certifired_img

Books and Documents

From the Desk of Editor (07 Sep 2014 NewAgeIslam.Com)


Fighting Jihadism With Heads Buried In The Sand!

 


 

By Sultan Shahin, Editor, New Age Islam

07, September, 2014


 

New Age Islam occasionally posts Jihadi narratives to acquaint readers of the extremist ideology that is attracting Muslim youth from all over the world, hoping that this will inspire some ulema to counter this narrative and point to its flaws. But some readers think this is not the correct thing to do. This problem arises even in the comment section when Jihadi Muslims and Islamophobic ex-Muslims quote militant, exclusionary verses of Quran and ahadees (sayings of the Prophet saw) of terroristic, pornographic nature. I find it difficult to ban from the Islamic website I run verses from the Quran that nearly all Muslims consider eternal exhortations of God, valid for them even today, a copy of the Quran safe in Lauh-e-Mahfooz, the sacred divine vaults, and ahadees that nearly all Muslims consider authentic, as they are collected by imams of the stature of Bukhari and Muslim and others who constitute the Sihah-e-Sitta (the Authentic Six).


 Maybe my idea that Muslims who have not yet converted to Jihadi Islam should be acquainted with the Jihadi narrative is wrong, misplaced, and will not work in keeping Muslims away from Jihadism, and indeed refuting and countering it. I am no clairvoyant. Maybe those readers are correct who think that Muslims should remain ignorant of the Jihadi narrative and there is no need to counter and refute this narrative.


But then, I feel I need to be told what should be done. For, I believe, there must be Muslims, like me, who are deeply worried about the phenomenon of Jihadism. How come an army of Muslim suicide bombers becomes available whenever, wherever in the world, someone needs them. I can assure you, there will surely be one in India too now that al-Qaeda is showing some interest. If al-Qaeda comes, Islamic State of "Khalifatul Muslemeen", "Ameerul Momineen" Ibrahim abu-Bakr al-Baghdadi cannot be far behind. This army will be small as these forces are not yet that much interested, it seems, and, of course, it will not have Indian Establishment's support. But the army will be there, is there, and only needs to be galvanised. If any one doubts this, he/she clearly needs to start acquainting himself/herself with the goings on in the world.


Now, obviously, if you are a non-Jihadi Muslim, and do not intend to become one in the near future, you should be worried. For, the first target of this group will not be non-Muslims. This is the experience so far around the world. It will be non-Jihadi, non-Wahhabi, non-Salafi, non-extremists Muslims.


As the 18/20 year old Nottingham University Ahl-e-Hadeesi student told me in 1986, all non-ahl-e-Hadeesi Muslims are "the first and foremost enemies of Islam" and should be eliminated.


That was 1986. When I asked this boy what do you intend with "the first and foremost enemies of Islam," he had said in a matter-of fact manner, "Kill them."


It was astounding and incredible at that time. Some one, not from Britain, would be justified in thinking that I was making this up for whatever reasons. I had myself not believed my ears. I was stunned. It was only  when my friend from the adjoining room, the father of children to whom this ahl-e-Hadeesi boy was primarily talking, came shouting and threw this boy out of the house, telling his children never to see him again, that I had no option but to believe my ears. 


I had indeed heard this amazing statement.


However, I then investigated as a journalist and found that all that the boy was saying was the standard Hizb ut-Tahrir narrative that had already alienated something like 70 per cent of Muslim youth on British university campuses from the mainstream of British life and people. [The head of Hizb ut-Tahrir Omar Bakri Mohammad was a very charismatic leader who could almost fill the Wimbley Hall, biggest in London, with a cheering audience of Muslim from all over United Kingdom. He all in London with cheering audience later headed Al-Muhajiroun, became spokesman for Osama bin Laden in Europe and has now been expelled and sent back to Egypt.]


But today, in the last decade or more, what the Nottingham boy had said is already happening around the world. Non-Wahhabi Muslims are being killed in their thousands, Sufi shrines are being demolished, visitors to these shrines being killed. Now, no one has any reason to doubt that this indeed is the objective, eliminate all non-Wahhabi Muslims, "the first and foremost enemies of Islam." This is actually being done everywhere possible.


Now, I think, we Muslims should acquaint ourselves with the Jihadi narrative that is taking our children away from us. It is attracting even our daughters who have received the best of education. Students of private schools in Britain, professionals, products of best universities in Europe and America are choosing to join and serve these terrorists, not just as killers but also as wives and concubines. They couldn't be doing this for money or any worldly gain. They are going on suicide missions in their own lands or joining al-Qaeda and IS.


If we are Muslims we should be worried. Killing the terrorists, fighting with them militarily is a short term answer. International; community and the victim governments are  engaged in that. This, of course, has to be done. But that clearly is not the answer. You kill one, you  create ten more.


