Rabu, 14 Juni 2017

‘Europe Will Become Muslim In 30 Years, Russia In 50 Years’ Russian Archpriest Warns Christian Apathy Is Fueling The Islamic Conquest Of Europe



We at and others have hammered at this for years- between Christian apathy, apostasy, self-indulgence, and a refusal to both honor God and have children while allowing millions of Muslims to enter who have children and practice Islam, the West is allowing itself to be conquered by the Muslims without the need for military conquest. Calling European ‘exhausted and sick people,’ he warned that without a massive return to Christ and a rebirth of the family, Europe is living on borrowed time and will be conquered by Muslims by 2047 and Russia by 2067:
Russian Archpriest Dmitri Smirnov, chairman of the Patriarchal Commission on Family Matters and the Protection of Motherhood and Childhood, predicts that Europe with turn Muslim within 30 years, while Russia will turn to Islam in about 50.
According to the Russian Orthodox cleric, Christians will be persecuted and live in semi-underground conditions.
Smirnov explained that Islam will prevail in the West because Muslims are willing to sacrifice themselves in order to fight for their own values, while Westerners are just “exhausted sick people, as good as dead.”
In an interview with Russia’s Soyuz TV earlier this month, the priest said Christian existence in Europe in the future “will be like peas scattered across European countries.”
Christians will not dare stick their necks out, they will congregate in small groups and will be persecuted,” he warned.
He also warned that the process is already underway: in Europe, Christian women are being raped and murdered by Muslims, and the men are unable to protect them. The rapists are sentenced to one-year probation maximum.
“This goes on in today’s Europe, and we are next in line,” Father Dmitri cautioned.
He mentioned that Muhammad has become the most popular name for baby boys in the UK.
Given current trends, Christianity in England is becoming a relic, while Islam will be the religion of the future. By 2020, estimates are that the number of Muslims attending prayers will reach at least 683,000, while the number of Christians attending weekly Mass will drop to 679,000.
Since 2001, 500 London churches of all denominations have been turned into private homes, while 423 new mosques have been established.
In one of his sermons, Smirnov said that “unlike Christians, modern Muslims know God’s will. And as a result, who is closer to God? That is why the future belongs to the Muslims. The future is theirs. They will inhabit the earth. Because today’s Christians have no use for all this.”
On another occasion he pointed to the fact that the “modern Muslim is willing to die for his faith. He wraps himself with dynamite and blows himself up wherever his mullah orders him. He is prepared to sacrifice himself. He is labeled a terrorist. But his goal is not to terrify the world… [they commits acts of terrorism because] they don’t want to have their values corroded. That’s what they are dying for. They are not some ‘terrorists’ coming down from the mountains. Most of them have college education. Yes, they are fanatics. They are willing to sacrifice themselves. And we are exhausted sick people, as good as dead.”

Jumat, 09 Juni 2017

Quran Teach Us About Love, Tolerance and Freedon Of Religion. These Are 6 Quotes In The Holly Quran



Islam according to the Quran teaches love and compassion for every human being, no matter their religion, says author Adnan Oktar whose television show is watched by millions in Turkey and the Arab world. He believes the problem for the majority of Muslims is that some groups are following traditions and superstitions invented centuries after the Quran was first sent and the Prophet lived, and these have gotten more radical over time.
After the attacks of September 11, 2001, Oktar published a book, Islam Denounces Terrorism. He argues that violent and intolerant beliefs about Islam go against the teachings of the Quran. Here, he presents six quotes that support his claim.
1) Peace is the cornerstone
The word “Islam” is derived from the word meaning “peace” in Arabic. Islam is a religion revealed to mankind with the intention of presenting a peaceful life where the infinite compassion and mercy of God manifests on earth. God calls all people to live by the moral values He sets so that compassion, mercy, peace and love can be experienced all over the world.
“O You who believe! Enter absolutely into peace (Islam). Do not follow in the footsteps of satan. He is an outright enemy to you.” (Holy Quran: 2, 208)

In the verse above, Islam intrinsically calls for peace and fosters a life in absolute sincerity and honesty before God. Therefore it is vitally important for an individual to believe in God with his own will and aspiration, and observe God’s commands and advice through personal conscientious contentment.
coffee-cup-CC-Katherine_Lim-ultraklm-flickr
2) No one should be forced to believe in Islam
“There is no compulsion where the religion is concerned.” (Holy Quran: 2/ 256)
As stated in the verse, no one can be compelled to live by Islamic morals. Conveying the existence of God and the morals of the Qur’an to other people is a duty for believers, but they call people to the path of God with kindness and love and they never force them. It is only God Who guides people to the right way. This is related in the following verse:
“You cannot guide those you would like to but God guides those He wills. He has best knowledge of the guided.” (Holy Quran/28: 56)


Senin, 05 Juni 2017

How Muslims Interpret PEACE and JIHAD?



