comment-6

    As stated in my last comment addressed to Sultan Shahin Sahab, “we are caught in a deep conspiracy directed against our faith, not by the Intelligence agencies of America, India, Israel or any non-Muslim quarter, but by our own fellow Muslims.” The later part of his presentation exposes some facets of this conspiracy, which I however see in a far greater scale in reports posted by some radical Muslims – Hirsi Ali’s recent article and Tareq Sahab’s castigation of Islam/ Muslims on the basis of merely one example of Muslim mob killing and burning a Muslim woman - completely disregarding historical relativism. Khaled Abou El Fadl aptly remarks that the Muslim intellectuals who see their own intellectual limitations (ugliness) in the mirror of civilization find it convenient as well as profitable to blame Islam. With this, I come to the question raised in the oral presentation: “why have the regular calls for "an Islamic Renaissance" (since early last century) largely gone unanswered?”

    My answer: the populist Islam reduced to the Pillars of Faith and other peripheral rituals virtually frees a Muslim from the fundamental commandments / Ahkam of the Qur’an and offers an easy path that suits the Muslim Ulema, political leadership, intellectual elite and the extremists and fanatics who accordingly resist any ‘Renaissance”

    The Qur’an espouses, among other things, the doing of good deeds, excellence in lawful pursuits, collaborating with the rest of humanity in all lawful avenues of life, cultivating exemplary conduct and behaviour, social, moral and ethical awareness, eschewing all kinds of vices - greed, gluttony, obsession for possession and consumption, excessive suspicion, hatred of others, lust, lassitude, temptations for exceeding limits and so forth. It calls for empowering, respecting and caring for women, sharing of wealth with the community, shunning exclusivist, supremacist and triumphalist aspirations, making fair payment for goods and services, maintaining integrity in financial dealings, upholding justice, and cultivating all the noble virtues - moderation, tolerance, forgiveness, mercy, compassion, kindness to neighbors and strangers for example that distinguish man from beast.

    The Qur’anic tenets collectively constitute its steep path that the Muslims commit to follow as part of their covenant of faith – a path that transformed a horde of robbers and camel drivers to the founders of the greatest civilization of all times.

    Take the Qur’anic commandments out of the package of Islam as is virtually the case with the populist Islam in this era, the Muslim is free to live like the beast of forest – happy in whatever state he is, free from any of the above noted and un-noted bindings of the Qur’an – to be a terrorist, to behead innocent journalists and to commit most brutal crimes against humanity in the name of Islam.

     Hence, there is a tacit conspiracy to set aside the clear Qur’anic commandments and cling to the highly porous and exhaustive secondary sources that can readily furnish justification or precedent for all kinds of vices including terrorism. The conspiracy is also played by declaring the Qur’an as unintelligible and insisting that it must be understood in light of the rulings, hypotheses and doctrines of the secondary sources.

    But there is light at the end of the tunnel. With the advent of Internet and corresponding explosive transmission of knowledge and ease and freedom of expression, and the debunking of the notion that the Qur’an is too enigmatic to be understood, and the exposition of the true characters of the twin enemies of Islam – its extremist Ulema and radical scholars [1], it is a matter of time that the Qur’an will find its place in the centre stage of Islamic thoughts and the secondary sources pushed into the margins or consigned to the archives.

    The Radical Intelligentsia of Islam and Its Orthodox Ulema Are the ‘Hypocrites’ and ‘Nomadic Arabs Intense In Kufr’ Of This Era: They Are Its Twin Internal Enemies, and Must Be Resisted

    http://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/muhammad-yunus,-new-age-islam/the-radical-intelligentsia-of-islam-and-its-orthodox-ulema-are-the-‘hypocrites’-and-‘nomadic-arabs-intense-in-kufr’-of-this-era--they-are-its-twin-internal-enemies,-and-must-be-resisted/d/34621

