palashcbiswas,
gostokanan, sodepur, kolkata-700110 phone:033-25659551
From: "communistpartyofpakistan@yahoogroups.com" <communistpartyofpakistan@yahoogroups.com>
To: communistpartyofpakistan@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, 22 July, 2009 18:06:44
Subject: [communistpartyofpakistan] Digest Number 1441
There are 6 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1a. Re: How Muslims Should Dialogue With Others
From: muradali shaikh
2. The Revolution We Need...The Leadership We Have
From: JG
3a. Kasab, others trained in Karachi for 45 days
From: S Turkman
3b. Re: Kasab, others trained in Karachi for 45 days
From: Jimmy Jumshade
4. Can Muslim Women Work Outside Their Homes?: By Maulvi Waris Mazhari
From: yogi sikand
5. Does Islam Prohibit Muslims From Befriending People of Other Faiths?
From: yogi sikand
Messages
________________________________________________________________________
1a. Re: How Muslims Should Dialogue With Others
Posted by: "muradali shaikh" muradali_shaikh2@yahoo.co.uk
Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 1:57 pm ((PDT))
If the Maulvi Sahaib has a good advice, then why not everybody follow it with whatever their religious leanings? What is food for the goose is food for the gander.
Look at the Civilized world's behaviour with Muslim ladies wearing hijab:
1) In a German court a Muslim lady giving evidence in a court against a racist German, was stabbed 18 times and killed, while the guards and judge, jury and prosecutors stood as spectators, and when the husband of the lady went to her rescue was immediately shot by the guard of the court.
2) In France Sarkozy's government has started a campaign against muslim ladies wearing hijab.
These are the examples of the tolerant democratic West against muslims.
So who need the advice of our Maulvi most?
________________________________
From: yogi sikand <ysikand@yahoo.com>
To: nigs3@yahoo.co.in
Cc: anusaba@rediffmail.com; ysikand@yahoo.com
Sent: Tuesday, 21 July, 2009 6:17:16
Subject: [communistpartyofpakistan] How Muslims Should Dialogue With Others
How Muslims Should Dialogue With Others
By Maulvi Syed Nikhat Husain Nadwi
(Translated from Urdu by Yoginder Sikand)
There is no room for coercion in Islam. Islam appeals to people's intellect, their minds, their sense of logic and reasoning in order to stress its claims. This principle can lay the basis for good relations between Muslims and people of other persuasions. Islam is not opposed to Muslims establishing social, economic or educational relations and bonds with others. This is why, from the early days of Islam onwards, Muslims have had these sorts of relations with others. The fundamental basis of such relations, as Islam understands it, is to jointly work against oppression and for establishing justice and peace. A second basis is the Islamic belief that all creatures are members of the family of God, and that, hence, they must be served. The third theological basis of inter-community relations and dialogue in Islam is the duty to respect the rights of all human beings.
Islam insists that there can be no compromise on its ideological principles, such as faith in the one God, prophethood, and the Day of Judgment. Besides this, there can be dialogue and discussion on all issues. Dialogue should also take a practical form, such as Muslims working together with others for constructive purposes, helping them or taking their help. Islam exhorts Muslims to respect others on the basis of their common humanity. It stresses social justice, peace and struggling against oppression, and for this Muslims can indeed join hands with others to work for a better world for everyone. This is a very important form of inter-religious and inter-community dialogue.
When two individuals are together, inevitably they start talking to each other. Without this, they cannot understand one another. If dialogue and interaction are so indispensable at the level of two individuals, how much more important it must be at the level of two or more cultures and religions! Obviously, unless members of different religious or cultural communities dialogue with each other there is no way they can truly understand one other. It is completely unreasonable to expect that cultural and religious communities can live in isolation with each other and not feel the need to understand each other's beliefs, practices, issues, concerns and problems. Such isolationism will spell doom for the whole of humankind. It is also a form of escapism, and, undoubtedly, a reflection of obscurantism. The future of humankind critically depends on people of different communities understanding each other and jointly struggling for a more just and peaceful
world, to work towards ending illiteracy, poverty, war, conflict and disease wherever these may be found.
The fundamental foundation of productive and sustainable dialogue is for religious and cultural groups to first understand each other properly and, on that basis, to come closer to each other. For this purpose, it is necessary to study in detail about other's cultures and religions, their languages, histories, beliefs, practices and traditions directly, from their primary sources, in an unbiased manner. This should also go along with efforts to devise means to work together with other communities to solve their problems and address their concerns. Only in this way can cultures come closer to each other.
Typically, human beings people do not understand the truth or usefulness of a matter unless they see themselves as benefiting from it. Thus, inter-cultural and inter-religious dialogue must provide tangible benefits to people, such as helping them solve their problems or mitigating or ending their conflicts. No one's wounds can be healed or their empty stomachs filled simply by preaching to them about philosophical niceties or lecturing to them about ideological issues. This cannot tear down the walls of hatred that divide people. People have to see direct benefits accruing to themselves from dialogue for them to appreciate its importance. Hence, the most productive form of inter-religious and inter-community dialogue is to understand the causes of conflicts and differences between different religio-cultural groups and then involve people from all parties to dialogue together to jointly work out solutions, which will benefit the parties or communities
involved in the dialogue. Similarly, they can work together for their common interests, including on economic, political, and social issues. This effort can start at the local level and then go all the way up to the national and international levels, too.