AUTHORS(S): 


A short text that discusses the various facets of "Jihãd" according to the Qur'an, and addresses the issues raised by critics who quote Qur'anic verses to argue that Islam is intrinsically non-peaceful.
*****
(This book is an expanded version of the talk given on the “Islam in Focus” TV program of October 2001)
*******

Introduction

On September 11, 2001, a few individuals hijacked four civilian airplanes and used them as weapons to create terror in United States, especially on the two World Trade Center buildings. All the crew and passengers in the four planes as well as about three thousand civilians lost their lives in those attacks.
The foreign policies of the United States of America vis-à-vis the Muslim countries do not justify that American civilians in the planes and the World Trade Center buildings be killed. This is not what Islam teaches. Look at the instructions of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) during war-time: he clearly forbade the killing of the old, the children, and the women. Those who lost their lives in the World Trade Center towers and in the planes were all civilians, and quite a few of them were Muslims.
All Muslim leaders in the United States of America, Canada, and the entire world clearly condemned the hijacking that was committed in the United States as act of terrorism which is not acceptable by Islam.
This condemnation is based on the universal value of sanctity for human life. The holy Qur’an relates the story of the first murder in human history, that of the two sons of Adam in which Cain (Qabīl) murdered his brother Abel (Habīl). This is in Chapter 5 of the Qur’an, verses 27 to 31.
At the conclusion of this story, Almighty God says:

“Whosoever kills a person without any reason (of murder or mischief in the earth), it is as though he has killed all the people. And whosoever saves a single life, it is as though he has saved all the people.” (Surah al-Maaida, 5:32)
It is clear from this verse that unless a person is put on trial and proven to have murdered someone, he or she cannot be killed — and that killing an innocent person is tantamount to killing all humans.

So What About Jihad?

One of the ironies of this era is that although the means of communication have greatly advanced, people still have difficulty in a meaningful communication and dialogue with other cultures and religions. There is a lot of misinformation and misunderstanding of the Islamic faith.
Many individuals, laymen as well as experts, have tried to link 9/11 to the concept of jihad in Islam. In one of the famous radio talk shows of Toronto, soon after 9-11, I heard one caller saying that what happened on that day was 10% terrorism and 90% Islam. A fundamentalist Christian leader in the US said on his TV show that “Probably Muhammad was a terrorist.” So it is important to talk about jihad in Islam.

Islam is the Religion of Peace


Islam is primarily a religion of peace. Its name “Islam” comes from “silm” which means two things: one is “submitting to God” and the second is “peace”. Both meanings are inter-twinned.
Whenever Muslims meet one another, they use the greeting of peace: “as-salamu ‘alaykum — peace be upon you”, and the other person responds by saying “‘alaykumus salam — upon you be peace.”

The daily prayers begin with praising God as “Mercy and Beneficent” and ends with the greeting of peace for all.

The Concept of Jihad


The concept of “jihad” needs to be understood clearly. Many people in the media take Qur’anic text out of context. And so let us see: what is the meaning of jihad?
The word “jihad” does not mean “holy war”. This is a Western rending of a broader concept in Islamic teaching. Ask any expert of Arabic language and he will tell you that “jihad” does not mean “holy war”. The term “holy war” has come from the Christian concept of “just war,” and has been used loosely as an Islamic term since the days of the Crusades.

So what does “jihad” mean?


Jumat, 26 Mei 2017

WHY IS QURAN BEEN WRONGLY TRANSLATED?


WHY IS QURAN BEEN WRONGLY TRANSLATED?

The language of Quran is Pre-Classical Arabic, which was primarily an oral and regional language but spoken in various dialects. The Arabic language is originally based on root words or a base word that carries the semantic content of the word and from it derives the family of the particular word.

The idea is that a base word as well as its inflected forms support the same core meaning, and can be considered extended words if a learner knows both the base word and the affix. Pre-Classical Arabic words are formed by taking basic words and adding combinations of prefixes and suffixes to them. A basic word to which affixes (prefixes and suffixes) are added is called a root word because it forms the basis of a new word. The root word is also a word in its own right. For example, the English words achieve, achiever, achievement consist of the root word achieve and the suffix – “er and ment.”

Although fundamentally Arabic is a root word language but no longer follows its principles of sticking to its basic root meaning, thanks to the evolution of Arabic to Modern Standard Arabic [MSA]. The Arabic word Haram is the best example of MSA, as its meaning paradoxically signify forbidden as well as sacred. Translators whimsically choose the meaning which suits their preconceived ideological context.

 Arabic Poetry falls into sixteen different rhythmical pattern called al-Bihar, viz., at-Tawil, al-Bassit, al-Wafir, al-Kamil, ar-Rajs, al-Khafif, al-Hazaj, al-Muttakarib, al-Munsarih, al-Muktatab, al-Muktadarak, al-Madid, al-Mujtath, al-Ramel, al-Khabab and as-Saria'. In addition, Arabic has speech of soothsayers, rhyming prose, and normal speech. Ironically Qur'an's structure did not fit into any of these categories. To cover their malicious intent, it is boasted by conspirators that this is a distinction that made the Qur'an inimitable, and left the pagan Arabs at a loss as to how they might counter it, although it is a lie fabricated to separate Quranic Arabic from the rest of the Arabs by portraying it as a sacred text that can only be understood by certain special section of the society with the aid by the specially created science called ilm-e-rijal [Knowledge of Men].  This concocted science fooled the entire Arab world and “Muslims” at large and they are still spell bounded by it. But the fact is the language of Al-Quran was plain Arabic and easily understood as by the local Arabs of the particular tribe and they knew its core message very well.

