These are mostly results of folklore and traditions from respective communities. When we discuss religions, you will find Judaism is similar to Islam. Both are very strictly monotheistic and have faith in "One unseen God". For example, you can go to China, Africa, Canada, Saudi Arabia, Malaysia, Japan, France and they way Muslims call to prayer is exactly the same. The basics of Salaat/namaz are the same. The book we read (The noble Qur'an) is the same. The status of the Qur'an is similar to the status of "Veda" among learned Hindus. People of knowledge of Hindu (Sanatana dharma) scriptures take verses of Veda very seriously.
Similarly when a small group of people decides, they will obey "Selective parts of the Qur'an", we should not expect all 1.7 billion Muslims will agree with such ideas. Since Allah (SWT) made it clear to follow Islam they way it was revealed (Meaning the basics of the faith).
Again this is not a significant enough issue to fight over it. The fighting urge comes from our "Local tradition" not "Islamic tradition". For example, I do not see any reason why a teenager like Malala was shot by "Talebans". Is this the biggest challenge Afghanistan is facing today? But culture of our sub-continent has many positive and some negative parts. I am afraid, our intolerance and love of violence is more influenced by "Tradition/culture" than "Scriptures".
I had to add that, during the famous last sermon by prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said, "....Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers....."
[ Source: Last sermon by prophet Muhammad PBUH ]
Shalom!
=============================================================================================================================================
All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action.....
From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Sun, Oct 21, 2012 7:33 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] : Shah Abdul Hannan--রামু, সাম্প্রদায়িকতা ও অসাম্প্রদায়িকতা ---Ramu, Communalism and Noncommunalism
Sent from my iPhone
(Source: Al Qur'an 33:40)
The phrase "last in the line of Prophets" means there will be NO more. This is "The foundation" of Islamic faith and an honest question can be asked without being hateful against followers of Mirza Gulam Ahmad.
Again I have spent many hours with his followers in Bangladesh and have nothing more to add than, we have some theological differences.
(Abu Dawood Vol 2 p. 228; Tirmidhi Vol 2 p.45)")
The problem starts when these people try to "Convert" Muslims to their ways. Which begs the question that, IF they were Muslims to start with why do they need to establish separate mosques?
As I said earlier, there are some genuine issues but that does NOT justify violence against them. Rather I have to admire them for standing up against Christian missionaries during colonial era in the sub-continents.
I have given link to "Foundations of Islamic faith", click on it to see why Muslims are careful NOT to admit any "new" prophets after the "Final messengers of Allah" (PBUH).
Again, you asked a very good question and unless you have some basic information, it is easy to get confused.
Brother, it basically boils down to who can scream louder. Even Shias might not be considered as true Muslims according to some idiots and hence, they can be legitimate target for elimination. Look, Islam has taken a totally wrong path. It wants to purify itself from something that might not be even pure? Sad to say that it has totally failed to deliver anything to its followers in its own backyards.
>>>>>>>>> I actually agree with you. The shias do not have "Religious differences" with me rather the sect started based on "Political difference". After prophet Muhammad (PBUH) died, his followers were divided about his successor. One group wanted to next leader to be from his family (Hazrat Ali bin Abi Talib) and a great number wanted to honor prophet's wish the make the best Muslim among them to be the next leader. There were no confusion about how devoted Hazrat Abu Bakr (RA) was. They wanted to negate him because he was not from "Family of prophet Muhammad"(PBUH).
Eventually Hazrat Ali Bin Abi Talib was nominated as leader of the Muslims but before that, there were three leaders. So this story shows Muslims were very progressive for that time (1400 years ago!) and they elected a leader based on his merit rather than his last name or who he married. According to most historians even Hazrat Ali (RA) was not so keen to be the leader but it was some Muslims who eventually established sect based on this "POLITICAL" difference.
Therefore, from outside the Ahmedi issue and shia issue may look the same BUT they are not!
Having said that, I agree that some gulf countries make too much out of this "Political difference" and it is NOT worth fighting over among Muslims. Right now Shia led Iran and Sunni lead Saudi Arabia are engaged in proxy wars to increase their respective sphere of influence. At personal level, I fail to see any "Religious" significance in such "Conflict". Current Syria conflict is one fine example of this sick mentality among Muslims leaders.
Bottom line is, Islam calls Muslims to spread peace among humanity and many Muslims falls short of this teaching because of their hunger of power, ego and arrogance. Nothing justifies violence against Ahmedia people or conflicts among shia and sunni (AKA Sunnah) population.
My two cents....
Shalom!
