certifired_img

Books and Documents

From the Desk of Editor (06 Apr 2015 NewAgeIslam.Com)


Is It Time Muslims Standardize A Contextual Qur'an, Asks A Reader. Yes, Perhaps, But Building A Quran-Based Islam, Shorn Of Deviations, Will Not Be Easy.

 

Thinking New And Dangerous Thoughts Has Become A Must For Muslims


 

 

By Sultan Shahin, Editor, New Age Islam
7 April, 2015



A regular contributor to New Age Islam and an original thinker who has raised many an eyebrow with his seminal thinking, Mr. Hamza has now come up, gingerly, with a new thought. He asks to "feel free to ignore this message because" he is himself "uneasy about it..."


What he is suggesting, however, shows the level of unease in the community over the mayhem going on around the world in the name of Islam and the desire to do something about it, at least think new thoughts, bold thoughts, seemingly crazy thoughts. Extraordinary situations do call for extraordinary responses.

 Let me first bring in what Mr. Hamza is suggesting, though rather gingerly, very cautiously, knowing the disturbed state of the Muslim society we live in today. Thousands of machetes are ready to sever our heads from our necks everywhere in the world if we are seen swerving even slightly from the path beaten by Mullahs for a thousand years. Ideas have been frozen for over 1,000 years. With their madrasa degrees, many Juhala (ignoramuses) have become ulama (self-styled learned). Ulama are told not to claim any ilm (education) in the absence of a madrasa degree distributed in many cases by confirmed and certified Juhala. 


However, even in this atmosphere some individuals with courage continue to think new thoughts. Hamza Saheb has come up with this: 


"But do you think it's time Muslims standardize a contextual Qur'an? Like, I don't mean tafsir, but a Qur'an with copious narrative around the original language (perhaps bolded in red) and woven around in logical order. The way you present the story of the prophet (he is addressing Muhammad Yunus Saheb, in appreciation of the third chapter of his book “Essential Message of Islam” narrating the story of the Prophet entirely from Quran) is just so logical and removes all misinterpretation. I know the Christians and Jews did it and ended up corrupting their books (our current bible is probably the interpretation of a copy of a tafsir of a copy); but is that fear still justified in the 21st century?  I don't know, just a thought.  Maybe I'm going too crazy. May Allah forgive me."


By Hamza - 4/6/2015 1:13:46 PM 


 Maybe Hamza Saheb, time has come when we throw caution to the wind and act more fearlessly.  


Logical Order


What do you mean by logical order, Hamza Saheb? Do you mean chronological order, which would also restore primacy to Meccan verses of universal significance? After all, it's in a chronological order that early Muslims including the Prophet (saw) must have understood and memorised the Quran. They could not have memorised contextual verses that had not been revealed yet, as those situations had not arisen by that time.

 In any case read chronologically, Quran reads like a beautiful book of spiritual and moral guidance, relevant in the 21st century, not requiring much contextual knowledge to begin with.

 I am saying this, as, for the last several years I am in the process of collecting essential verses of the Quran in a chronological order. Have not gone very far yet. Mainly shortage of time. Far too many duties requiring immediate attention. I wish Hazrat Usman had not destroyed those versions of Quran that early Muslims in Mecca used to recite. I imagine it as a beautiful Quran which would invite everyone, except the exploiters and the tyrants. It had no calls to war and defence and offence and punishment.

You are not going crazy, Hamza Saheb, you are thinking new thoughts. We Muslims are in a desperate situation and one has to think of all sorts of thoughts, some even crazy-sounding to come out of the quagmire we are in.  Actually, large sections of Muslims seem to be going crazy in different parts of the world. Last night I read of what used to be moderate Sufi-minded community of Malaysians demanding criminal punishments based on pre-Islamic Arab cultural practices. We already know of British Muslims demanding "Sharia-Controlled zones in England!" And, of course, many crazy things happening around the world, mostly atrocities perpetrated by Muslims on fellow Muslims.

There is a good reason why you, Hamza Saheb, are being so cautious. I wonder about my own chances of survival too. God, of course, is the final arbiter. But, as I shared this with readers before, my two maulana interlocutors have told me that they consider me kafir but not qabil-e-gardanzadni (worthy of the honour of beheading) yet, Why? Because I am in their eyes a kafir only by virtue of not calling Ahmadiyas kafir. That's all, there is no specific charge against my own faith and conduct. But there is a warning, coming from someone who was supposedly a friend 30 years ago, though he will not reveal his identity. 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, books, magazines, newspapers and television, 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 earth, without permission from God.