For justifying that Quran is different from the rest of the Arabic language Ibn Ishaque [born in 85 Hijri] the father of the conspirators created a relative story of  Mu‘allaqātcommonly known as hanging poems. Ibn Ishaque was a Christian captured from a monastery and brought as a slave to Medina during the campaign of Khalid bin Walid. It is said he converted to Islam but he was the main culprit in changing the direction of the Quran and the Islam.

To support the story of Mu‘allaqāt, Ibn Ishaque created characters related to the poems so as to build the future foundation for interpreting the Quran in the line of ilm-e-rijal commonly known as Narratives of Prophet. All this is done to make an impression that the book Quran is distinct and its style of writing is unique from the rest of Arabic language, thus making it difficult even for the Arabs to understand it. All this concoction was doctored to support the doctrine of ijaaz al-Quran that the content of the Quran is inimitable and not easy for a common man to understand without the help of the Biblical Hadith.

The victim of this well planned conspiracy is the poor, helpless Quran. The meanings of the vibrant Arabic words of the Quran were changed to fit in the already planted Biblical stories related to the “Prophets”, even the root words were changed to support their views. A parallel literature was systematically created to counter the Arabic of the Noble Quran thus making it more difficult for the Arabs as well as foreigners to understand in spite many of its meaning are still preserved in Classical Lexicons.   

David Samuel Margoliouth [1858-1940] a Professor of Arabic in Oxford University resolved this "slight puzzle" by advancing his famous theory that the poems we know of as pre-Islamic were actual forgeries of a later Islamic period, being largely a development of the styles found in the Qur'an. His theory is based on the verses of the Qur'an 26:224-227, which addresses poets.

Another intellectual and figurehead for the Egyptian Renaissance, Taha Hussein [1889-1973]was an Arab-Egyptian and one of the most influential 20th-century Arab writer of the modernist movement in the Middle East and North Africa. His sobriquet was "The Dean of Arabic Literature". He was nominated for a Noble Prize literature fourteen times.

Although Taha Hussein wrote many novels and essays, in the West he is best known for his autobiography, Al-Ayyam (الايام, The Days) which was published in English as “An Egyptian Childhood” (1932) and “The Stream of Days” (1943). However, it was his book of literary criticism “On Pre-Islamic Poetry” (في الشعر الجاهلي) of 1926 that bought him some fame in the Arab world. In this book, he expressed doubt about the authenticity of much early Arabic poetry, claiming it to have been falsified during ancient times due to tribal pride and rivalry between tribes. He also hinted indirectly that the Qura’n should not be taken as an objective source of history. Consequently, the book aroused the intense anger and hostility of the religious scholars at Al Azhar and many other traditionalists, and he was accused of having insulted Islam. However, the public prosecutor stated that what Taha Hussein had said was the opinion of an academic researcher and no legal action was taken against him, although he lost his post at Cairo University in 1931. His book was banned but was re-published the next year with slight modifications under the title “On Pre-Islamic Literature” (1927). 

It is not only Taha Hussein who believed that the so called "pre-Islamic poetry" is a fabricated work; there are also some respectable contemporary scholars who think that there is something fishy about this so called pre-Islamic poetry.

Whatever may have been the linguistic environment of pre-Islamic Arabia, the rapid spread of the faith across Africa and into Asia soon created a situation in which written and spoken Arabic inhabited opposite ends of a linguistic spectrum. At one end was the language of written communication and Islamic scholarship, which regarded the language of the Qurʾān as its inimitable yardstick; from this belief developed the later critical doctrine of ijaaz al-Quran (the “inimitability of the Qurʾān”), which resulted in a written (literary) language that has undergone remarkably little change over the centuries because it was different from the rest of the Arabic and was believed to be liturgical or unique language. At the other end was the spoken Arabic of Arabs, which from Spain (known as Al-Andalus during the Moorish period) and Morocco in the west to the Arabian Gulf and Iraq in the east displayed—and continues to display—enormous variety, hardly a surprising linguistic phenomenon in view of the great distances involved and the wide variety of cultures with which Islam came into contact.

Pre-Islamic Arabic can be considered a polycentric language and Al-Quran is the best example of it. In Arabic-speaking countries, different levels of polycentricity can be detected. Modern Standard Arabic is a pluricentric language with varying branches correlating with different regions where Arabic is spoken and the type of communities speaking it.

Classical Arabic, also known as Quranic Arabic [although the term is not entirely accurate, is the language used in the Quran as well as in numerous literary texts from Umayyad and Abbasid times (7th to 9th centuries)]. Many Muslims study Classical Arabic in order to read the Quran in its original language. It is important to note that written Classical Arabic underwent fundamental changes during the early Islamic era, adding dots to distinguish similarly written letters, and adding the Tashkeel (diacritical markings that guide pronunciation).