I believe we must confront and refute the ideology behind Islamist terrorism. We must develop our own moderate narrative, a progressive theology, if you like. In order to do that we must acquaint ourselves with what it is. The reason so many readers are opposing this, is that they are ashamed. For, what the Taliban scholar is saying is based on Quran and Hadees and Sharia, which nearly all Muslims consider divine.


Not one reader is saying that the Taliban scholar is misquoting any Hadees or verse of the Quran or misinterpreting them. Only question being raised is why publish this dialogue between a Pakistani Army Official and a Taliban scholar.


As I see it, I am being asked why have you not buried head in the sand like all of us. Well my answer is: I am worried and am trying to do something about it. If you have a better way let me know. Don't ask me to go back to sleep, like all of you.


Do you think you can bring back the Scottish private schoolgirl Aqsa Mahmood by going deeper inside you blanket? Do you think you can keep future Aqsa Mahmoods from becoming Jihadi suicidees by hiding your heads in the sand?


Even what I am saying, refute the Jihadi ideology, counter their systematic theology of violence, is easier said than done. Particularly in this climate when most Muslims don't give a damn, are in a suicidal mood. Products of Deobandi madrasas that the Taliban are, it is natural they will quote Deobandi elders like Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madani in their defence. But even Barailwi-Sufi ulema will not say that the hadees the Taliban are quoting are concocted, fabricated. I investigated and found that not to speak of Deobandi and other Wahhabi ulema, even Sufi-Barailwi ulema do not doubt the authenticity of the hadees which presents Prophet Mohammad (saw) himself as justifying and practicing terrorism (in the sense of killing of innocent women and children and other civilians). They say it is in Bukhari, Muslim and other books of sihah e-sitta. So it has to be correct.


However, unlike the Taliban, who are products of Deobandi madrasas, who use this hadees to justify their terrorism, these Sufi-minded ulema, products of Sufi-Barailvi madrasas, explain the incident involving the Prophet as necessary collateral damage that could not be avoided, and quote other verses of Quran and sayings in ahadees too that speak of the Prophet's compassion and strict prohibition of killing of innocent civilians and thus argue that Muslims should not engage in terrorism. But, the Jihadis, say that the peaceful verses and quotations of the prophet have been abrogated by the later verses and quotes that talk about killing and keeping away from non-Muslim communities and not to befriend them. 


Thus they justify Mohammad ibn-e-Abdul Wahhab's central thesis: “Even if the Muslims abstain from Shirk (polytheism) and are Muwahhid (firm believers in oneness of God), their Faith cannot be perfect unless they have enmity and hatred in their action and speech against non-Muslims.


------ Shaikh Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab, Majmua Al-Rasael Wal-Masael Al-Najdiah 4/291


 Indeed, as some ex-Jihadis have disclosed, Jihadis have worked out an effective counter to every doubt that may arise in the minds of initiates on the basis of peaceful, compassionate verses of Quran and sayings of the prophet in ahadees that specifically prohibit killing of innocents. Is there any wonder that our children from secular, progressive, moderate, Sufi-Barailvi homes, are going away to Jihadism in search of Heaven. We just don't have an effective counter-narrative. And how can we if there is so much resistance to even knowing what the Jihadi narrative is. Even New Age Islam readers are saying: bury your head in the sand and all will be well. Well, friends the situation isn't getting better. It's getting worse and worse. Think for a moment about the Scottish private schoolgirl Aqsa Mahmood.


 Related comments:


•          Everyone knows that it was a planted conversation which I suspect never took place.


What has been 'told' by the Taliban Scholar is totally false. No scholar can say so.


By propagating it in this manner you are doing a big disservice to Islam. You must think about it. 


By Dr. M. A. Haque - 9/7/2014 2:25:55 AM


-----


•          Dr. Haque, I agree with you. The given rationale for publishing such offensive stuff is not convincing.


By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 9/7/2014 2:52:22 AM


--------


•          Even if it is a real conversation and not planted, why is what an "embedded" scholar of a renegade criminal group says of any importance from an Islamic point of view?  It is a clear attempt to defame Islam itself.


Mr. Shahin brazenly lied and attributed to the Talibani Scholar what he did not even say, to defame and slander Maulana Hussain Ahmad Madani who died in 1957 and has nothing to do with the present day Taliban.


By Observer - 9/7/2014 3:38:10 AM


 URL: http://www.newageislam.com/from-the-desk-of-editor/sultan-shahin,-editor,-new-age-islam/fighting-jihadism-with-heads-buried-in-the-sand!/d/98943





TOTAL COMMENTS:-   30


  • Muslims have to be educated from young the right teaching of Islam or else they would be easily misled by muslim extremists to do evil.  Why?  That is simple!  Once a Muslim child would flip the book of Quran or Hadith, the word, fight, would appear.  When the word, fight, appear in their mind, they would think of violence.  Thus, moderate Muslim concept has to be taught since young with the guidance of Quran as well as Hadith verses so that they would stand firm to be moderate Muslim.