This warning came just as I talked to some maulana friends about the possibility of holding a meeting and discussing the meaning of kufr, kafir and other derivatives of the term in the light of what Naseer Saheb had written. I thought, I would invite Naseer Saheb and ask him to bring out before this mixed audience of Muslims and non-Muslims and some journalists and academics every verse of Quran, without any exception and show what these words meant in those verses, leaving at the end the audience to gather the real meaning of this word.

The misuse of the word Kafir is a major issue of discord between the Hindu and Muslim communities. Apparently, the Mullah community got word; they knew what would happen, if this conference were to go through, even though I was inviting Mullahs from all denominations to discuss the subject. If it could be proven that kafir in Quran does not mean non-Muslim or polytheist, or idol-worshipper or infidel, but it is a religion-neutral term simply meaning the oppressor, religious persecutor, particularly the one who is engaged in stopping people from practicing their religious freedom, much like the Arab kings today or other Muslim countries, much of the strife could be wiped out.

 In India in particular Muslims' contempt for the kafir, by which they mean all non-Muslims, is a big divisive issue. But, of course, the maulanas cannot even sit with Muslims from other sects; they consider all others kafir. If Quran could be allowed to guide the world, their house of cards would collapse. Our anti-Takfir conference, if it could go ahead and succeed in its mission, would be big blow to their takfiri ideology and politics. As maulanas presumably know they have no intellectual arguments, the only answer could be physical threats.

Much of this problem arises from the fact that many of our salaf, the first Muslims, the companions of the Prophet, were not well-educated or very familiar with books; they had great earthly wisdom and deep faith but could not quite comprehend even the difference between kafir and mushrik, as Naseer Saheb has revealed. They and their successors fought wars not quite understanding what and who and why they were fighting. They did not perceive Islam essentially as a religion of peace and pluralism, a religion that gives unlimited religious freedom to all religious peoples, including Muslims. They did not perceive the Prophet, as essentially a Sufi saint, a rishi, and a muni, who used to spend weeks at a stretch meditating in a cave, while running what would today be called a Human Rights NGO for the welfare of the oppressed, when back from his cave. He was a social activist and a Sufi before he was elevated to the position of a prophet.

Not many know of this aspect of his life, about his social activism and his fond memories and moving descriptions of these activities during his days as prophet. The Prophet and his allies in the organisation were active in search of justice for all, particularly the wayfarers, traders from foreign soil who had been wronged by Meccans and other oppressed and exploited. " 

This group of Meccan activists called The Alliance of the Virtuous, had been formed by the prophet's uncles Zubair and Abu Talib, in his presence, in a meeting at the house of Abd Allah ibn Judan. The circumstances in which this Alliance was formed and the purpose behind it are quite instructive. South African author Farid Esack quotes a narration by Ibn S'ad (1967,1, p., 144) to tell this fascinating story of pre-Islamic Mecca. ....  “A visiting Yemenite merchant had sold some expensive goods to a leading figure of the clan of Sahm in Mecca. The Sahmite refused to pay the agreed price. The trader was merely a visitor to Mecca and had no allies to turn to for help".  


As narrated by Ibn S’ad, the foreign merchant stood on the slope of Mount Qubays near Mecca, told his story and appealed to the Quraish to see that justice was done to him. In response, several clans like Hashim, Zuhrah and Taym decided to come together and swore to fight for Justice for the oppressed like this merchant and other exploited and helpless. They decided to remain in solidarity with the weak and oppressed against the exploiters and oppressors, even if the latter belonged to the Quraish. 


  So with the formation of this Alliance of the Virtuous, not only this visiting Yemenite merchant got justice but a human rights activist group started working to safeguard the rights of the weaker sections of society. And, most important of all, for us, from its very inception, as founder-member, Prophet Mohammad (saw) played an active part in this struggle for justice for all and was always very grateful for having been able to do so. So it is for us Muslims to understand the foundations of Islam and strengthen them. 