    By muhammad yunus - 3/25/2015 11:17:15 AM



  • Even Jamia Azhar chief talking of a link between Islamic education, corrupt interpretations of Quran and Hadith and terrorism has not evoked any response from ulema in India. Significantly, he was speaking in Mecca and in a counter-terrorism conference. Ulema have neither condemned Sheikhul Azhar nor supported or even commented on it.  By Aftab Sheikh - 3/24/2015 10:56:02 PM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin sahib,
    While talking about the “essential messages of Islam” I did not refer to the Qur’anic verses, because they are very clear, rather intuitive. One needs not to delve deeper in the Qur’an to understand them. Essential messages of Islam are the universal values enunciated in numerous verses of the Qur’an such as universal brotherhood of humanity (Qur’an 49:13), gender equitability (Qur’an 9:71), inclusiveness (Qur’an 49:13) collaboration in goodness (birr) and moral uprightness (Taqwa) (Qur’an, 5:2), pluralism, communal harmony, balance and cooperation (Qur’an 2:143) and all such moral, social, ethical economic and spiritual trajectories. Their applicability will remain timeless and universal in each and every context. Therefore, they need not to be changed, reformed or even rethought.
    I strongly feel that Islamic reformation can only be possible when Muslims gear up to embrace the notion of contextualising verses of the Qur’an and hadith reports, except for those stressing universal values and essential messages of Islam.  All Qur’anic injunctions and Prophetic traditions can only be understood properly when they are kept relevant and confined merely to their particular contexts. However, the essential messages of the Quran and hadith can be applied, anytime and anywhere, to bring about Islamic reformation and renewal in Muslim societies. By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/18/2015 11:34:48 AM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin sahib,

    While talking about the “essential messages of Islam” I did not refer to the Qur’anic verses, because they are very clear, rather intuitive. One needs not to delve deeper in the Qur’an to understand them. Essential messages of Islam are the universal values enunciated in numerous verses of the Qur’an such as universal brotherhood of humanity (Qur’an 49:13), gender equitability (Qur’an 9:71), inclusiveness (Qur’an 49:13) collaboration in goodness (birr) and moral uprightness (Taqwa) (Qur’an, 5:2), pluralism, communal harmony, balance and cooperation (Qur’an 2:143) and all such moral, social, ethical economic and spiritual trajectories. Their applicability will remain timeless and universal in each and every context. Therefore, they need not to be changed, reformed or even rethought.

    I strongly feel that Islamic reformation can only be possible when Muslims gear up to embrace the notion of contextualising verses of the Qur’an and hadith reports, except for those stressing universal values and essential messages of Islam.  All Qur’anic injunctions and Prophetic traditions can only be understood properly when they are kept relevant and confined merely to their particular contexts. However, the essential messages of the Quran and hadith can be applied, anytime and anywhere, to bring about Islamic reformation and renewal in Muslim societies.

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/18/2015 11:26:55 AM



  • I fully agree with Mr. Sultan Shahin, Mr. Ghulam Rasool, Mr. Muhammad Yunus, and Mr. Ghulam Mohiyuddin when they beautifully express the following:

    Mr. Sultan Shahin: “The truth is these verses came to guide the prophet in the strife imposed upon him in the early years of Islam”.

    Mr. Ghulam Rasool: “Dear Sultan Shahin saheb, I must say that this oral statement is a lucid, comprehensive and subtle coverage of most Jihadist radicalized literature.  One can have a nuanced understanding of the ideological roots of jihadist theology and extremist thoughts in the Muslim societies. Thanks for this extraordinary work and gigantic task. It will prove great help for tackling the extremist and radical currents such as ISIS and the ilk”.

    Mr. Muhammad Yunus: “The Qur’an lays down a set of universal or fundamental principles, notably, doing of good deeds. excellence in lawful pursuits, collaborating with the rest of humanity in all lawful avenues of life, exemplary conduct and behaviours, pursuit of knowledge, discharge of one’s social, moral and ethical responsibilities, empowerment of women, freedom of religion, equal status of people of other faiths, fair payment for services, sharing of wealth with the community, integrity in financial dealings, good business ethics, upholding justice, moderation, tolerance, forgiveness, mercy, compassion, kindness to neighbours and strangers and so forth”.