    By zuma - 9/10/2014 7:18:12 AM



  • Since the Quran is said to have all the knowledge and solutions to every problem related to everytime with a copy in loh e mehfooz it only means everything is preordained.
    How could the abu jahal support the prophet? How could Abu lahab could come with the prophet? how could Abu Talib accept the Iman.
    this predestination is the part of Muslims faith. 

    Amantu billahi wa malaikatihi wa kutubihi wa rusulihi wal-yawmil-akhiri wa bil-qadari khayrihi wa sharrihi minallahi taala wal-ba’thu ba’dal-mawti haqqun ashhadu an la ilaha illallah wa ashhadu anna Muhammadan abduhu wa rasuluh.

    that is why it is almost impossible for Muslims to break their ties to such beliefs. The Quran will always be considered applicable to any period and place and violent verses will remain its part and will be used.



    By rational mohammed yunus - 9/10/2014 3:20:09 AM



  • Well said Rational!

    What is more reprehensible morally - plagiarism or attributing something to someone which he never said and is damaging to his reputation?

    Plagiarism is imitation and imitation is the best form of flattery. When it concerns "intellectual property" plagiarism is also stealing.

    Attributing something which a person never said and is damaging to the  person's reputation is one of the vilest acts that any human being can descend to.

    Mr Shahin has apologised for publishing an article by a third party which was proved to be close to 100% plagiarism. He was prodded to do so but maybe he would have done it on his own. He really had no choice but to apologise.  I do not see this apology coming from any "goodness".

    However, does he not attribute things to me which I never said? Has he not attributed to the Talibani scholar what he never said when he "quoted" Maulana Madani? Have I not produced incontrovertible proof from the Maulana's writings that the Maulana stood against everything that was falsely attributed to the Maulana by Mr Shahin? Has Mr Shahin apologised for his calumny? How did he respond to the proof? He lied some more!

    That puts his apology for plagiarism in perspective. There was nothing 'good' about it but just majboori.


    By Observer - 9/9/2014 1:01:27 AM



  • Javed Ghamidi on the "Afghan Jihad" and on "Jihad" itself.

    This is very short video of less than 2 minutes. You can listen to his longer speeches on the same subject also.

    http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xygv0n_afghan-jihad-and-jihad-itself-javed-ahmad-ghamidi_people

    Ghamidi speaks very clearly on  the folly of employing armies of civilians to fight wars and says that fighting wars is not the job of civilians. He also says that he had forewarned of the terrible consequences of such a 'strategy' and had predicted that after the Russians leave Afghanistan, the "Mujahideen" would start killing the Muslims.

    This video is proof that the so called 'Deobandis' in Pakistan opposed even the war efforts by civilians against the occupying Russian army in Afghanistan.

    Muhammad Amir Rana writing on "Perspectives on Terrorism" (2008)

    "... Out of 46 major Deobandi parties in Pakistan, 10 are militant in nature, with jihadist and sectarian agendas. Moreover, these militant parties do not enjoy popular support from the mainstream religious clergy. Even on the issue of support for the Taliban, there are diverse contradictory views within the major Deoband political party, Jamiat Ulema-e-Islam. A large faction of the party, led by Maulana Muhammad Khan Sherani and Khaleed Somroo, remained critical of the Taliban, even when they were in power in Afghanistan. Last year, concerning the Lal Mosque issue in Islamabad, most of the Deobandi clerics from religious-political parties and the Madressah Board had denounced the activities of the students. So, the ideological demarcation within the school(s) of thought tends to revolve around jihad.

    Sufism is a complex and cross-cutting belief system in Pakistan. Even the Deobandis believe in Sufism. Naqshbandi, the major Sufi cult in Pakistan, is mainly comprised of the Deobandis. Furthermore, it is also interesting that Maulana Masood Azhar, head of the major terrorist group Jaish-e-Muhammad, is also believer of Sufism and has restricted his followers to the practices of the Naqshbandi cult.

    To further complicate the intermingling of beliefs and practices, the Barelvis, who are considered to be representatives of Sufism in Pakistan, are not free from pro-militant jihadi tendencies. In the Kashmir insurgent movement during the 1990s the Barelvis were quite prominent. Some Barelvi militant groups, such al-Baraq and Tehreek-e-Jihad, are still active. Sunni Tehrik, a major Sunni sectarian group, was found to be involved in the violent activities in Karachi and Interior Sindh. The Safi'es, an important Sufi group in Afghanistan, was an ally of the Taliban in their struggle to take over the country. They even managed to obtain a few important government offices under the Taliban regime.