  Regrettably, despite Prophet Mohammad's pronounced mystical inclination and human rights activism, Islam is being turned today into an exclusivist, totalitarian, fascist political ideology. Islamist thugs are taking control of the religion of Islam in many countries.  Islam is going through a difficult phase at the moment. The danger of extremism catching the imagination of many of our youth is growing.  


An extremist, exclusivist, political, fascist interpretation of Islam is being propagated in our country as much as in other parts of the world though a variety of media. A number of very well-funded TV channels and hundreds of websites and scores of newspapers and magazines have come up to propagate a Wahhabi-Salafi version of Islam with its extremist ideas that say that one cannot be a true Muslim living in the midst of non-Muslims and integrating in a multi-religious, multicultural society. Even so-called Sufi-Bareilwi madrasas in the south Asian subcontinent adopted the same dars-e-nizami, shorn of Sufi texts, long ago under Emperor Aurangzeb and are providing Taimi and Wahhabi, even Qutbi and Maududite ideas to our children in the madrasas for hundreds of years. The madrasas that did teach Sufi texts until a few decades ago have also abandoned them.  


 But most of these problems clearly arise from our Salaf or early Muslims' inability to comprehend the message of Quran quite correctly. Apparently, they did not quite understand that Islam was a religion of peace and the wars were meant to fight for religious liberty of all religious groups, not just Muslims. This was clear from the verse explaining why Muslims were being asked to fight, but clearly the following verse too did not make much of an impression on these people of deep faith: “Our Sustainer is God! For, if God had not enabled people to defend themselves against one another, monasteries and churches and synagogues and mosques - in [all of] which God’s name is abundantly extolled - would surely have been destroyed [ere now]."(Quran, 22:40)


 It is difficult to imagine that with Arabic as their mother tongue, these early Arab Muslims, so devoted to the Prophet and the Holy Quran, could not have understood this verse and its implications. One can only surmise that they simply ignored Allah's words as their descendants in Saudi Arabia today continue to do, otherwise there would have been churches, synagogues, temples and monasteries in the Arab world, catering to the needs of the people of different religions living and serving that region. Alas, there is no Mohammad in Arabia now to form an Alliance of the Virtuous and fight for the right of the oppressed minority religions.

However, I would request Hamza Saheb to keep thinking new thoughts and sharing with us, even with pseudonyms, as many Muslims are forced to do now.

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/from-the-desk-of-editor/is-it-time-muslims-standardize-a-contextual-qur-an,-asks-a-reader-yes,-perhaps,-but-building-a-quran-based-islam,-shorn-of-deviations,-will-not-be-easy/d/102313





TOTAL COMMENTS:-   27


  • Respected Readers, As-Salaam Alay-Kum - New Age Islam forum has maintained an open and liberal policy of allowing any Tom, Dick and Harry to post their respective comments. No matter who insults Islam and mocks Holy Qur’an.


    That’s seems to be the norm these days, as Muslim journalists and pundits believe that the more the Muslims confront these sorts of insults, the more, we will be able to introspect and figure out what went wrong in the Islamic world. What was shocking to know that one single learned Muslim with three different names and/or screen names: “Naseer Ahmed Ahmed Saheb” has long been posting his own understanding of the Qur’anic verses on the forum. In fact, after reading his comments for more than two years, I realized that he skillfully avoid answering tough questions by ways of deliberately resorting to insults and abuses.


    Even such harsh rebuttals was perfectly in line with the New Age Islam forum’s policy. Recently, Iftekhar Hai’s write-up about “Righteousness from a Global Perspective,” was posted in both English and Urdu language. That was thoughtful of Sultan Shahin, Editor of New Age Islam to do so. Interestingly, Naseer Sb. indirectly expresses his usual “Anti-American” bias, whereas, Iftekhar has an optimistic outlook of better days ahead of us as “One Humanity.”


    Long before these two gentlemen came on the scene, I, Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia wrote a letter with a subject title, “HELP YE ONE ANOTHER IN RIGHTEOUSNESS.” dated November 25, 2003. Granted that hardly a few readers will bother to glance at my letter, nevertheless, it will be worthwhile to read about “Preachers of Hate,” “Merchants of Death,” along with a reference to an article, “The Falseness of Anti-Americanism,” by late Fouad Ajami (May Almighty Allah rest his soul in peace). Knowing well that many readers always find it hard to comprehend the spirit of my letter, therefore, I have decided that the best way to bring the message across is to post my letters only on my personal blogs. Henceforth, take a little pride in a fact that there are still a handful of “Moderate Muslims,” who do possess a human spirit as well as a small dose living wisdom. Thanks again for reading, I remain Very truly yours - Link: https://myfellowmuslims.wordpress.com/november-25-2003/


    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 5/31/2015 7:15:34 PM



  • Mr Shahin, I am neither a Wahabi nor a Deobandi. By birth I am a Quadri and therefore Sufi.