    Mr. Ghulam Mohiyuddin: “We should not pussyfoot around when it comes to denouncing and rejecting the ideology of hate and violence which has been let loose and which threatens to destroy Islam. Islam as a message of peace, righteousness and brotherhood of mankind must be cogently re-articulated and propagated vigorously”. By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 3/17/2015 12:00:08 AM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin Sahab,
    Thanks for appreciating my comments that I thought would elaborate the points you raised at UNHRC. As you know and your presentation demonstrates, we are caught in a deep conspiracy directed against our faith, not by the Intelligence agencies of America, India, Israel or any non-Muslim quarter, but by our own fellow Muslims. I am not saying this just to lend strength to your claims, but to corroborate the following statement appearing in the concluding part of my jt. publication, Essential Message of Islam, published in June 2009 – more than five years ago:
     "Last but not least, there is an over-riding need for the Muslim intelligentsia to protest the demonization of their Holy book by some of their own theologians and jurists, who, in the name of implementing the Qur’anic ordinances, justify blatantly anti-Qur’anic heinous crimes, particularly against womenfolk, as typified by examples that hit the world media in recent years and can be readily accessed on the Internet [1]
    Incidents that hit world media and shocked the Muslim intelligence include:
    Local clerics issued a fatwa asking a woman molested by her father-in-law to divorce her husband and marry the rapist father in-law under the behest of the Hanafi law. [June 06, 2005]
    A local Islamic jury awarded gang molestation of a newly wed girl to avenge the sexual crime committed by her brother, and the punishment was executed with the consent of the bride’s father-in-law, before the eyes of the groom. [June 05, 2005]
    A gang molested housewife, was awarded exemplary punishment by Muslim court for violating segregation laws, while the rapists, seven in number, were given far lighter punishment than what the law prescribed. [November 16, 2007]
    Hence, the later part of your presentation on the distortion of the Qur’anic message, has special interest for me, let alone it colossal significance for the common Muslims, who remain largely ignorant of the Qur’anic message and blindly accept what the Ulama tell them, even if what is told them contradicts the Qur’an.  Therefore I am going to comment on them in a staggered manner, as I am currently on a vacation. By muhammad yunus - 3/15/2015 10:44:07 PM



  • I fully agree Ghulam Mohiyuddin Saheb with your "emphasis was on dissemination, simplicity,  lucidity and brevity." And even the missive you referred to is important and useful as far as it goes. But we have to keep refining our message and building a coherent narrative of peace. I hope Jamia al-Azhar's recent call for "a change in Islamic curriculums" will kick-start the process of change. By Sultan Shahin - 3/15/2015 7:01:48 PM



  • Dear Janab Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi  Saheb, while thanking you for your kind comments, I must say I find it very reassuring that a classical scholar like you has used twice phrases like "essential messages of Islam," and "Islam in its essential messages." It is essential that we distinguish between what is essential and what is contextual and allegorical in Quran, the primary sacred resource for Muslims.

     

    However, you do not refer to the essential message of Quran. This is not difficult to understand. You are a madrasa graduate and madrasas do not focus on Qur'anic education. For madrasas Quran  is primarily meant to be revered as a divine being, God-like, uncreated and an object of pleasing recitation. The guidance our madrasa-trained scholars do get from Quran is from the writings of scholars, normally belonging to whatever sect they belong to, about what these ancient scholars have said about different subjects, occasionally quoting even from verses of Quran, though primarily depending on a host of secondary sources. A madrasa-educated Alim's  knowledge of Quran, too, consists primarily of only those verses that have been quoted in the studies made by these scholars. Independent study of Quran, as a primary resource for divine guidance, is not the forte of scholars who have gone through madrasa education from any stream. So Quran is not even taught in our madrasas for the first 13/14 years of their pupils' education, except, of course, as an object of parrot-like recitation. Surprisingly, this is the case even in Salafi-Wahhabi madrasas that claim to be ghair-muqallid, and are thus supposed to be taking their guidance form primary sources. This should have meant Quran, but it clearly doesn't. So your lack of reference to Quran is understandable. Still, as I said before, your use of the word "essential"  is very reassuring.

     

    But I am a little perplexed at the schizophrenia inherent in the following clauses from different sentences of your comment. On the one hand you say: "we don't have to reinvent, change or even rethink the essential messages of Islam" ... as ... "occurred during the Christian Reformation." On the other you say: " ...that can greatly help us in this process of Islamic reformation." And, you had started with the message: " We are in dire need to build up a reform-oriented Islam."