When seeking to initiate inter-religious or inter-cultural dialogue, it is crucial not to start with negative issues, because this is a sure way for dialogue efforts to fail. Rather, the focus should, as far as possible, be on positive issues and a constructive agenda. Likewise, it is not proper to seek to initiate a dialogue by harping on past events or grievances. Instead, the focus must be on the present, for the aim of the dialogue is essentially to improve the present conditions of, and relations between, two or more communities, not to harp on the past.
For such dialogue to succeed, partners to the dialogue must be willing to make sacrifices. They must be tolerant and broad-minded. They must take into account other people's sensitivities and emotions and always be conscious not to seek to trample on their rights. Successful dialogue requires that partners be genuinely committed to work for peace, freedom, justice and good relations.
Another principle that must always be kept in mind when thinking about or engaging in dialogue is that to consider any other culture bad or to label it so is not proper. Islam forbids Muslims from abusing the deities of polytheists. This is so because this might provoke them to react in a similar way. This Islamic teaching suggests to us that Muslims must not abuse or vilify other cultures or brand them as enemies.
The rapidly changing world of today requires that all cultures must reconsider their ways of relating to each other, and work together for peace and prosperity for all. In our own country, India , home to numerous different religious and cultural communities, dialogue for this purpose is extremely necessary today. Unfortunately, the different religious communities in India know little about each other. This has given rise to numerous misunderstandings, which, in turn, continue to fuel conflict and violence. Very few Indians belonging to one community have studied, in a dispassionate and detailed manner, the religion, customs, beliefs, traditions and world-views of other communities living in the country in order to properly and dispassionately understand them. There are extremely few Muslims who have studied Sanskrit, the language of the Hindu scriptures, so that they could directly read and understand the Gita, the Puranas, the Ramayana, the Vedas and
so on. Hardly any Muslims have studied the Pali language in order to read the Buddhist scriptures. There must be almost no Muslims who have directly met and interacted with Hindu, Buddhist and Jain religious leaders. Probably no Muslim has visited, or stayed for a while in, Hindu religious schools and other such institutions and their pilgrimage sites so as to directly understand them.
The same holds true in the case of all the other communities in India . There are hardly any Hindus who have read the Islamic texts, and have met, interacted and exchanged views with Muslim ulema. The distance between Hindus and Muslims has become so wide now that the doors of Hindu gurukuls and Muslim madrasas are closed to other communities, and both of them are characterized by a heightened sense of fear, insecurity and defensiveness.
All this so alarmingly suggests how distant the various communities of India are from each other. In fact, hatred between many of these communities has rapidly escalated in recent years, making the task of dialogue particularly difficult. Yet, dialoguing is an urgent task that must be taken up at all levels and as widely as possible. Dialogue is not the task only of our religious leaders and organizations, although they have a very crucial role to play in this. They must interact with their counterparts in other communities so as to create a climate of trust and dispel mutual suspicions and misunderstandings. This sort of dialogue is indispensable for the peace and prosperity of our common homeland. The different religio-cultural communities of our country also need to dialogue and unite to struggle against the baneful impact of many aspects of the dominant Western culture that is now playing such havoc with our cultures and mores.
Inter-community dialogue is indispensable to promote the unity and prosperity of our country and its traditional cultures. In this regard, I wish to point out that a major hurdle in this regard, and a cause for much acrimony, is the tendency of some people who, just because they are in a minority, insist that they have accepted the country's political system and Constitution only out of compulsion, and claim that the moment they are able to gather enough power they will refuse to accept the Government and the Constitution of the land. This attitude has, in fact, become a major cause for concern throughout the world. Extremists, no matter what their religious identity, who espouse this view will not hesitate to use every means to capture power in the hope of thereby bringing about the Revolution of their dreams. Naturally, others will not take lightly to this. That is why conflict, force and violence must be avoided. We need to struggle against these
authoritarian tendencies, and, through dialogue, work to ensure that all people get the same rights and opportunities to live and prosper. This is the only way out for global, as well national and local, peace, welfare and justice.
(This is an edited version of translation of extracts from Maulvi Nadwi's Urdu booklet, 'Muzakirat Ki Zarurat' ('The Need For Dialogue' (New Delhi: Institute of Objective Studies, 2005).
Yoginder Sikand works with the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Social Policy at the National Law School, Bangalore
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. The Revolution We Need...The Leadership We Have
Posted by: "JG" the_projekt@yahoo.com the_projekt
Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 1:58 pm ((PDT))
(from Revolution #170, http://www.revcom.us/a/170/Revolution_we_need-en.html)
The Revolution We Need...The Leadership We Have
A Message, And A Call, From The Revolutionary Communist Party, USA
This Is NOT The Best of All Possible Worlds…And We Do NOT Have to Live This Way
"The land of the free, and the home of the brave." "The leader of the free world." That's what they always say about this country. But this is a Big Lie.