    Pro-Sufism Barelvis dominate Pakistan's religious landscape. The reason why they did not play a major role in the Afghan jihad of the 1980s was not because of any religious or ideological bindings, but because of political factors. The Saudi influence in the Afghan jihad was another reason for their marginalization. The Saudis had supported only Wahhabi and Deobandi groups during the Afghan jihad against the Soviet Union. Moreover, the Arabs and Africans who took part of the Afghan jihad had similar sectarian orientations and felt more at ease working alongside the local Salafi and Deobandi commanders. The Afghan and Pakistani groups had also preferred to work with Arab and African mujahideen because they had the more substantial resources.

    Had it not been for the Saudi and Arab factor, the Barelvis too would have been able to secure their share in the jihad effort. If that had happened, would the promotion of the Wahabi ideology be suggested as a counter-strategy today?"


    Javed Ghamidi is a frequent invitee to TV discussions and debates and holds and expounds his  very clear and categorical views on what is Jehad and what is Terrorism and therefore un Islamic. He does not mince words.

    Since the topic of Maududi has come up, Maududi is a person who has influenced many ulema including Maulana Wahiduddin and Maulana Javed Ghamidi. These two Maulanas also had differences with Maududi on his views on 'Political Islam' and moved away from him. However both the Maulanas also acknowledge their debt to Maududi. This is a reason I like all three of them. They are all very principled people who can boldly differ while acknowledging what is good about the other person and his influence on them.
     
    Javed Ghamidi was  born into a "Qadri" family and moved away from Sufism like many others. This is not a sign of his getting radicalised however, as there are very few Maulanas, who are both moderate  and authentic in their interpretation of the religious texts, which only underlies the fact that Islam is a religion of peace.

    You can visit his website, listen to his videos or podcasts or download books and articles.


    By Observer - 9/9/2014 12:39:05 AM



  • Dear Sultan Shahin - 9/8/2014 11:32:13 AM
    your definition of abuse may be different. can you call me sex-maniac because i quote Ahadith and similar accounts from the Sirah?
    Is it not abusive? Is calling sectarian an abuse? you take offense in word 'sectarian' but not in "sex-maniac".
    you find no abuse in calling me psychological patient for which i must seek your help.
    on the other hand Mr observer(even if a devbandi/wahabi/salafi) never showed such behavior as you, mr mohammed yunus, mr ghulam m and others who approached you to ban me.
    Mr aiman reyaz though called my comments stinging but never abused. I can criticize beliefs of Mr Ghulam Ghauss but will not abuse him for he is a nice man. same i will not say about Mr Ghulam Rasool but still a nice man. He called me a liar though i was right in my quotation against Imam rabbani.
    though i am not very bothered about such things because the way i comment i don't expect garlands of flowers from emotionally charged believers. it is just to reply your question. I don't ask any apology from you.
    i appreciate you have been kinder to me than Mr mohammed yunus and his ilks.
    My complaint against you is not that you are fighting against the terrorism or you are a moderate. it is, you act as sectarian. Well I may be wrong in my feeling.

    I am with you provided you condemn terrorism wherever it is. you are too harsh to devbandism and too mild to Brailvism. you have no answer to why Devbandis stood against British, fought along-with Hindus for the country and Brailvis(there is one exception Fadhle Haque who died in the prison of Andman Nicobar) as mainstream stood for Pakistan.
    I don't agree with anything Mr Observer says but he has many valid points to be taken into consideration.
    you often say that you lack in resources. i too agree, but how you will fight against enemy. Will wholesale condemnation of certain sect is going to help.
    The Quran and Hadith feed both or these are used by both but how can you say based on interpretation they are wrong and you are right.
    Mr Ghulam M has noticed weakness in your stand. you need to think again. How Mr observer has manged  to convince him?

    For me Muslims as human beings are at first priority and the Islam is last. Muslims have to break some ties with Islam.
    I left Tablighi Jamat because it could not answer me but i can't deny some high values i learned and practiced there. I am follower of none that doesn't mean i can't mention good in them. Every human being including Maulanas have some good which we can praise and evil which we can condemn.
    you are applying absolutism on Devbandis that is my complaint.
    I am not fond of either Salman Nadvi or Tahir ul Qadri but are they epitomes of only good and evil?
    as a Moderate why don't you follow middle path. condemn Maududui for what he deserves for and praise if you find some good.
    if you don't find good it is possible other see that.
    in nutshell fight terrorism where it is. Go to its root wherever they are even if in dormant stage. can you construct a bridge when there is a flood?
    you have to find answers why educated Muslims(even if few) find ways to extremism. anpadh Jahils are not planning.
    you have to find answers why Ibn e taimiyah, syed Qutub, hasan al banna and Maududi extracted political Islam from the Quran and Sunna.
    Muslims will keep to defend the Quran and Sunna by saying there is nothing wrong with them. Mr Observer is one of them. your ghulamain brothers too come into this category. alone re-interpretation is not going to help.