     

    I would suggest, if I may, do please clarify your thoughts on whether or not there is any need for reformation in Islam, reformulation of an Islamic narrative, a kind of renaissance, which of course may not have anything to do with the reformation in Christianity. Both these religions have followed different trajectories and had requirements of different sorts of change. But change IS required in Islam and Muslims' understanding of Islam. We have to develop a coherent narrative of peace and pluralism, a theology of peace sans contradictions and clarify our confused thinking at the moment. Instead of schizophrenia, we need clear thinking.  And, more than ever at this point in history.

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/15/2015 6:50:19 PM



  • Sultan Shahin sahib, your points are well taken. My emphasis was on dissemination, simplicity,  lucidity and brevity. I hold no brief for any particular missive.

    The millenarian doctrine is almost all Hadith based and must be confronted head on. It must be rejected and labelled as a fanciful lie. Life on earth is not some cosmic drama being played out but an opportunity for individuals to be virtuous citizens and for societies to be harmonious and peaceful havens.
    Quranic scholars must glean and develop themes of nonviolence and abhorrence of violence (rather than  "justifiable violence") as being fundamental in Islam. Battle verses and contingent verses are best left out of sermons and madrasa curricula. Our scholars should build on verses such as "Let there be no compulsion in religion". The only reason given by the Quran for making us "into nations and tribes" is, "so that you may know each other". "Know" is quite different from "fight" or "kill".

    The Quran also says, "To each among you have We prescribed a Law and an Open Way. If God had so willed, He would have made you a single People." There can be no more powerful affirmation of pluralism than that!

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 3/15/2015 1:58:00 PM



  • We are in dire need to build up a reform-oriented Islam. For this, we don't have to reinvent, change or even rethink the essential messages of Islam. But what we urgently need, at present, is a reform within Islamic countries, Islamic societies, Islamic seminaries and Islamic curriculums. In fact, Islam in its essential messages does speak to our modern situations and present-day problems. But we Muslims are not willing to borrow the light from it. By Islamic Reformation, I mean a process similar to that which occurred during the Christian Reformation. However, we cannot simply reject what the ulema and the traditional Islamic scholars have produced by dint of hard labour over the centuries. But we must try to think beyond that and formulate new statements for the present day. Of course, that's not an entirely new project. There are numerous substantial percents in the past and present Muslim world that can greatly help us in this process of Islamic reformation.

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/15/2015 12:56:13 PM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin saheb,

    I must say that this oral statement is a lucid, comprehensive and subtle coverage of most Jihadist radicalized literature.  One can have a nuanced understanding of the ideological roots of jihadist theology and extremist thoughts in the Muslim societies. 

    thanks for this extraordinary work and gigantic task. It will prove great help for tackling the extremist and radical currents such as ISIS and the ilk.

    By Ghulam Rasool Dehlvi - 3/15/2015 12:09:34 PM



  • "The letter of 174 scholars to Al-Baghdadi needs to be abbreviated, simplified and circulated widely in the press and on the internet if it is to have any effect on stemming ISIS's recruitment, " says Ghulam Mohiyuddin Saheb in another thread.
    I am giving below the Executive Summary of the fatwa of a consortium of one hundred and twenty Islamic Scholars placed onto the internet as an Open Letter to Islamic State (ISIS) leader Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi denouncing the organization’s violent and extremist actions in the Middle East. This bare-bones summary, however, will influence only those people who give great credibility of the scholars who signed this statement. But the list of scholars does not contain classical Islamic scholars from Saudi Arabia, South Asia, South East Asia or Africa. They are mostly academics and scholars  from Egyptian, European, American and non-Saudi Arab universities and other civil society organisations. none of whom have any great following among any sections of the masses of Muslims.

     

    Even the 16-page letter, suffers from several deficiencies. It presents the moderate theological Islamic viewpoint on various issues of contention. But while it does point to some dastardly actions of the so-called Islamic State and take into account some statements of Islamic State's ideologues, it does not refute many of their theological arguments point-by-point as it needs to be done to have an impact.


    There is a reason why Islamic State's ideologues are effective in snatching our children from us and turn them into bombs while we are unable to stop them.