The truth is that we live under a system that, from the start in this country, built up its wealth and power by enslaving millions of Black people, stealing land from Indians and Mexicans through war and genocide, and working many people, including children, literally to death. It is by such murderous means that this system has expanded "from sea to shining sea" across this continent—and around the whole world.
It is a system of capitalism-imperialism…a system in which U.S. imperialism is the most monstrous, most oppressive superpower…a system driven by a relentless chase after profit, which brings horror upon horror, a nightmare seemingly without end, for the vast majority of humanity: poverty and squalor…torture and rape…the wholesale domination and degradation of women everywhere…wars, invasions and occupations…assassinations and massacres…planes, missiles, tanks and troops of the USA bombarding people in faraway lands while they sleep in their homes or go about their daily lives, blasting their little children to pieces, cutting down men and women in the prime of life, or in old age, kicking down their doors and dragging them away in the middle of the night…while here in the USA itself the police harass, brutalize and murder youth in the streets of the inner cities—over and over again—and then they spit out their maddening insults,
insisting that this is "justified," as if these youth are not human beings, have no right to live, deserve no respect and no future.
Throughout the world, as a result of this system, a billion people or more go hungry every day…with many facing the threat of starvation. Hundreds of millions of children are forced to work like slaves and to live in putrid slums, in the midst of garbage and human waste. Waves of immigrants, unable to live in their own homelands, travel the earth in search of work—and if they find it, they are worked until they can hardly stand and are forced into the shadows, with the constant fear that they will be deported and their families broken apart. Growing numbers of people cannot find work at all now, with many losing their homes as well as their jobs, while others are worked even more mercilessly. Everyone is lured and driven to consume more and more, at the cost of ever-mounting debt and the loss of any sense of larger purpose or meaning to life or any deeper connection with other human beings. Many are being pushed to the edge…growing numbers are
going over the edge, often lashing out in crazed desperation.
Young women in the millions are traded like cattle and forced into sexual slavery, shipped across countries and continents, while women everywhere are degraded, demeaned, and brutalized in a thousand ways—beaten and raped in huge numbers, treated as objects of sexual gratification and breeders of children instead of full human beings. The idea of an intimate loving relationship with another human being is made into a sick joke, perverted into a property or commodity relation, weighed down by repressive patriarchal tradition and denied or restricted for people of the same sex.
The environment and human destiny itself is being taken to the brink of disaster.
All this because of the dictates of this system—because of its stranglehold on humanity. All this while technology and wealth exist on a scale and in forms never before imagined—technology and wealth produced by millions, billions, throughout the world who are nameless and faceless to the powers that be—technology and wealth that could and should be a resource belonging to humanity as a whole and used to meet the needs of people everywhere for a decent and ever-enriched material, intellectual and cultural life.
Look at what this system is doing to youth right here in the USA. For millions in the inner cities, if they are not killed at an early age, their likely future is prison (nearly 1 in 8 young Black men is incarcerated, the prisons are overflowing with Blacks and Latinos, and this country has the highest rate of incarceration of women in the world). This system has robbed so many youth of the chance for a decent life and has got far too many living, dying and killing for nothing—nothing good—nothing more than messing up people and murdering each other on the streets of the cities here…or joining the military, being trained to be murderers on a mass scale, massacring people in countries across the globe. A system which offers millions and millions of youth no greater purpose, no better fate, than crime and punishment, or to become a mindless killing machine for the system itself—that alone is reason enough to sweep this system from the face of the
earth!
And, despite the good intentions of many teachers, the educational system is a bitter insult for many youth and a means of regimentation and indoctrination overall. While, particularly in some "elite" schools, there is some encouragement for students to think in "non-conformist" ways—so long as, in the end, this still conforms to the fundamental needs and interests of the system—on the whole, instead of really enabling people to learn about the world and to pursue the truth wherever it leads, with a spirit of critical thinking and scientific curiosity, education is crafted and twisted to serve the commandments of capital, to justify and perpetuate the oppressive relations in society and the world as a whole, and to reinforce the dominating position of the already powerful. And despite the creative impulses and efforts of many, the dominant culture too is corrupted and molded to lower, not raise, people's sights, to extol and promote the ways of
thinking, and of acting, that keep this system going and keep people believing that nothing better is possible.
Look at the lies they constantly tell us—with all their honeyed words about "democracy" for the people and "human rights," while they are ruthlessly dictating over people, with force and violence, all over the world, and right here at home. Oh, and now they come on with Obama…to make us think they will be bringing some kind of change for the better. But Obama represents this system, and all this system can bring is more of the same: more torture and torment, more oppression and brutality, more war and destruction.
Some say this is all "god's will" and we just have to "put it all in god's hands." But it was not some god that got us in this situation…and it won't be some god that will get us out of it. The truth is, there are no gods…and we don't need them!