    By rational mohammed yunus - 9/8/2014 11:43:18 PM



  • To Sultan Shahin,

     

    You have listed out all the violence from Muslims.  Good!  However, do Muslims have the choice to cease their war with non-Muslims?  Yes!  There are verses from Quran and Hadith for Muslims to cease war with non-Muslims.  There are:

     

    (  سورة التوبة  , At-Taubah, Chapter #9, Verse #4)-Yusuf Ali translation:

    ‘(But THE TREATIES ARE) NOT DISSOLVED WITH THOSE PAGANS WITH WHOM YE HAVE ENTERED INTO ALLIANCE and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So FULFIL YOUR ENGAGEMENTS WITH THEM TO THE END OF THEIR TERM: for Allah loveth the righteous.’

     

    As the phrase, the treaties are) not dissolved with those pagans with whom ye have entered into alliance, is mentioned above with the phrase, fulfil your engagements with them to the end of their term, the Quran demands all Muslims to fulfil the peace treaty with non-Muslims.  Or in other words, Muslims must not fight with non-Muslims if there is peace treaty among them.

     

    (  سورة النساء  , An-Nisa, Chapter #4, Verse #90)-Yusuf Ali translation:

    ‘Except those who join a group between whom and you there is a treaty (of peace), or those who approach you with hearts restraining them from fighting you as well as fighting their own people. If Allah had pleased, He could have given them power over you, and they would have fought you: Therefore IF THEY WITHDRAW FROM YOU BUT FIGHT YOU NOT, and (instead) send you (Guarantees of) peace, then ALLAH HATH OPENED NO WAY FOR YOU (TO WAR AGAINST THEM)

     

    As the phrase, if they withdraw from you but fight you not, is mentioned above with the phrase, Allah hath opened no way for you (to war against them), it implies that Allah accepts those Muslims not to fight with non-Muslims if they would withdraw themselves with Muslims for violence.

     

    From the above extracts, it would come to the conclusion that even Allah would accept those moderate Muslims that do not fight with non-Muslims if they do not stir up violence with them.  Why should Muslim extremists treat moderate Muslims to be bad?  Don’t they know that moderate Muslims obey the Quran not to fight with them since they stir up havoc against them!  Allah accepts moderate Muslims!  Why Muslim extremists could not accept them?  Do they war against Quran to act against it? Or, are Muslim extremists greater than Allah that they could abuse or violate the words of Quran to have war against non-Muslims when they do not fight with them?

     

    Muslim extremists might bring out many verses from Hadith to support that they could fight with non-Muslims.  Do they have the choice not to fight with them?  Yes, there is.  This is due to Hadith mentions that the Prophet Mohammad even sent fellow Muslims to have peace treaty with them.  The following is the extract:

     

    (Book #16, Hadith #116)-Sahin Bukhari:

    ‘Narrated 'Asim: I asked Anas bin Malik about the Qunut. Anas replied, "Definitely it was (recited)". I asked, "Before bowing or after it?" Anas replied, "Before bowing." I added, "So and so has told me that you had informed him that it had been after bowing." Anas said, "He told an untruth (i.e. "was mistaken," according to the Hijazi dialect). Allah's Apostle recited Qunut after bowing for a period of one month." Anas added, "THE PROPHET SENT ABOUT SEVENTY MEN (WHO KNEW THE QURAN BY HEART) TOWARDS THE PAGANS (of Najd) who were less than they in number AND THERE WAS A PEACE TREATY BETWEEN THEM and Allah's Apostles (but the Pagans broke the treaty and killed the seventy men). So Allah's Apostle recited Qunut for a period of one month asking Allah to punish them.’

     

    Muslims extremists might use the Hadith to encourage Muslims to fight.  Could they show respect to non-Muslims?  Yes, there could do it.  Let’s meditate the Hadith verse below:

     

    (Book #53, Hadith #393)-Sahih Bukhari:

    ‘Narrated Said bin Jubair: that he heard Ibn 'Abbas saying, "Thursday! And you know not what Thursday is? After that Ibn 'Abbas wept till the stones on the ground were soaked with his tears. On that I asked Ibn 'Abbas, "What is (about) Thursday?" He said, "When the condition (i.e. health) of Allah's Apostle deteriorated, he said, 'Bring me a bone of scapula, so that I may write something for you after which you will never go astray.'The people differed in their opinions although it was improper to differ in front of a prophet, They said, 'What is wrong with him? Do you think he is delirious? Ask him (to understand). The Prophet replied, 'Leave me as I am in a better state than what you are asking me to do.' Then the Prophet ordered them to do three things saying, 'Turn out all the pagans from the Arabian Peninsula, SHOW RESPECT TO ALL FOREIGN DELEGATES BY GIVING THEM GIFTS as I used to do.' " The sub-narrator added, "The third order was something beneficial which either Ibn 'Abbas did not mention or he mentioned but I forgot.'