    Apart from misrepresenting Islamic standpoint on issues like Jihad and Qital, Islamic State is also presenting a millenarian thesis based on allegorical verses of Quran and narrations of Hadees. The malaise is far deeper and far more complex than could be addressed by simplistic presentations of a positive moderate view of Islamic theology. A veritable new theology of peace and co-existence needs to be developed with reference to the theology of violence and xenophobia being propagated by these and other marauders.

     

    This said, the work of these scholars is valuable as far as it goes and, as Ghulam Mohiyuddin Saheb has said, needs to be propagated as much as possible. It is available on New Age Islam in the following link:

     

    Full Text of Muslim Theologians' Open Letter to Abu Bakr Al-Baghdadi, Refuting His Ideology of Jihad That Justifies Killings of Innocent Civilians, Muslims and Non-Muslims

    http://www.newageislam.com/books-and-documents/full-text-of-muslim-theologians--open-letter-to-abu-bakr-al-baghdadi,-refuting-his-ideology-of-jihad-that-justifies-killings-of-innocent-civilians,-muslims-and-non-muslims/d/99389

     

     

    Executive Summary

    1.   It is forbidden in Islam to issue fatwas without all the necessary learning requirements. Even then fatwas must follow Islamic legal theory as defined in the Classical texts. It is also forbidden to cite a portion of a verse from the Qur’an—or part of a verse—to derive a ruling without looking at everything that the Qur’an and Hadith teach related to that matter. In other words, there are strict subjective and objective prerequisites for fatwas, and one cannot ‘cherry-pick’ Qur’anic verses for legal arguments without considering the entire Qur’an and Hadith.

    2.   It is forbidden in Islam to issue legal rulings about anything without mastery of the Arabic language.

    3.   It is forbidden in Islam to oversimplify Shari’ah matters and ignore established Islamic sciences.

    4.   It is permissible in Islam [for scholars] to differ on any matter, except those fundamentals of religion that all Muslims must know.

    5.   It is forbidden in Islam to ignore the reality of contemporary times when deriving legal rulings.

    6.   It is forbidden in Islam to kill the innocent.

    7.   It is forbidden in Islam to kill emissaries, ambassadors, and diplomats; hence it is forbidden to kill journalists and aid workers.

    8.   Jihad in Islam is defensive war. It is not permissible without the right cause, the right purpose and without the right rules of conduct.

    9.   It is forbidden in Islam to declare people non-Muslim unless he (or she) openly declares disbelief.

    10. It is forbidden in Islam to harm or mistreat—in any way—Christians or any ‘People of the Scripture’.

    11. It is obligatory to consider Yazidis as People of the Scripture.

    12. The re-introduction of slavery is forbidden in Islam. It was abolished by universal consensus.

    13. It is forbidden in Islam to force people to convert.

    14. It is forbidden in Islam to deny women their rights.

    15. It is forbidden in Islam to deny children their rights.

    16. It is forbidden in Islam to enact legal punishments (hudud ) without following the correct procedures that ensure justice and mercy.

    17. It is forbidden in Islam to torture people.

    18. It is forbidden in Islam to disfigure the dead.

    19. It is forbidden in Islam to attribute evil acts to God.

    20. It is forbidden in Islam to destroy the graves and shrines of Prophets and Companions.

    21. Armed insurrection is forbidden in Islam for any reason other than clear disbelief by the ruler and not allowing people to pray.

    22. It is forbidden in Islam to declare a caliphate without consensus from all Muslims.

    23. Loyalty to one’s nation is permissible in Islam.

    24. After the death of the Prophet, Islam does not require anyone to emigrate anywhere.

    By Sultan Shahin - 3/15/2015 9:55:18 AM



  • Dear Yunus Saheb, I am grateful for your detailed analysis and complementary, supportive information on some of the points I raised in my address to the UN Human Rights Council in its March 2015 session. 
    I particularly appreciate your summing up remarks:  "In one word, as long as the Muslim scholars fail to recognize the synergy between Islamic and global values, and attempt to create a distinct civilizational identity for the Muslims, they will not only be acting against the universal message of the Qur’an but also restricting their religious thoughts to a very narrow segment of the Qur’anic message, notably hijab, woman’s role at home, dietary regulations and the introductory pillars of faith. They will be closing their mind to the foundational principles and liberating and dynamic paradigms of the Qur’an, which the rest of the world has unwittingly appropriated, and thus continue to go down the slope in the steep trek of civilization that the others are climbing steadily. Putting it differently, the Muslims must take an inclusive view of Islam as the Qur’an offers."
    By Sultan Shahiin - 3/15/2015 8:10:09 AM



  • Yunus sahib,  I appreciated and agree with your thoughts in comment #4. By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 3/15/2015 12:50:43 AM



  • Comment-5.