THE REVOLUTION WE NEED
It is this system that has got us in the situation we're in today, and keeps us there. And it is through revolution to get rid of this system that we ourselves can bring a much better system into being. The ultimate goal of this revolution is communism: A world where people work and struggle together for the common good…Where everyone contributes whatever they can to society and gets back what they need to live a life worthy of human beings…Where there are no more divisions among people in which some rule over and oppress others, robbing them not only of the means to a decent life but also of knowledge and a means for really understanding, and acting to change, the world.
This revolution is both necessary and possible.
This capitalist-imperialist system is in crisis…This system is bankrupt…This system is rotten to the core…This system is based on ruthless exploitation…This system commits so many monstrous crimes, and causes so much unnecessary suffering. We do not need to be sacrificing even more to "rescue" this system. This system needs to be swept aside…its crimes against humanity stopped cold…its institutions dismantled, and replaced by ones that empower people to build a new society free of exploitation and oppression.
The biggest lie of all is that there is no other way than this system—or that attempts to really make a different way, through revolution and advancing toward communism, have brought about something even worse. The wretched of the earth have made revolution and started on the road to communism—first in Russia and then in China—and they achieved great things in doing so, before they were turned back by the forces of the old order. We are here to tell you that not only has this been done before, but we can do it again—and even better this time. This is the truth that is covered up and lied about, but we have the facts and the analysis to back this up—tremendous historical experience has been summed up, scientifically, and is there for us to learn from and build on.
It is up to us: to wake up…to shake off the ways they put on us, the ways they have us thinking so they can keep us down and trapped in the same old rat-race…to rise up, as conscious Emancipators of Humanity. The days when this system can just keep on doing what it does to people, here and all over the world…when people are not inspired and organized to stand up against these outrages and to build up the strength to put an end to this madness…those days must be GONE. And they CAN be.
"But people are too messed up. It's just human nature for things to be this way, and it can't be changed."
Yes, it can. It has happened before—when people have risen up to make revolution. It can and must be done again—and it can and must go even further. We, in our millions and millions, can change ourselves and fit ourselves to rule and remake society in the interests of humanity—but we can do this only as we fight to change the larger conditions, to throw off oppression, as we join with others, throughout the world, to change the whole world. This is what our Party means when we say: Fight the Power, and Transform the People, for Revolution.
"But we are not in a position to make revolution in this country…they are too powerful, and they will never let us get that far." No one is more aware than our Party of the difficulties, the risks and the dangers, in making revolution. We are out here working for this every day. We know the price that has to be paid…and we know it is worth it, and that giving our lives to this is more rewarding than anything else. We know that they want to stop this revolution—crush it and bury it before it can really get going again…but we also know that a fight can be waged, and that we can have a chance to win the fight, to make this revolution real.. And, yes, it is true—now is not yet the time, in this country, to go all-out to seize the power away from those who rule over us and to bring a new power, serving our interests, into being. But now IS the time to be WORKING FOR REVOLUTION—to be stepping up resistance while building a movement for
revolution—to prepare for the time when it WILL be possible to go all out to seize the power.
Revolution can be made when there is a revolutionary situation, an even greater crisis in society as a whole: when people in greater numbers come to deeply feel and understand that the present power has no legitimacy…that it serves only a handful of oppressors…that it uses lies and deception, corruption and completely unjust force and violence to keep this system going and "keep the people in their place"…when millions see the need to fight to break this power and establish a new power that can bring about the changes that people desperately need and want. For a revolution, there must be a revolutionary people, among all sections of society but with its deepest base among those who catch hell every day under this system…people who are determined to fight for power in order to radically change society, to get rid of oppression and exploitation. But the point is this: we cannot, and we must not, sit around and wait for "one fine day" when this
revolutionary situation comes about and a revolutionary people comes on the scene. No, we must—and we can—work to bring a revolutionary people into being…to enable people to see why they should put no faith in this system, and should not live and die in a way that keeps this system going…but instead should devote their lives to resisting oppression and building up for the time when we can get rid of the cause of all this oppression. Using our Party's newspaper, Revolution, as the foundation, guideline, and organizational scaffolding for this whole process, this is what our Party means when we say we are hastening while awaiting the revolutionary situation, preparing minds and organizing forces…for revolution.
All this is not possible without leadership. But the thing is…There is leadership.
THE LEADERSHIP WE HAVE
In Bob Avakian, the Chairman of our Party, we have the kind of rare and precious leader who does not come along very often. A leader who has given his heart, and all his knowledge, skills and abilities to serving the cause of revolution and the emancipation of humanity. Bob Avakian came alive as a revolutionary in the 1960s—taking part in the great movements of those days, and especially working and struggling closely with the most advanced revolutionary force in the U.S. at that time, the Black Panther Party. Since then, and while many others have given up, Bob Avakian has worked and struggled tirelessly to find the way to go forward, having learned crucial lessons and built lasting organization that could continue the struggle, and aim to take it higher, while uniting with the same struggle throughout the world. He has kept on developing the theory and strategy for making revolution. He played the key role in founding our Party in 1975, and since
then he has continued the battle to keep the Party on the revolutionary road, to carry out work with a strong revolutionary orientation. He has deeply studied the experience of revolution—the shortcomings as well as the great achievements—and many different fields of human endeavor, through history and throughout the world—and he has brought the science and method of revolution to a whole new level, so that we can not only fight but really fight to win. Bob Avakian has developed the scientific theory and strategic orientation for how to actually make the kind of revolution we need, and he is leading our Party as an advanced force of this revolution. He is a great champion and a great resource for people here, and indeed people all over the world. The possibility for revolution, right here, and for the advance of the revolution everywhere, is greatly heightened because of Bob Avakian and the leadership he is providing. And it is up to us to get
with this leadership…to find out more about Bob Avakian and the Party he heads…to learn from his scientific method and approach to changing the world…to build this revolutionary movement with our Party at the core…to defend this leadership as the precious thing it is…and, at the same time, to bring our own experience and understanding to help strengthen the process of revolution and enable the leadership we have to keep on learning more and leading even better.