     

    Muslim extremists might use Hadith to support their fight with non-Muslims.  Do they not know that Prophet Mohammad did not fight with some non-Muslims?  If Prophet Mohammad could associate with non-Muslims, why couldn’t these Muslim extremists behave the same as him?

     

    (Book #63, Hadith #210)-Sahih Bukhari:

    ‘Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: THE PAGANS WERE OF TWO KINDS AS REGARDS THEIR RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROPHET AND THE BELIEVERS. SOME OF THEM WERE THOSE WITH WHOM THE PROPHET WAS AT WAR AND USED TO FIGHT AGAINST, AND THEY USED TO FIGHT HIM; THE OTHERS WERE THOSE WITH WHOM THE PROPHET MADE A TREATY, AND NEITHER DID THE PROPHET FIGHT THEM, NOR DID THEY FIGHT HIM. If a lady from the first group of pagans emigrated towards the Muslims, her hand would not be asked in marriage unless she got the menses and then became clean. When she became clean, it would be lawful for her to get married, and if her husband emigrated too before she got married, then she would be returned to him. If any slave or female slave emigrated from them to the Muslims, then they would be considered free persons (not slaves) and they would have the same rights as given to other emigrants. The narrator then mentioned about the pagans involved with the Muslims in a treaty, the same as occurs in Mujahid's narration. If a male slave or a female slave emigrated from such pagans as had made a treaty with the Muslims, they would not be returned, but their prices would be paid (to the pagans). Narrated Ibn 'Abbas: Qariba, the daughter of Abi Umaiyya, was the wife of 'Umar bin Al-Khattab. 'Umar divorced her and then Mu'awiyya bin Abi Sufyan married her. Similarly, Um Al-Hakam, the daughter of Abi Sufyan was the wife of 'Iyad bin Ghanm Al-Fihri. He divorced her and then 'Abdullah bin 'Uthman Al-Thaqafi married her.


    By zuma - 9/8/2014 7:31:43 PM



  • Sultan Shahin sahib, I know that you do publish Waris Mazhari, Ziauddin Sardar and Muhammed Yunus and other progressive thinkers, and I am very thankful for that.
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 9/8/2014 2:52:29 PM



  • "Those who are wedded to the jihadi ideology cannot be saved. Some of them will have to be dealt with by the armies and police forces."

    Indian Woman Seeks Abortion after Being Raped By Her Father-In-Law; Clerics Order Her 'To Treat Her Husband as Her Son'

    Scottish private schoolgirl Aqsa Mahmood, now a member of ISIS


    Very true, Ghulam Mohiyuddin Saheb, I am not trying to save those are wedded to the jihadi ideology. My inspiration to work comes from the possibility of saving those like the Scottish private schoolgirl Aqsa Mahmood who has joined ISIS recently, like the 300 Indian Muslims who have gone to Iraq recently, like the brilliant software engineer from a secular, progressive, moderate Muslim family, who joined Indian Mujahedeen and is languishing in jail now.


    Do I not publish Waris Mazhari, Ziauddin Sardar and Muhammed Yunus and other progressive thinkers?


    However, I can see that this is not enough. I am not talking about Muhammed Yunus Saheb here. He got us banned in Pakistan. Which means he was beginning to be effective through his refutations of Jihadi ideology. Pakistani authorities, at least the supporters of Jihadism in the Pakistani establishment, were not bothered with us until we were merely presenting Islam's positives. When Yunus Saheb, Ghulam Ghaus Saheb and Ghulam Rasool Saheb agreed to write refutations of JIhadi brainwashing articles on Jihadi magazines like Nawa-e-Afghan Jihad, Azaan, etc. Pakistani Taliban apparently got alarmed and got us banned through their supporters within the Pakistan civilian government.


    I want New Age Islam to be effective in its task. I want our children like Aqsa Mahmood who are in the process of radicalisation, before they make up their minds, to see that there is also an answer to what they are being told on Saudi-financed Salafi-Wahhabi websites. These answers cannot be merely a reiteration of Islam means peace. They have heard that before. Jihadis also tell them the same thing. They don't tell them Islam means war. They tell them it is incumbent on Muslims to work for world peace which can only come when all world is Islamic and all apostates have been killed. Islam means justice that can only come when Islam dominates the world. They quote Quran and Hadees to buttress their argument.


    Maulana Maududi said Islam needs the whole planet earth, not just a portion to dominate so that peace and justice under God's sovereignty can be established on the entire planet. Let us provide these school children, madrasa students, young professionals a forum where they can find answers to the brainwashing material being used on them.


    By Sultan Shahin - 9/8/2014 2:43:39 PM



  • Mr Shahin,

    Read the article "Jihad vs Terrorism". You will find answers to all your questions.

    By Observer - 9/8/2014 2:21:13 PM



  • Naseer Saheb Observer, you say: "There is not a single verse in the Quran that promotes aggression. Why are you joining with the Islamophobes to spread the lie?"