     As should be clear to any sane person (which you do not appear to be), I am the only truly non sectarian who has zero tolerance for any sectarianism even though it comes from the Sufi/Barelvis which is my own family and lineage. Since all the sectarianism on your site is from the Sufi/Barelvis, and I speak out against it and in the process expose their weak underside, I appear to be anti Sufi which I just cannot be. However, you are a total stranger to this level of integrity and will therefore interpret everything in terms of your own level of integrity. I have to live with it.


    By Naseer Ahmed - 5/31/2015 11:09:51 AM



  • Naseer SahebI have not given up my project, never do. But I am travelling now and will be back in India late June. Will surely start the process then. Meanwhile you can look at your paper again in the light of discussions in which you appeared to change your position somewhat. Maybe, this is not so but perhaps some refinement is in order.


    My biggest problem is even ulema associated with New Age Islam do not accept your definition of kufr and are not willing to even debate. Maybe they think you are correct but they want to maintain their xenophobic position nevertheless. After all, your position is based on a study of Quran and ulema do not care much for Quran; indeed madrasas do not even teach Quran. Not even Salafi, Wahhabi, ahl-Hadees madrasas while claiming to be ghair-muqallid. Our ulema's knowledge of Quran is limited to the quotations they came across in their text books written by previous ulema whom they really follow and believe in.


    As for your non-sectarianism, i hope some reader collects your vitriolic rhetoric against Sufi-Bareilwis and shows you a mirror. I do not have the time for that now. But you are as non-sectarian as any other Wahhabi who does not accept any other sects right to exist. Of course once they have killed all non-wahhabis, there will be complete non- sectarianism in Islam


    By Sultan Shahin - 5/31/2015 9:15:27 AM



  • Mr Shahin, You did not respond to my comment: Shahin Sb, Let us go ahead with your program. This should be our Jihad fi sabilillah. By Naseer Ahmed - 4/7/2015 12:08:17 AM


    Now the only person who has come up with a comprehensive and well-researched programme for defeating the extremist ideology from the very grass root level is me. Notice that even today I refuse to use sectarian terminology like you do very glibly. It is extremism and extremists that I have always opposed irrespective of their sectarian hues. You have not come up with the Urdu booklet. The booklet should contain all my articles on the definition of Kafir and on the meaning of Qital fi sabi lillah. I do not see why you cannot start with the known progressives such as Maulana Wahiduddin Khan and Maulana Mazhar Warisi? I have named two well known Deobandi Maulanas that I know through this website.


    Surely you would know more from among both Barelvi and Deobandi. On the contrary, I am surprised that you have launched a vilification campaign against me! Is it because you have developed cold feet? The possibility of physical harm that you talk of can unnerve anyone. Maybe you just want to live a life of pretensions and reform is just a good word with which to fool people. Your only aim appears to be to indulge in word warfare with a heavy sectarian tinge. So the vilification of the only person with a demonstrable sincerity for fighting extremism is what you have stooped to? Is that your strategy for running away from real reform and a real fight against extremism? How low can you go Mr Shahin? I think that I am wasting my time with you and nothing good will ever come out of you. I will focus on other alternatives.


    By Naseer Ahmed - 5/31/2015 7:30:49 AM



  • "One can only say that they simply ignored Allah's words and continue to ignore the message, otherwise there would have been churches, synagogues, temples and monasteries in the Arab world, catering to the needs of the people of different religions living and serving that region. Alas, there is no Mohammad in Arabia now to form an Alliance of the Virtuous and fight for the right of the oppressed minority religions."

    yes, what stopped the companions of the prophet from allowing other religions to coexist.
    it shows the difference between the words and practice.
    was there any church/temple/synagogue in Mecca and Medina when the prophet was in full political power and after departed this wold leaving his companions behind to emulate him?