If you have not heard about this—if you don't know about the revolution we need and the leadership we have—that is because those who now hold power do not want you to know…they keep this from you, or lie about it when they can't keep word of it from getting out. And it is because our Party itself has not, until now, been consistent enough and bold enough in getting the word out, and acting on it.
BUT WE ARE CHANGING ALL THAT—STARTING NOW.
We must spread the word to every corner of this country…giving people the means to become part of this revolutionary movement, and organizing into this movement everyone who wants to make a contribution to it, who wants to work and fight, to struggle and sacrifice, not to keep this nightmare of a world going as it is but to bring a better world into being.
We mean what we say, and we will not back off or turn our backs on what we have started, on the people who need this revolution. We will keep coming back and digging in, to strengthen this movement for revolution, to build up the bases, spread the influence and organize the forces we need to make revolution. We will not be scared off, backed down or driven away.
A WHOLE DIFFERENT WORLD, A MUCH BETTER FUTURE, IS POSSIBLE. WE HAVE WHAT WE NEED TO FIGHT FOR THAT WORLD, THAT FUTURE.
IT IS UP TO US TO GET WITH IT AND GET TO THE CHALLENGE OF MAKING THIS HAPPEN.
As our Party's Constitution says: "The emancipation of all humanity: this, and nothing less than this, is our goal. There is no greater cause, no greater purpose to which to dedicate our lives."
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3a. Kasab, others trained in Karachi for 45 days
Posted by: "S Turkman" turkman@sbcglobal.net torkmaan
Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 4:12 pm ((PDT))
Kasab, others trained in Karachi for 45 days
ediff.com Tue, 21 Jul 2009 04:55 AM PDT
Mohammad Ajmal Kasab [ Images ], the captured terrorist in the 26/11 attacks, confessed that he and nine other terrorists were confined to a house in Karachi for 45 days where Lashkar-e-Tayiba [ Images ] operative Abu Hamza taught them how to navigate a boat.
Kasab said the house in which they were confined was the same building shown on the Pakistani news television channel Geo TV after the attacks.
.
"Geo TV ne jo dikhaya tha na Aatank ka Ghar keh kar... hum ko wahi par rakha tha dedh mahine ke liye. (The house shown by Geo TV as the 'House of Terror' was the same one where we were kept for one-and-a-half months)," Kasab told Special Judge M L Tahilyani.
When the judge asked Kasab how he knew that the house was shown on Geo TV, the terrorist replied, "Mujhe pata hai sir. (I know)."
.
Kasab said Hamza and another Lashkar operative Abu Kaahfa gave the terrorists lessons in navigating a boat and how to survive on a boat for a week. "The house was near a creek and we were also given ammunition, pistols and guns in a bag," he said.
.
After 45 days, Kasab and the others were taken to the creek where they boarded a boat called Al-Hussaini. Kasab said Lashkar operatives Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhwi, Abu Kaahfa and Abu Hamza were present to see them off at Karachi.
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
3b. Re: Kasab, others trained in Karachi for 45 days
Posted by: "Jimmy Jumshade" jimmybug@rocketmail.com
Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 4:57 pm ((PDT))
Yes & indeed trained, very nicely by MQM TERRORIST ORG..................................................Cancer of Karachi...........
--- On Tue, 7/21/09, S Turkman <turkman@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
From: S Turkman <turkman@sbcglobal.net>
Subject: [geokarachi] Kasab, others trained in Karachi for 45 days
To: "W M" <wideminds@yahoogroups.com>
Cc: pakistan-zindabad@yahoogroups.com, communistpartyofpakistan@yahoogroups.com, karachi_citizen@yahoogroups.com, friendzspot@yahoogroups.com, "G o" <geokarachi@yahoogroups.com>, Karachi-Waly@yahoogroups.com, KarachiCity@yahoogroups.com, Karachi-Airport@yahoogroups.com, rawalpindi2@yahoogroups.com
Date: Tuesday, July 21, 2009, 4:11 PM
Kasab, others trained in Karachi for 45 days
ediff.com Tue, 21 Jul 2009 04:55 AM PDT
Mohammad Ajmal Kasab [ Images ], the captured terrorist in the 26/11 attacks, confessed that he and nine other terrorists were confined to a house in Karachi for 45 days where Lashkar-e-Tayiba [ Images ] operative Abu Hamza taught them how to navigate a boat.