     

    I agree with you that verses in Quran taken contextually and as created by God for guiding the Prophet (saw) on the occasion when they were revealed do not promote violence. But Muslims are determined to not take them contextually, not consider them sort of abrogated, not providing us guidance today in the 21st century; indeed they are determined to consider Quran uncreated, a copy of the one in lauh-e-mahfooz (sacred vaults in Heaven), parallel to God, divine by itself, and so valid for all time to come, providing guidance to Muslims today. As on the question of death to all apostates, ulema of all schools of thought agree on the uncreatedness and divinity of Quran by itself.

     

    The result is that some verses from The Holy Quran are being used for brainwashing our youth and leading them on to what they are told is the path of Jihad and the way to Heaven. While these verses may have great historical value and help us understanding the historical roots of our religion and the almost insurmountable difficulties the Prophet (saw) had to face in carrying out his task and feel grateful for his perseverance and patience, most of them are clearly not applicable to us verbatim  in our present situation and in the present age. We are not living in the seventh century Arabia, but in the 21st century post 9/11 world. There is no way we can go back in time and migrate to Prophet’s Arabia and help fight his battles and earn Allah’s blessings and probably a good accommodation in Heaven. The natural thing to do for a sensible community would be to consider these verses not applicable in the present circumstances and tell our children that, so that they do not fall prey to the terrorist ideologues who ask them to follow these verses as they are divine exhortation of God valid for ever and ever.

     

    Some of the verses in question are the following. It should not be difficult to see that they were meant for a very different era and very different circumstances that prevail today. On the testimony of ex-Jihadis, whom God guided just before they became suicidees, these verses are being reproduced below for your education and response: 

     

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

     

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

     

    8:39 Fight and subdue those who persist in aggression until persecution is no more, and absolute freedom of religion is established.

     

    47: 4: Therefore, when ye meet the Unbelievers (in fight), smite at their necks; At length, when ye have thoroughly subdued them, bind a bond firmly (on them): thereafter (is the time for) either generosity or ransom: Until the war lays down its burdens. Thus (are ye commanded): but if it had been Allah's Will, He could certainly have exacted retribution from them (Himself); but (He lets you fight) in order to test you, some with others. But those who are slain in the Way of Allah,- He will never let their deeds be lost.

     

    8:12 Remember thy Lord inspired the angels (with the message): "I am with you: give firmness to the Believers: I will instil terror into the hearts of the Unbelievers: smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them."

     

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

     

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

     

    Let me also quote from a compilation of militant verses in Quran made by Dr. Shabbir Ahmed of Florida along with his occasional commentaries (available at www.ourbeacon.com). I am leaving them as they are and in the order they are, though this well mean repeating verses quoted by me above.

     

    Dr Shabbir Ahmed seeks to explain and rationalise these verses, the way peaceful Sufi-Barailvi ulema rationalise and explain hadees implying that the Prophet (saw) himself justified and practiced killing of innocent civilians as collateral damage in a certain situation.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    2:193 Hence, fight them only until there is no more harassment, and Deen may be adopted for the sake of God alone. And if they desist, then let there be no hostility except against those who replace peace with aggression. 

    2:194 You may fight during the Months of Peace and Security if you are attacked, for, a violation of sanctity will activate the Law of Just retribution. So, the one who attacks you should expect retaliation in like manner. Be mindful of God, and know that God is with those who live upright. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    8:43 God made them few in your vision. Had He made them appear more numerous (and you got intimidated by their great numbers), you would have been discouraged. And you would have disputed among yourselves (whether fighting them at Badr was a good idea). But God saved you from faltering. He is fully Aware of what is in the hearts.

    8:44 When the two armies faced each other, He made them appear few in your eyes, and made you appear weak in their eyes (3:12). God willed that to be the Day of Distinction. All matters go back to God’s Laws as their source. 

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

     

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


    By Sultan Shahin - 9/8/2014 2:05:18 PM



  • GM Sb and other readers of NAI,

    Please criticise and condemn Maududi for the following principled stand of his which establishes an important principle in Islam as regards waging or supporting covert war which is what terrorism is. Maududi declared such war as "deceit, lies and hypocrisy" and therefore un Islamic. Please also remember that no other Maulana took a similar principled stand. 

    Maududi  refused to issue a fatwa of Jehad for the 1965 war that Pakistan waged against India because it was without a formal declaration and without first breaking off diplomatic relations and without negotiations to avoid a war preceding it.