    Why this simple inclusive verse remained on tongue but never became the reality?

    it is the food for thought who says companions were ideal and practiced Islam fully.


    By rational mohammed yunus - 4/18/2015 5:43:35 AM



  • CHALLENGE OF MODERNITY

     

    Islam faces the huge challenge of modernity whose source lie in the West. Muslims  cannot escape the changes being forced upon them by factors like mass economic production and movement, monetization of money, mass education and penetration

    of rationality to the grassroots of the population, automation, mass media etc. This calls for continuous and systematic thinking. To borrow Prof. Fazlur Rahman’s words, “Societies often react to changes in two ways i.e., panicking and recoiling upon itself and seeking delusive shelters in the past on one hand and sacrificing or compromising its very ideals on the other and can react to new forces with self-confidence by necessary assimilation, absorption, rejection and other forms of positive creativity, it will develop a new dimension for its inner aspiration, a new meaning and scope for its ideals.” Any laissez faire attitude towards the new forces will make us simply drift, and the attitude of escaping to the past will seem emotionally more satisfying in the immediate future, but will be more fatal of the two attitudes.  Reading of the early history of Islam would reveal that early Muslims were much more creative, thoughtful and courageous in interpreting the Quran and the Sunnah according to their circumstances and would not flinch from taking stands that would appear drastically different from approach of the Prophet but would be based on the keen understanding of the Islam’s cardinal principles. If we have to move forward in current times, we need to do away with much of those old fixations that freeze us in seventh century mould.

     

    Maqbool Ahmed Siraj

    Framing a Rational and Humane Agenda Link to the Article

     

    Intellectual Crisis of the Muslim Ummah

    Aligarh Muslim University - April 6-7, 2015

     

    A Pen1  www.myfellowmuslims.com

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com


    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/12/2015 10:13:28 AM



  • To: All “Intellectual Bigots, Islam Haters & Muslim Bashers Listen Up   

     

    Fareed Zakaria tees off on Bill Maher: “You’re not persuading people. You’re getting applause lines in the West” Link to salon.com

     

    "That's insulting," replies Maher in heated "Real Time" debate about Muslims, Islam and reform VIDEO - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3y4tXROzQe4

     

    Fareed Zakaria tees off on Bill Maher: "You're not persuading people. You're getting applause lines in the West"

     

    Fareed Zakaria and Bill Maher hotly debated Islam and the Muslim world on Friday’s “Real Time.”

     

    Perhaps the most interesting moment was when Zakaria went straight at Maher’s critique of Islam as an intolerant religion, which the host has developed more aggressively in recent months.

     

    “My problem with the way you approach it,” Zakaria said, “is I don’t think you’re going to reform a religion by telling 1.6 billion people — most of whom are just devout people who get some inspiration from that religion and go about their daily lives — I don’t think you’re going to change religion by saying your religion is the motherlode of bad ideas, it’s a terrible thing.”

     

    He continued: “Frankly, you’re going to make a lot of news for yourself and you’re going to get a lot of applause lines and joke lines.”  But, he added, “push for reform with some sense of respect for the spiritual values.”

     

    You’re not persuading people with what you’re doing. You’re getting applause lines in the West,” Zakaria said.

     

    “That’s insulting, that I’m doing this for applause lines,” Maher said.

     

    For more of his response and the rest of the discussion, which included New York Times columnist Ross Douthat, watch the entire clip below.’

     

    A Pen1  www.myfellowmuslims.com

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com


    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/11/2015 6:53:33 PM



  • Any text must be viewed in its context. What was relevant in a tribal society eking out an existence of bare subsistence in one of the harshest climatic conditions on the planet a millennia and a half back is bound to be dated by modern standards. But since the authorship of the Holy Quran is Divine, to talk of contextualising it is heresy.
    Also Sharia commentaries of the eleventh century are meant to guide life in the twenty first century, not only for the believers but for all beings. Nothing is undefined. Everything has to be in conformity with some authority couched in a language open to various interpretations at the hands of self proclaimed experts( Ulema).
    This makes it very difficult if not impossible to reconcile Islam with the modern world based on the Universal Laws of Man.
    To just highlight two issues, the laws governing men and women and the treatment of the Faithful in contrast to the Dhimmis or unbelievers or the concept of TAQQIYA can cause endless conflict in society at large if Sharia was to be imposed the world over. Surely this is not the Golden Dawn towards which we all aspire.