Kasab said the house in which they were confined was the same building shown on the Pakistani news television channel Geo TV after the attacks.
.
"Geo TV ne jo dikhaya tha na Aatank ka Ghar keh kar... hum ko wahi par rakha tha dedh mahine ke liye. (The house shown by Geo TV as the 'House of Terror' was the same one where we were kept for one-and-a-half months)," Kasab told Special Judge M L Tahilyani.
When the judge asked Kasab how he knew that the house was shown on Geo TV, the terrorist replied, "Mujhe pata hai sir. (I know)."
.
Kasab said Hamza and another Lashkar operative Abu Kaahfa gave the terrorists lessons in navigating a boat and how to survive on a boat for a week. "The house was near a creek and we were also given ammunition, pistols and guns in a bag," he said.
.
After 45 days, Kasab and the others were taken to the creek where they boarded a boat called Al-Hussaini. Kasab said Lashkar operatives Zaki-ur-Rehman Lakhwi, Abu Kaahfa and Abu Hamza were present to see them off at Karachi.
Messages in this topic (2)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. Can Muslim Women Work Outside Their Homes?: By Maulvi Waris Mazhari
Posted by: "yogi sikand" ysikand@yahoo.com ysikand
Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 7:18 pm ((PDT))
Can Muslim Women Work Outside Their Homes?
By Maulvi Waris Mazhari
(Translated from Urdu by Yoginder Sikand)
Some traditional ulema are of the view that Muslim women must not work outside their homes. They even argue that women can step out of their homes only under extreme necessity. Otherwise, they insist, they must remain within the four walls of their homes. Ironically, there are no Quranic commandments that sanction these prohibitions. Consequently, sharp differences among Islamic scholars continue to remain concerning these matters. In this regard, my personal opinion is reflected in a hadith report, according to which the Prophet is said to have declared that one should ask one's heart, no matter what fatwa a mufti might give on a particular matter. In other words, in such cases one must follow one's conscience.
I see no harm in women taking up employment out of their homes, provided, of course, their respect and honour are protected and their work does not cause their children and husband to suffer or be neglected. In some situations, in fact, it may even be a dire necessity, rather than a matter of choice, for women to seek employment out of their homes. Such, for instance, may be the case for divorced or widowed women with no source of sustenance or for a woman whose husband does not earn enough to properly maintain the family. If a woman seeks to work out of the home with the intention of using her earnings to help the poor or for spending her income on pious causes, I feel she can do so, keeping in mind, of course, the provisos mentioned above.
Unfortunately, there is no unanimity or consensus among the ulema on the issue of women working outside their homes. There is, as I suggested above, no evidence that they can cite from the Quran and the corpus of Hadith to back the contention that such employment is absolutely haram or forbidden. From earliest times onwards, many Muslim women, particularly from poor families, have been working outside their homes, mostly because this was an economic compulsion. The opinion of some ulema banning this has never been enforced anywhere in the Muslim world. That is why today, in many Muslim countries, even in those that style themselves as 'Islamic' states, such as Iran and Saudi Arabia, women can be found working in different spheres of the economy, in both the public as well as private sectors.
There is even early Islamic precedent for Muslim women working outside their homes. For instance, the Caliph Umar appointed a woman, Shifa Bint Abdullah, as the administrator of the market in Madinah. Obviously, for her work she had to regularly visit the market, inspect how people were conducting their businesses and interact and talk with the businessmen, most of who must have been men. Today, in contrast, many ulema might balk at a woman taking up such a job. They might argue that a market is a centre of materialism, the very opposite of spiritualism, and that a woman working out of her house, and, that too in a market, would cause strife, and that she might even lose her morals. Yet, the Caliph Umar appointed Shifa Bint Abdullah to this post although he could well have chosen a man for this purpose had he wanted to.
As I said earlier, I see no harm in a Muslim woman working outside her home, even if she has to interact with men in her workplace, provided, of course, the environment is decent and she can preserve her modesty. Even in the Prophet's time, interaction between the genders was never forbidden, contrary to what some people might think. In the early years of Muslim history, Muslim women would go out to purchase and sell things and even participated in battles.
Some people might claim that the Quran explicitly prohibits Muslim women from going out of their homes. To support this claim, they often refer to the following verses in the Surah Al-Ahzab of the Quran:
O ye wives of the Prophet! Ye are not like any other women. If ye keep your duty (to Allah), then be not soft of speech, lest he in whose heart is a disease aspire (to you), but utter customary speech. And stay in your houses. ( Quran 33: 32-33)
What they ignore or forget is that the above-quoted commandment ordering the wives of the Prophet to stay in their houses was applicable precisely to them, and not to all Muslim women. According to some scholars of the Quran, Umar Faruq advised the Prophet to ask his wives to adopt seclusion within their homes because all sorts of people, good as well as bad, used to come to the Prophet's house to meet him. It was on this occasion, they say, that these verses were revealed.