Modern Standard Arabic is colloquial Arabic which is evolved from many regional dialects that also bears slightly different meanings. That’s why we find in MSA etymology more than one meaning of a single base or root word which is a sign of evolution or deviation from the principles of pure Pre Classical Arabic. In Pre-Classical Arabic the meaning is related to each other by the virtue of belonging to the same family of word. But when the unrelated meaning appears apart from the family of word it is a clear cut sign that the unrelated appeared word are not from the family and should be not taken as the original meaning. The main cause of discord or misinterpretation of many Arabic words and root words are these unrelated words taken from MSA to translate Al-Quran.

All the present day interpretation of the Quran is either based on MSA dictionaries or Laghtul Quran based on Shan-e-Nuzool or ilm-e-rijal which carries multiple meanings of a single word to suits particular line of thinking. No regard is given to the principles of Old Arabic root language as fitting into the ideological context is more important than doing justice to the root language. The Old Arabic language on which Al-Quran is based is completely ignored; also root words and its meaning are twisted just to fit in their ideological agenda.

It is simple, not using our own knowledge and following blindly the traditions of our father and grandfather only because they were seniors is a sign of mental slavery. Simply copying or imitating the elders and leaving everything on the will of God or blaming others shows our incompetence to deal with the problem by ourselves. Nobody can cure us if we failed to judge that we are suffering from dangerous ailment and we need an immediate medical attention. Contentment is the enemy of evolution and we are content in whatever condition we live in. We think that we possess the Weapon of Mass Destruction in the form of Supplication or ritualistic Prayers. We claim to read the Quran but we fool ourselves by following the readymade translations of our predecessors. We are content and contentment is the enemy of development, main reason for our failure.

Some mistakes occurred in the translations:

1) Example:

The root word علم [alam] means he knew – ilm, talim, maulim, Aalim, Alim, Allama, Uloom, Maaloom, Ulema…

The meaning of every derivative word should contain the basic essence of the root word as they belong to the same family. If there is change in the meaning we can easily detect the corruption or distortion in the original meaning. For example the word الْعَالَمِينَ [Aalameen] is the derivative of root word علم but in traditional or Modern Standard Arabic it is translated as Worlds whereas it’s meaning should be all the Knowledge. This is a clear cut distortion because the essence of the root word has shifted from the family of علم.

2) Example:

The root word شهر [shahar] the meanings of which are apparent, manifest, notable, commonly known, famous, proclaim, advertisement but then it suddenly moves out of the familiarity of original meanings and drastically changes its essence which also whimsically signifies New moon, lunar month, drew his sword from its scabbard etc.

The commonly known derivatives of Shahar are Mashoor, Shaurat, Ashraan, Ashaar, Ishtehaar have familiar meaning as it is from the same family of words. But Modern standard Arabic does not follow the principles of root language as it is a different version of Pre Classical Arabic of the Quran.

3) Example:

The root word of Haram حرم means sacred. Its general essence are sacred, respected, private, restricted, reverence, honor, enshrine - Haram, Aihtaraam, Mohtaram, Ihraam, Moharram, Maihroom, Hoormat… but when the essence of this word is taken as forbidden or illegal or unlawful or something unworthy it signifies drastically changed in the meaning and this becomes matter of concern for all.

This drastically change in meanings of a single word into two or more diverse meanings makes people think that Arabic is a complicated language and it is safe if we follow the canonical meanings developed through ilm-e-rijal generally accepted as the only genuine source.

Now the problem with the translation of Al-Quran is we are translating the old Quranic Arabic with the lens of Modern Standard Arabic or through the canonical meanings developed by the conspirators of Islam. And we the students and the teachers of Arabic language believe these canonical meanings to be genuine without doing any research work. This blind following of students as well as teachers of their predecessors work who are recognized as traditional thinkers is the cause of the all the malady which Muslims are facing today.  It is a taboo for the “Muslims” to think out of their own traditions. The huge traditional atmosphere prevents any Muslim from thinking out of this “approved institution” label as sacred and people are happily content to live in this golden prison of traditions. 

Ultimately the message of the Noble Quran is the main sufferer. If we don’t rethink or reformat our thought process nobody can help us. Believe me the book Quran has unlimited potential to revolutionize the entire world towards the path of peace. But unfortunately the upholders of the Quran are the main mischief mongers who prevent those who want to do systematic investigation into and study of materials and sources in order to establish facts and reach new conclusions. PEACE





Rabu, 24 Mei 2017

Labeling Apostate is a Preferred Method


Labeling Apostate

It has often become a preferred method to label the free thinkers as atheist or people with no knowledge. Having a slightly different view from majority in the mainstream Islam is enough to be categorized as a traitor. Many people think that I am an atheist dressed up as a Muslim to bash Muslims. Is it a sin to think independently?

Or do you think that Muslims generally believe that "critical analysis of held traditional Islamic beliefs" is only done by non-Muslims to embarrass all Muslims?