    To delve further into history, Maulana Sayyid Abu'l-A'la Mawdudi  during his life time had rejected the case of jihad in Kashmir and underwent imprisonment on charges of sedition in Pakistan. In 1947, while observing standstill agreement with the J&K government, Pakistan had covertly supported insurgency in the Valley by despatching a large number of tribals spearheaded by armed paramilitary units characterising their struggle as jihad. Mawdudi rejected the government efforts by arguing that the vigilante groups could not be fighting a jihad nor could the Pakistani government surreptitiously support a jihad when observing a standstill agreement. According to him, jihad had to be properly declared by the central government in justifying a legitimate and ongoing war. Jihad declared, failing this criteria could be construed as declared in circumstances of hypocrisy (Munafiq). Covert war was not acceptable in Islam, he argued. In 1965, also notwithstanding Ayub Khan's open appeal to Maulana Mawdudi to support his war efforts against India by declaring a jihad, Mawdudi refused to comply.
    http://www.jammu-kashmir.com/insights/insight9811b.html


    Please also criticise and condemn the Deobandi ulema for opposing the partition of India and for participating in the freedom struggle. 

    Praise the Barelvis for supporting Jinnah and the partition of the country and for rioting to achieve the objective. Also praise their chief ideologue Ahmad Raza Khan Barelvi for being the first to moot the idea of partition, and for refusing to meet Gandhi because he was a Hindu leader and for not agreeing to play a subservient role under the Hindus. Isn't that the Barelvi definition of pluralism and inclusivism? And how peaceful were they in achieving the partition of the country.

    GM Sb,

    I have no interest in tarnishing the Barelvis but I cannot stand Mr Shahin's hypocrisy. Ask him to control his sectarian attacks on the Deobandis. While he can only lie and slander, what I say is with full documentary evidence.



    By Observer - 9/8/2014 1:56:28 PM



  • Mr Shahin,

    Produce the evidence that the Maulana or any other ulema named in the Munir report authorised any bunch of people to act as the investigator, prosecutor, judge and executioner. Are you completely out of your mind?

    Are you an advocate of the Taliban arguing their case and justifying them? 


    By Observer - 9/8/2014 1:29:54 PM



  • Observer sb., it would be a very good thing if  every ulema declared terrorism to be haram. Instead of partisanship on behalf of Deobandis, Barelvis or Maududi, we should be strong and lucid proponents of our principles, namely denunciation of violence, coerciveness, supremacy, exclusivity and intolerance, and advocacy of reconciliation, compromise, accommodation, pluralism and peaceful co-existence.
    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 9/8/2014 1:24:30 PM



  • Sultan Shahin sahib, you are using their narratives to make our point. That is a bankrupt strategy. We should have our own narrative of what Islam is all about and what it is not about.  What we take from the scriptures is what we know in our hearts to be true and good. That is what other religions have done. Let us follow the examples of Waris Mazhari, Ziauddin Sardar and Muhammed Yunus. The true message can be culled from the Quran (as well as from the Sermon on the Mount and the Ten Commandments), but more importantly it can be found in our hearts.


    Those who are wedded to the jihadi ideology cannot be saved. Some of them will have to be dealt with by the armies and police forces. Let us spread the ideology of peace, pluralism and brotherhood to the younger generation and to those who see Islam as the Middle Path. Let us find ways to control the madrasas and the Friday pulpits.


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 9/8/2014 1:09:51 PM



  • Naseer Saheb Observer, Please read the following comment of yours. You have forgotten that according to you "the fact is that there is unanimity on this question (of death to the apostate)by the ulema of all sects according to the Munir Report 1954." Was Maulana Husain Ahmad Madani not a Deobandi Aalim. Did he write that apostates should not be punished with death? The Taliban aalim (scholar) quotes him as the scholar who supported and justified death for apostates. Maybe Barailvi ulema also advocate the same, as you say, but the Taliban are products of Deobandi madrasas, so naturally they will quote Deobandi ulema whose books they have read.

    Please read the following relevant portion of your own comment: "While the article gleefully mentions that the ulema quoted by the Talibani scholar supporting death for apostasy are Deobandi, the fact is that there is unanimity on this question by the ulema of all sects according to the Munir Report 1954.

    Apostasy in an Islamic State is punishable with death. On this the ulama are practically unanimous (vide the evidence of Maulana Abul Hasanat Sayyad Muhammad Ahmad Qadri, President, Jami'at-ul-Ulama-i-Pakistan, Punjab; Maulana Ahmad Ali, Sadr Jami'at-ul-Ulama-i-lslam, West Pakistan; Maulana Abul Ala Maudoodi, founder and ex-Amir-i-Jama'at-i-Islami, Pakistan; Mufti Muhammad Idris, Jami'Ashrafia, Lahore, and Member, Jami'at-ul. Ulama-i-Pakistan; Maulana Daud Ghaznavi, President, Jami'at-i-Ahl-i-Hadith, Maghribi Pakistan; Maulana Abdul Haleem Qasimi, Jami'at-ul-Ulama-i-Islam, Punjab; and Mr. Ibrahim All Chishti).  By Observer - 8/16/2014 4:49:55 AM


    By Sultan Shahin - 9/8/2014 12:40:02 PM



Compose Your Comments here:
Name
Email (Not to be published)
Comments
Fill the text
 
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.

Content