Many traditional Indian ulema, however, continue to insist that Muslim women must not seek outside employment or even go out of their homes. Still, I would say, there has been at least some attitudinal change in some ulema circles in this regard. To cite an instance, some years ago a Mufti of the Dar ul-Ulum at Deoband issued a fatwa forbidding Muslim women from contesting elections. Shortly after, however, he rescinded this fatwa and issued a fresh one, declaring it permissible for Muslim women to participate in elections. I do not know why, and on what basis, he changed his opinion, but this case illustrates the fact that, slowly, the views of some traditional Indian ulema on issues related to women are beginning to change. At the same time, it is true that probably the majority of the Indian ulema still remain wedded to their traditional opinions about women's employment. These are men who have been reared on traditional or medieval fiqh texts, and
whose lives are restricted to teaching within the walls of their madrasas.
Today, however, we have an increasing number of younger ulema who are more socially engaged, have knowledge of contemporary issues and an awareness of the demands of modern world. They know the concerns and problems of the new generation—and this includes the issue of women's employment—and desire to provide appropriate leadership to it. I am optimistic that these ulema will come to play an important and more socially relevant role, including as far as women's issues are concerned, in the coming decades.
Messages in this topic (1)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. Does Islam Prohibit Muslims From Befriending People of Other Faiths?
Posted by: "yogi sikand" ysikand@yahoo.com ysikand
Date: Tue Jul 21, 2009 10:45 pm ((PDT))
Does Islam Prohibit Muslims From Befriending People of Other Faiths?
By Maulvi Yahya Nomani
(Translated from Urdu by Yoginder Sikand)
The question is often raised that while Muslims constantly claim that Islam teaches them to live at peace with people of other faiths and to relate with them with kindness, love and concern, the reality is just the opposite, because, it is alleged, the Quran forbids Muslims from having social or other such relations with non-Muslims and has prohibited friendship with them.
This wrong allegation is based on two basic misunderstandings. Firstly, a wrong conception of the terms 'wali' and 'wala', which are used in the Quran. Secondly, misunderstanding about precisely which group of unbelievers this prohibition applies to. In this regard, the fact is often ignored that at several places the Quran qualifies its statements so as to indicate that this prohibition does not apply to all non-Muslims in general, but, rather, to only a particular type among them. In fact, at one place the Quran also explicitly mentions that this prohibition applies just to a particular group among the non-Muslims, and that friendship with other non-Muslims is not forbidden. As the Quran very clearly puts it:
God does not forbid you regarding those who have not fought you on account of the Religion, and have not expelled you from your homes, that you should be virtuous to them and be equitable with them; surely God loves the equitable. God forbids you only regarding those who have fought you on account of Religion, and have expelled you from your homes, and have given support in your expulsion, that you should take them for friends; and whoso takes them for friends, those are the wrong-doers.( Quran 60: 8-9)
The First Misunderstanding
The first misunderstanding arises from a misreading of certain verses of the Quran that forbid Muslims from taking disbelievers as their walis. The Arabic word wali has been wrongly taken to be the synonymous of 'friend'. In actual fact, there is no strict equivalent of the Arabic word al-wali or its derivatives in Urdu and English and many other languages. That is why it is often translated as dost in Urdu and 'friend' in English. It is this that causes people to wrongly believe that Islam forbids Muslims from taking non-Muslims as their friends.
The word wali actually refers to a person whom one has a very intimate friendship with. This also connotes helping, assisting and being in solidarity with such a person. Imam Ibn Jarir Tabari, an expert in the Arabic language and a noted Quranic commentator, explains a verse in the Quran which ordains 'Let not the believers take for friends or helpers Unbelievers rather than believers' (Quran 3: 28) as follows:
'In this verse, God has forbidden the true believers from taking the disbelievers as their helpers […] That is to say, they are forbidden from considering them as their supporters, assisting them in their [non-Muslims'] religion, supporting them against the Muslims and the true believers and sharing the secrets of the Muslims with them.' Commenting on the use of a derivative of the term wali the Quran, he adds, 'In the Arabic language, the general meaning of the word wali is helper and supporter.'
From this discussion, it is evident that these verses forbid Muslims from establishing secret ties with the disbelievers or assisting them secretly. These verses have nothing to do with forbidding friendship and good relations with non-Muslims in general. This is made even more clear when the Quran explains that the wala or close bonding that it forbids is that which denotes 'help against the true believers' (for instance, Surah Al-e Imran: 28; Surah Nisa: 139 and 144). This restriction or specification regarding the phrase 'against the true believers' itself indicates that the bonding that the Quran forbids is of that sort that entails helping disbelievers against the Muslims.