Many of my friends say that we should not criticize publicly the faith in which we are born in because if we criticize our own faith, we provide material to the non Muslims haters to bash Muslims. There are black sheep in every religious community whose agenda is to spread hatred and feel superior about their own ideology and religion. But in my view, in the age of the IT revolution, if we liberal or moderate Muslims remain silent due to the fear that our data would be misused by Muslim haters then I think we are living in fool’s paradise. Truth should prevail at any cost. In fact we should become a beacon for all irrespective of the differences we may have with others. This is the time for all thinking Muslims to courageously come forward for the sake of humanity to show the world that there are muslims who for the sake of peace can face the firing squad from their own community. If we call ourselves Muslims then it becomes our duty to amend our community at this crucial juncture and respond to their immediate need to reform, and if we fail to do so I am sure our future generation would never forgive us.

I think the only true believer of any faith is one who questions everything. If you are not questioning, how can you be thinking? And if you are not thinking, how can you believe or to be more precise follow blindly?

Here we go ... the standard epithet hurled by the blind followers and the fear-mongering mullahs - Kaafir! Atheist! Did they spare one single thinking Muslim? Sir Syed Ahmed Khan was accused of kufr, Iqbal was accused of kufr, all the thinking heads who rejected the prattle were declared atheists or ignorant. Irony is that they even accused Ghazali their Imam, of atheism because at the later stage of his life he made some critical analysis and for that he had to spend rest of his life in jail.

Anyone who chooses to use their brain in contemporary Islam is considered as an atheist according to these demented lunatics. If you keep chanting the prattle then you are golden. 

Any correctional process leads to progress. We have all progressed in life. Then what is wrong in evaluating or analyzing our religious teachings. Throughout the world there is unrest and the cause is the belief system. If this system is the root cause of all the problems, then we definitely need to amend it. Our youngsters are brainwashed with the outdated defunct data. Any progressive society will always bring about changes and develop. Just adamantly sticking on to the stories and revering them will take us nowhere.
READ, and THINK, and CHALLENGE, and QUESTION! Every single one of us must do that. Question EVERYTHING. It is immaterial what answers you come up with as long as you are honest to yourself. But it is CRITICAL that every single Muslim must reason and think for themselves but the criteria should be unbiased and the aim should be to spread love for all and hatred for none. IF WE WANT TO SURVIVE AND SUSTAIN, WE NEED A MAJOR RE FORMATTING AT THE EARLIEST.
PEACE.


Rabu, 10 Mei 2017

Quran Teach Us About Love, Tolerance and Freedon Of Religion. These Are 6 Quotes In The Holly Quran page 2

3) Freedom of thought and religion are paramount
The Quran provides an environment where people can fully enjoy freedom of thought and freedom of religion and allows people to live by the faith and values they believe in. According to Islam, everyone has the right to live freely by his beliefs, whatever they may be. Anyone who wants to support a church, a synagogue or a mosque must be free to do so. In this sense, freedom of religion, or freedom of belief, is one of the basic tenets of Islam. There is always freedom of religion wherever the moral values of the Qur’an prevail.

That is why Muslims also treat Jews and Christians, described in the Qur’an as “the People of the Book,” with great justice, love and compassion. God says in the Qur’an:
“God does not forbid you from being good to those who have not fought you in the religion or driven you from your homes, or from being just towards them. God loves those who are just.” (Surat al-Mumtahana, 8)
4) Compete with each other in doing good
muslim-jew-reston-synagogue.jpg
Muslims who share these basic values believe in the need to act together with Christians and Jews. They therefore strive to eliminate prejudices stemming from provocations by unbelievers and fanatics. Jews, Christians and Muslims should strive together to spread moral virtues across the world.
God explicitly states that the existence of people from different faiths  and opinions is something that we have to acknowledge and welcome heartily, for this is how He created and predestined humankind in this world:
“We have appointed a law and a practice for every one of you. Had God willed, He would have made you a single community, but He wanted to test you regarding what has come to you. So compete with each other in doing good. Every one of you will return to God and He will inform you regarding the things about which you differed.” (Surat al-Ma’ida, 48)
In acknowledgment of this fact, Muslims have an inner love and compassion for people of all faiths, races and nations, for they consider them as the manifestations of God in this world and treat them with an heartfelt respect and love. This is the very basis of communities administered by Islamic morality.
The values of the Qur’an hold a Muslim responsible for treating all people, whether Muslim or non-Muslim, kindly and justly, protecting the needy and the innocent and “preventing the dissemination of mischief”. Mischief comprises all forms of anarchy and terror that remove security, comfort and peace.
“God does not love corruption”. (Surat al-Baqara, 205)
Photo credit (top): Ali Mansuri (CC license)


Source

Selasa, 09 Mei 2017

How Muslims Interpret PEACE and JIHAD? page 4





Conclusion

From these examples, it is quite clear that Islam is not talking about the minor jihad for the sake of aggression; rather it is allowing the Muslims to physically defend their lives, properties, and lands against any aggression, and also to fight for ending tyranny against the oppressed men, women and children.
The verses regarding the idol-worshippers of Mecca are very specific and related to that time period. Let us again look at Chapter 22, verses 39-40:

“Permission (to fight) is granted to those who are fighting because they have been oppressed, and most surely God is well able to assist them. Those who have been expelled from their homes without a just cause except that they say, ‘Our Lord is Allah.’ (Surah al-Hajj, 22:39)
“Had there not been God’s repelling some people by others, certainly the monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which God’s name is mentioned would have been demolished. And surely God will help him who helps His cause; most surely Allah is Strong, Mighty.” (Surah al-Hajj, 22:40)

     
Islam deals with the realistic human society and not with the idealistic society. In the words of Dr. Sayyid Hussain Nasr, “Muslims view the Christian ethics as being too sublime for ordinary human beings to follow; it seems that the injunction to turn the other cheek was being meant only for saints. Christian people over the centuries have not shown any more restraint in war than have non-Christians. The ideal preached and the practice followed have often little to do with each other.”2
Let us conclude with the chapter 109 of the Qur’an:

“Say: O those who do not believe! I do not worship what you worship. Nor do you worship what I worship. Nor am I going to worship what you worship. Nor are you going to worship what I worship. You shall have your religion, and I shall have my religion.” (Surah al-Kafiroon, 109:1-6)

Misuse of “Jihad”

Just because the term “jihad” is misused by some Muslims for their political agenda, Muslims don’t have to abandon this noble concept of their faith. While talking about jihad, I have heard many Muslims describing only the major (spiritual) jihad and shying away from the minor jihad in the sense of armed struggle for defense. As Muslims, we stand by our teachings and don’t need to apologize for it even if some misguided souls hijack the terms of our faith for their own political ends.
It is not only the likes of Bin Laden who hijack and misuse the noble terms of Islam; we have even seen the government of the United States of America promoting the concept of minor jihad when it suited its own geopolitical interests.
During the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan in the 80’s, the U.S. Agency for International Development spent millions of dollars to supply Afghan school children with textbooks filled with violent images and “militant Islamic” teachings. Published in the dominant Afghan languages of Dari and Pashtu, these textbooks were developed in the early 1980s under an AID grant to the University of Nebraska-Omaha and its Centre for Afghanistan Studies. The agency spent $51 million on the university’s education programs in Afghanistan from 1984 to 1994.
The primers, which were filled with talk of jihad and featured drawings of guns, bullets, soldiers and mines, have served since then as the Afghan school system’s core curriculum. Unlike the children in the rest of the world whose math textbooks have pictures of apples and oranges, the Afghan children were taught to count with illustrations showing tanks, missiles and land mines.3
And so when it suited its strategic interests, the United States of America promoted the culture of jihad among the Afghan children in the 80’s and President Reagan even welcomed the Afghan “mujahideen” in the While House. (Even the Taliban used the American-produced books, though the radical movement scratched out human faces in keeping with its strict fundamental code.) Now that that culture of violence has come to haunt it, the US administration is absolutely against the idea of jihad and expects Muslims to abandon that concept in totality.

Muslims cannot be expected to change their views on the noble concept of jihad just because of some misguided Muslims or some world powers’ misuse of that term. Muslims should strongly condemn the misuse of jihad and confidently affirm the concept of jihad as explained in the Qur’an and the noble examples of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Media & Stereotyping the Muslims

In light of what we have said above, there is no justification in linking 9/11 to the concept of the minor jihad in Islam.
However, we are deeply saddened to see that certain segments of the media, especially the radio talk shows, are still fuelling the hatred against the Muslims, the Arabs, and the great monotheistic faith of Islam. This is in spite of the fact that Muslims have universally condemned the act of terror of September 11th in which innocent lives were lost.
Targeting the Muslims or the Arabs based on guilt-by-association is absolutely wrong. The double standard in the media is really appalling. Just think for a moment:
When a bomb exploded in early days of September 2001 in Northern Ireland near a Catholic school in a Protestant neighbourhood, no one in the media blamed the entire Protestant community as “terrorists and murderers”. When the IRA committed acts of terror in Northern Ireland or United Kingdom, no one in the western media labeled the Catholic faith “as the religion of terrorism”.

When Dr. Goldstein, a Jewish settler in Israel, entered the mosque in Hebron few years ago and gunned down Palestinian worshippers, no one said that all Jewish people are “terrorists”. When Serbians brutally massacred Muslims in Bosnia, the media never blamed the Serbian Orthodox Church for it even though some priests of that church used to bless the Serbian militia before they embarked on executing the Muslim prisoners. YET we see that when a few Arabs or Muslims commit acts of terror, all the Muslims and all the Arabs are automatically branded as “terrorists and murderers.” As Muslims, we ask the media for fairness, and nothing more.
The media should realize that the hijackers who used those planes as weapons did not only hijack the planes and kill thousands of innocent people in United of States of America; they also victimized a billion Muslims who are now being labeled as “murderers and terrorists”.