From: Shah Deeldar <shahdeeldar@yahoo.com>
To: mukto-mona <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Fri, Oct 19, 2012 7:53 am
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] : Shah Abdul Hannan--রামু, সাম্প্রদায়িকতা ও অসাম্প্রদায়িকতা ---Ramu, Communalism and Noncommunalism
-SD
From: Subimal Chakrabarty <subimal@yahoo.com>
To: "mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com" <mukto-mona@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 18, 2012 9:08 AM
Subject: Re: [mukto-mona] : Shah Abdul Hannan--রামু, সাম্প্রদায়িকতা ও অসাম্প্রদায়িকতা ---Ramu, Communalism and Noncommunalism
__._,_.___
****************************************************
Mukto Mona plans for a Grand Darwin Day Celebration:
Call For Articles:
http://mukto-mona.com/wordpress/?p=68
http://mukto-mona.com/banga_blog/?p=585
****************************************************
VISIT MUKTO-MONA WEB-SITE : http://www.mukto-mona.com/
****************************************************
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it".
-Beatrice Hall [pseudonym: S.G. Tallentyre], 190
Change settings via the Web (Yahoo! ID required)
Change settings via email: Switch delivery to Daily Digest | Switch to Fully Featured
Visit Your Group | Yahoo! Groups Terms of Use | Unsubscribe
__,_._,___
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Re: [mukto-mona] : Shah Abdul Hannan--রামু, সাম্প্রদায়িকতা ও অসাম্প্রদায়িকতা ---Ramu, Communalism and Noncommunalism
Because of this marginal difference, we see so much animosity and violence and so much disunity
>>>>>>>> While I strongly oppose any violence over any differences BUT the difference itself is not "Marginal". Rather in "Fundamentals" of faith. Comparing "Hindu tradition" with Islam will not help. What we know as "Hinduism" is not a religion rather tradition. So different parts of India focus on "Different gods/goddesses". For example "Durga" is the biggest festival or Bengali Hindus. Gonesh is focused by Hindus from another area. Similarly others put "Diwali" as the most prominent festivals.
-----Original Message-----
But I guess prophets and Mahdis are not synonymous. Because of this marginal difference, we see so much animosity and violence and so much disunity. I understand the mindset and politics of Mr. Anwar and Mr. Hannan. But you liberal guys should ignore it. You know the Hindus has so much diversity with respect to the channels and modes of reaching God. We have seen centuries of religious wars both in Europe and Middle East. Muslims also have shed and also are still shedding blood over religion. In India there has always been tension and clashes among various sects among the Hindus and also between Hindus and other major religious groups like Buddhists and Jains. I am not aware of any historical accounts of major bloodshed over inter-religious or religious conflicts. I am a little intrigued by this fact. Do tolerance and flexibility have any thing to do about it?
Interesting. So Ahmadiyaas do not recite or believe in "La ilaha illalahu .,,,,."! I know I messed up. But you know which sura I am talking about.
>>>>>>>>> Actually they claim to have faith in one God like all Muslims. However they feel after the final messenger of Allah (SWT), there was another one sent AFTER prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Which is kind of difficult for Muslims to understand. Since the noble Qur'an (words of God!) stated there would be NO new prophets after Muhammad (PBUH).
"O people! Mohammed has no sons among ye men, but verily, he is the Messenger of Allah and the last in the line of Prophets. And Allah is aware of everything."
## "In My Ummah (Islamic Nation), there shall be born Thirty Grand Liars (Dajjals), each of whom will claim to be a prophet, But I am the Last Prophet; there is No Prophet after Me.
"Narrated Ubaida: Ali said (to the people of 'Iraq), "Judge as you used to judge, for I hate differences (and I do my best ) till the people unite as one group, or I die as my companions have died." And narrated Sad that the Prophet said to 'Ali, 'Will you not be pleased from this that you are to me like Aaron was to Moses?'
(Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 57, Companions of the Prophet, Volume 5, Number 56)"
"Narrated Sad: Allah's Apostle set out for Tabuk. appointing 'Ali as his deputy (in Medina). 'Ali said, 'Do you want to leave me with the children and women?' The Prophet said, 'Will you not be pleased that you will be to me like Aaron to Moses? But there will be no prophet after me.'
(Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Book 59, Military Expeditions led by the Prophet (peace be upon him) (Al-Maghaazi), Volume 5, Number 700)"
-----Original Message-----
Brother, it basically boils down to who can scream louder. Even Shias might not be considered as true Muslims according to some idiots and hence, they can be legitimate target for elimination. Look, Islam has taken a totally wrong path. It wants to purify itself from something that might not be even pure? Sad to say that it has totally failed to deliver anything to its followers in its own backyards. Muslims are migrating in droves to the West that they hate so much. Isn't it paradoxical?
"All great truths begin as blasphemies." GBS
Mr. Rahman
Interesting. So Ahmadiyaas do not recite or believe in "La ilaha illalahu .,,,,."! I know I messed up. But you know which su
Your email settings: Individual Email|Traditional