    I am in complete agreement with Sultan Shahin Sahab’s comment on verses relating to fighting that: “these verses came to guide the prophet in the strife imposed upon him in the early years of Islam."

    What he obviously means is that these verses must be quoted out of context today to overturn their defensive character to an offensive one. I will also add that many of these verse offer general principles of tolerance, patience and forgiveness that one cannot find in secular laws of war, and their presence in the Qur'an is essential to establish the defensive character of the Prophetic mission, lest those opposed to Islam can dismiss it as a religion of violence.

    Here are some examples:

    1. Illustrations from the Uhud battle (625 CE) in which the Prophet fought against an overwhelmingly powerful Meccan army close to his base at Medina some 200 miles or ten days march from Mecca

    i. Verse 4:84. commands the Prophet to "urge the believers to fight without compelling anyone (4:84)."

    This demonstrates that the Prophet of Islam did not coerce his followers to fight - even when it was to defend the community.

    ii. verses 3:152-153 declare:  Initially, the Muslims made decisive gains, when some of the fighters weakened: they argued over the order and disobeyed after God showed them what they loved of this world (victory/booty) (3:152). They ran off, paying attention to no one and ignoring the Prophet calling them from behind. (The attackers struck back in full force and thus) God repaid them (the Muslims) with affliction upon affliction so that they would not sorrow over what slipped away from them (3:153).
    Later, the Qur'an confirms that the Prophet was mild to the dissenters:
    "It was due to mercy from God that the Prophet was mild to the dissenters (who harbored doubts against him during the Uhud battle and defied him) (3:159)."

    These verse demonstrate that whereas the Prophet could ‘court-marshal” those who defied orders in the battlefield when fighting was in full steam, he forgave them.  

    2. Trench War (628 CE): The following Qur'anic record on the trauma the Muslim defenders of Medina went through moment by moment as they watched an approaching confederation of army from distance:

    -          (As they watched over the horizon) the attackers came on them, waves upon waves. Their eyes dimmed and their hearts rose up to their throats and they imagined (weird) thoughts about God (33:10).  This was a moment of trial for the believers as- they were shaken by a most violent shock (33:11).

    -          The hypocrites wished they were in the desert with the Bedouins, inquiring about the news of the believers (33:20).

    -          They said what God and the Prophet of God had promised was mere illusion (33:12).

    -          A party of them said to others to go back as it was no (safe) place for them, and a party of them sought the Prophet’s permission saying that their homes were exposed, though they were not exposed and they only wanted to flee (33:13).

    -          The siege lasted for a month, and it was only the Qur’anic exhortations and the Prophet’s exemplary leadership that kept the Muslims from surrendering (33:21).

    -          Finally God repulsed the pagans in their rage by a severe storm (33:25) and forces invisible (33:9), and spared the believers combat (33:25) and the Muslims were saved from a crushing defeat and virtual annihilation.

    3. Peaceful Integration of Mecca (630).

    (As the Muslims began to enter the city), the most fanatic among the Quraysh tried to resist when God sent divine peace (sakinah) upon His Messenger and on the believers, and imposed on them the Word of restraint (taqawa), as they were entitled to it and worthy of it (48:26).

    God withheld the hands of the Meccans from the Muslims and the hands of the Muslims from the Meccans (48:24). Had it not been so, the Muslims would have trampled on those believing men and believing women (among the Meccans) they were not aware of (as those Meccans had secretly become Muslims), and thus guilt and stigma would have befallen them unawares? Had the (Meccan) Muslims been separated out, God would surely have punished the disbelievers among them (the Meccans) (48:25)?