  • 1. Hurr al-‘Ãmili, Wasã’ilu ’sh-Sh¢‘a, vol. 11, p. 43.
  • 2. See in Hans Kung & Jurgen Moltmann, eds., Christianity Among World Religions (Edinburgh: Clark, 1986) p. 7.
  • 3. Information on US financed “jihãdi culture” is based on the article of Joe Stephens and David B. Ottaway, “From U.S., the ABC’s of Jihad” in Washington Post, March 23, 2002, page A01.
          The so-called “jihãdi culture” (which should be rightly named as “kalashnikov culture” of Afghanistan) not only came to haunt US itself; it also breed militancy in the sectarian Sunni group of Pakistan like Sipah-e Sahaba and now shows its ugly face, through the vehicle of al-Qaeda, in Iraq also.

Senin, 08 Mei 2017

How Muslims Interpret PEACE and JIHAD? page 3



First Example

Chapter 2 (Surah al-Baqara), verse 191 is quoted as follows:

“Kill them wherever you find them.”

To understand the full context of this verse, read verses 190 to 193 together:

“And fight in the way of God those who are fighting against you, and do not exceed the limits, surely God does not love those who exceed the limits. And kill them wherever you find them, and drive them out from whence they drove you out–persecution is severer than slaughter.
And do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque [in Mecca] until they fight with you in it; but if they do fight you, then slay them; such is the recompense of the unbelievers. But if they desist, then surely God is Forgiving, Merciful. And fight them until there is no persecution and religion should be only for God; but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors.”
     
The context clarifies that the verse 191 is allowing Muslims of Medina to defend themselves against the aggression of the unbelievers of Mecca. It surely does not say that Muslims should go around the world killing any infidel that they find!


Second Example


Chapter 4 (Surah an-Nisaa), verse 74 which supposedly encourages blood shedding:

“So let those fight in the way of God who are willing to sell this world’s life for the hereafter; and whoever fights in the way of God, then be he slain or be he victorious, We shall grant him a mighty reward.” (Surah an-Nisaa, 4:74)
Those who quote this verse, conveniently leave out the next verse no. 75 which explains the purpose and justification for the minor jihad:

“And what is the matter with you that you do not fight in the way of God for [the sake of] the oppressed men, women, and children who pray: ‘Our Lord, take us out of this town whose people are oppressors, and appoint for us from Thee a guardian and give us from Thee a helper…” (Surah an-Nisaa, 4:75)
This verse is clearly urging the Muslim to stand up for the oppressed men, women and children. Should not divine religions defend the oppressed men, women and children?

Third Example

Chapter 9 (Surah at-Tawba), verse 12:

“Fight the leaders of unbelief.”
This is just part of the whole passage where God talks about the Muslims in Medina and their truce agreement with the unbelievers of Mecca. See verses 12 to 14:

“And if they break their oaths after their agreement and revile your religion, then fight the leaders of unbelief –surely their oaths are of no value– so that they may desist.
“What is the matter with you that you do not fight a people who broke their oaths and aimed at the expulsion of the Prophet [from Mecca], and they attacked you first? Do you fear them? But God is most deserving that you should fear Him, if you are believers.
“Fight them; God will punish them by your hands and bring them to disgrace, and assist you against them, heal the hearts of a believing people, remove the rage of their hearts, and God turns (mercifully) to whom He pleases, and Allah is Knowing, Wise.”

     
The context clearly gives the right of defence to the Muslim but, in no way, does it promote aggression.

Fourth Example

Chapter 9 (Surah at-Tawba), verse 36:

“Fight the polytheists all together.”
     
In reality, this sentence is part of an entire verse in which God talks about the sacredness of four of the twelve months in which fighting is forbidden. Then it says:

“And fight the polytheists all together as they fight you all together; and know that God is with those who guard (evil).”
Those who like to take this Qur’anic verse out of its context conveniently miss out the part “as they fight you all together”. As you see, this verse is also responding to the aggression started by the polytheists against the Muslims; it does not talk about initiating a war.

Conclusion


Minggu, 07 Mei 2017

THE LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF THE TERM ALLAH:



A SHORT EXCERPT FROM MY ARTICLE ON ALLAH:

THE LINGUISTIC ANALYSIS OF THE TERM ALLAH:

Allah is not a proper noun or a single word but a special term. A term is used to describe a thing or to express a concept especially in a particular language or subject. Allah is an "Arabic" term used even before the advent of Islam and it is not a monopoly of "Islam". Bedouins, Jews, Christians and even Polytheists used this term long before the "Quran" was written. It was in their colloquial use. This term is a compound of words,[ال + لا + له = [اللَّهِ - Together it means there is nothing for Him, where ال stands for THE - LAAM with dagger alif becomes لا which signifies no or nothing and له indicates for HIM. AL signifies sign of emphasize. Laam has a shaddah over it and a dagger Alif on it. So laam with dagger Alif becomes لا which will be translated as nothing / no. - Lahu له is the personal pronoun in third person singular, which stands for ' For Him'. The shaddah on Laam also indicates sign of intensity. The term Allah can be defined as Nominative case, Genitive case and Accusative case.