    By Ranjeet Singh Chordia - 4/11/2015 4:26:09 PM



  • Dear Mr. Nilamani Tripathy,

     

    I can certainly appreciate you being “Overly Concerned” about Islam and the Muslims. I would say, rightly so, based on the irrational behavior of my people.

     

    The authorship of the Holy Quran is Divine, to talk of contextualising it is heresy.

     

    To you your religion and to me mine." That’s what we the Muslims must adhere to. Now my question to you is, “Did you notice any Muslim commentator being engaged in constantly questioning or insulting Hindu holy book?” The answer is flat no.  

     

    To reconcile Islam with the modern world based on the Universal Laws of Man.

     

    What is the meaning of Universal Laws of Man? Is it only confined to one Abrahamic religion, or it should apply to mankind as a whole?

     

    The concept of TAQQIYA can cause endless conflict in society.

     

    For sure. Those who are “Intellectually Dishonest, and deliberately avoids confronting their own social ills of their respective societies, are also applying the concept of “Taqqiya.” I say, why not look into your own backyard?

     

    If Sharia was to be imposed the world over.

     

    What makes you and so many continue to hype up the “Sharia” scare. Are you a scaremonger? If not, then for crying out loud, at least be supportive of “Moderate Muslims” viewpoints. That is something neither you nor “Secular Logic,” would do.

    May I ask, why so?  

     

    The Golden Dawn towards which we all aspire.

     

    Why not teach Muslims about the Golden Rules of your religion? Are they appropriately applied in the daily lives of Hindus. If you wish to aspire your fellow humans, then aside from being all too busy criticizing Islam, try to teach us more about the Golden Dawn of what other religions aspires mankind towards. Am I right or wrong?

     

    The word to the wise is sufficient.

     

    Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia

     

    A Pen1  www.myfellowmuslims.com

    http://www.wethemoderatemuslims.com

    http://www.readingisliving.com


    By Mohammed Rafiq Lodhia - 4/10/2015 11:09:10 AM



  • Any text must be viewed in its context. What was relevant in a tribal society eking out an existence of bare subsistence in one of the harshest climatic conditions on the planet a millennia and a half back is bound to be dated by modern standards. But since the authorship of the Holy Quran is Divine,to talk of contextualising it is heresy.
    Also Sharia commentaries of the eleventh century are meant to guide life in the twenty first century,not only for the believers but for all beings. Nothing is undefined. Everything has to be in conformity with some authority couched in a language open to various interpretations at the hands of self proclaimed experts( Ulema).
    This makes it very difficult if not impossible to reconcile Islam with the modern world based on the Universal Laws of Man.
    To just highlight two issues, the laws governing men and women and the treatment of the Faithful in contrast to the Dhimmis or unbelievers or the concept of TAQQIYA can cause endless conflict in society at large if Sharia was to be imposed the world over. Surely this is not the Golden Dawn towards which we all aspire.

    By Nilamani Tripathy - 4/10/2015 7:52:29 AM



  • One who gets irritated, loses the debate.
    By ahmad - 4/9/2015 7:49:34 AM



  • I am under no obligation to answer anyone. As far as I am concerned, you can consider everyone fallible including the Messengers of God and indeed they were. The question is only of degree. If you want to draw your own line, do so. It is a futile discussion without any meaningful purpose and I am not interested in continuing it.
    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/9/2015 7:37:40 AM



  • The buck passes
    By ahmad - 4/9/2015 7:28:39 AM



  • GRD Sb covered this battle very well in a comment. Ask him.
    By Naseer Ahmed - 4/9/2015 5:50:57 AM



  • If even during the caliphate of a rightly guided caliph, two most important members of Ahl-e-bayt fight a bloody battle, then the question can be asked who was rightly guided among the two? And if the answer is that both were rightly guided because both had their own justifications for going to war against each other causing bloodshed among Muslims, then it should be accepted that during any given time or era, Muslims may engage  in a mutuallly agreed bloody battle justifying their respective ideologies.Why is it that the  salaf fight against each other and will be called rightly guided through  consensus and the successive generation of people fighting and killing each other will be dubbed kharijites and militants and kafirs?
    By ahmad - 4/9/2015 3:54:15 AM



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