Together (AL + LA + Lahu) becomes Allah, a complete term and not a single word. So by studying this entire nuance of the term, I concluded the literally meaning of Allah is THERE IS NOTHING FOR HIM and the next verse clearly describes the first verse that HE IS THE SAMAD [on whom all depend]. Every entity depends on Him, He is free from all dependency and there is nothing for Himself; this tendency or phenomena can also be called as Consciousness. This is the reason why we don't find the root word of Allah; as Allah is not a word but a composite term with no derivatives. But some lexicographer is of the opinion that Allah is a definite article of ilah but then if Allah is a definite article then the word following that should also be a definite article but this not the case in verse قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ - 112:1 because AHADUN here is an indefinite article. This proves that Allah cannot be a definite article of ilah. The word Ahadun is an indefinite article which is defining the term Allah. How can an indefinite word Ahadun which means anyone, any can define in definite word?

It's a poor understanding to take root word of Allah as ilah (اله) - written as ال +اله – If Al is added to ilah it becomes Al ilah and not Allah. The word ilah means one who is served or adored or god or any ideologies which we subscribe become our ilah. By adding AL we are unconsciously acknowledging that there are indefinite gods and that Allah is the definite version of smaller gods. It is a conjecture to deduce ilah as deity or god and Allah to be bigger God, just by adding AL to it. Although Allah is a composite term and that does not mean God but it means the ONE INFINITE SYSTEM OF CONSCIOUSNESS, encompassing each and every system.

When I say the literal meaning of Allah is 'there is nothing for Him' this signifies everything depends on Him and He serves all thus He is called Samad which means on Allah everything depends and He requires nothing in return. If you serve Him it is for your benefit only. He is an infinite unit [ أَحَدٌ] of Consciousness which is indispensable. Although every service is directed to Him only but He is not in need of it. There is nothing for Him [Allah] because whatever we do for Him is actually done for our benefit. He is Rehmaan and Rahim who does not need anything from us. When we serve Allah but in fact we serve our own consciousness so be careful and sincere in your service to your Rabb [Consciousness].

The readers are confused, as to who is this 'Him' referred to? Arabic has no neutral gender so Allah/Rabb is represented by Masculine pronouns. Allah is not a proper noun but a term or a symbol which signifies an infinite source of Power or Energy encompassing everything.
Man’s belief is always acquainted with the idea of a personified single God, although Allah does not mean God and Ahad does not mean one or unique. The word for one is wahid in Arabic and for unique the Arabic equivalent word is fareed.

In Surah Tawheed an important announcement is made that ALLAH IS AHAD and not WAHID. It is extremely important to understand this small verse whose correct understanding will completely change the entire message. This can make a huge impact on our understanding of the core message of the "Quran" and will affect our lives at large.

The traditionalists say that these four small verses define Allah. No doubt these verses define Allah thoroughly but the traditional translations shed no light on the word of paramount importance, i.e. ALLAH. Allah has many shades and it should be understood in the right perspective of the context, as discussed above. We cannot take the meaning of “Allah” as one super-duper deity or a bigger god.

IMPORTANT NOTE: Nowhere in the dictionaries have we found the correct meaning of Allah - Traditional translators have depicted Allah as God / divine entity possessing human emotions of love, anger, envy, happiness, revenge etc and someone who works on His Own whims and fancies. After studying the "Quran" thoroughly I stumbled upon the verse "QUL HO ALLAHO AHAD" and noticed that the word Ahadun in the first verse is translated as "The One", but in same surah in verse 4 - Ahad is translated as "any" or "none", although in other places in the "Quran" it is translated as "anyone" or "any", I was startled to see this major discrepancy. I knew that Ahad does not mean one and the meaning of one was actually Wahid. If we have to say "The One" then it would be Al-Wahid - الْوَاحِدُ and not Ahad. The translators have conveniently ignored the lexicon meaning and Quranic morphology of the word, in lieu of traditional beliefs.

MEANINGS OF SOME DERIVATIVES OF احد (AHAD) FROM "QURAN" FOR YOUR PERUSAL; PLEASE CHECK:

2:136,180, 266, 285 - 3:84, 91, 91, 153 - 5:6, 115 - 6:61 - 9:4, 6, 84 - 15:65 - 18:19,22, 26, 38, 42, 47, 49, 110 - 19:26, 24:21, 28 - 33:39, 40 - 38:35 - 59:11- 72:27,22,20,18 - 112:4

ARABIC COLLOQUIL EXAMPLES OF AHAD:

لا احد فى الدار - There is not anyone in the house.
هل احد راى مثل هَـٰذَا - Has anyone seen the like of this ?
يا احد رآ ها - O has anyone seen her ?
ما بالدار من احد الا حمارا - There is not in the house anything except donkey.

Edward William Lane Lexicon - Page 27

This clearly proves that Ahad does not mean One so Allah cannot be a definite article as it is followed by indefinite article Ahadun.

Quran clearly says that Allah is not a deity [ilah] so question of smaller or bigger deity [ilah] does not arise - The Allah is no ilah [the one which we serve or adore] except / but He [Rabb], the Ever-Living, the Eternal (3:2) - Quran explains the Term Allah very clearly - Peace.

I have a simple Question for those who have not understood above article is why Ahadun means ONE whereas in all other places in Quran it signifies any, anyone OR one of them?

AHADUN is indefinite article and it does not mean ONE so Allah cannot be a definite article either – Salam / Peace