The precise context of these verses, which is clearly evident in the verses themselves, must be properly understood. Without this, their actual import is likely to be misunderstood. The disbelievers that they refer to, whom it forbids Muslims from closely bonding with and helping, were those who were determined to wipe out Islam and were involved in a massive campaign for this purpose. They had even unleashed war against the Muslims. These included the polytheists of Mecca , who had declared open war against the Muslims, as well as the Jews of Medina. Besides provoking war against the Muslims, they were also trying to spread internal dissension, conflict and inter-tribal disputes among them and vilified Islam and the Prophet. At that time, Muslims had blood relatives or friends among both the polytheists of Mecca and the Jews of Medina. They had social relations and dealings with them. A number of hypocrites (munafiqin) among the Muslims also sympathized
with the Meccan polytheists and the Medinan Jews, and they were proving to be skilled agents of the opponents of Islam in their conspiracies. The Quran unveiled the dangerous activities of this group of people. These subversive activities had reached such a dangerous point that in the ninth year of the Hijra the hypocrites set up their own centre, calling it a mosque, at Quba, whose aim was to undermine and destroy the polity at Medina headed by the Prophet, instigate dissensions among the Muslims, invite an army from outside to invade the town, and fan internal revolt (Quran 9: 107).
Besides these inveterate hypocrites, there was also a group of people among the Muslims with weak faith, who used to oscillate between the Muslims and their opponents, depending on which way the wind was blowing. The hypocrites were, by and large, under the influence of the Medinan Jews, and were working to fulfill their agenda (see Surah al-Maida: 52). The Quran instructed the Prophet to warn these hypocrites to be ready to be punished in Hell for having established secret relations with the enemies of Islam. It is in this context that the Quran berates these hypocrites for choosing those disbelievers as their walis and leaving aside the true believers, in the mistaken expectation that, in this way, they could acquire respect and power. They sat along with the leaders of the disbelieving foes of Islam in their meetings, where the latter would mock Islam and the Prophet. The Quran says that these hypocrites used to remain in waiting, being neither fully
with the Muslims nor fully with their enemies, so that if the Muslims were victorious, they could come to them, saying that they were with them, and that if the disbelievers triumphed, they could go to them, saying that they had assisted them in defeating the Muslims.
This behaviour of the hypocrites is what the Quran refers to when it forbids the believers from taking disbelievers as their walis. As mentioned above, this group of hypocrites was heavily under the social and political influence of the Jews, and was hand-in-glove with them in their scurrilous propaganda against Islam and the Prophet. The Quran refers to this situation (particularly in Surah Ahazab and the Surah Noor). The leaders of the Jews mocked and reviled Islam, and in their meetings some Muslims would also be present. The pagan Arabs were also involved in this. These Jews and pagan Arabs tried to incite ordinary Muslims to disobey the Prophet and revolt against him. It was in this context that the Quran says that those in whose hearts there is a disease, that is to say who are hypocrites, rush towards the disbelievers to join hands with them for fear that otherwise they might fall into trouble.
This is the sort of wala or solidarity (a termed related to the word wali) with the enemies of Islam who are bent on uprooting the faith that the Quran forbids. Obviously, a relationship of wala with such people would be a direct contradiction of one's Islamic faith, as well as a grave threat to Islam and the Muslims at the political and social levels, too.
The Second Misunderstanding
Another cause of considerable misunderstanding about Islam's teachings with regard to the possibility of friendship between Muslims and others is that the above-mentioned prohibition of wala, or taking disbelievers as walis, has been erroneously interpreted as applying to all non-Muslims in general. It must be stressed here that, as the discussion of various Quranic verses above has shown, this order applies only to those non-Muslims who are enemies of Islam and who are involved in activities aimed at undermining and destroying it. This point is strikingly brought out in the following verses of the Quran:
O ye who believe! Take not into your intimacy those outside your ranks: They will not fail to corrupt you. They only desire your ruin: Rank hatred has already appeared from their mouths: What their hearts conceal is far worse. We have made plain to you the Signs, if ye have wisdom. Ah! ye are those who love them, but they love you not,- though ye believe in the whole of the Book. When they meet you, they say, "We believe": But when they are alone, they bite off the very tips of their fingers at you in their rage. Say: "Perish in you rage; Allah knoweth well all the secrets of the heart." If aught that is good befalls you, it grieves them; but if some misfortune overtakes you, they rejoice at it. But if ye are constant and do right, not the least harm will their cunning do to you; for Allah Compasseth round about all that they do (Quran 118-120).
These verses specify that the foes that they refer to are those whose hearts burn with enmity and who are engaged in plots to destroy the Muslims. It does not refer to ordinary, well-meaning, kind and sincere people of other faiths. The true import of these commandments can be properly understood from the fact that in a very highly secretive and sensitive matter, the migration of the Prophet from Mecca to Medina , the Prophet not only shared his plans with a non-Muslim, Abdullah ibn Arqad, but also fully trusted him. This fact clearly suggests that these verses forbid taking as confidants and intimates only those non-Muslims who are enemies of Islam and its followers. It is, thus, obvious, and needs no explanation, that a non-Muslim of good character is much better to have as a friend and confidant than a person who is Muslim in name alone and is a hypocrite and an opportunist.
The sort of non-Muslims that the Quran forbids Muslims from taking as their intimate associates is also clearly indicated in the following verse:
O ye who believe! Take not My enemies and yours as friends [or protectors] (wali)― offering them (your) love, even though they have rejected the Truth that has come to you, and have (on the contrary) driven out the Messenger and yourselves (from your homes), (simply) because ye believe in Allah your Lord! If ye have come out to strive in My Way and to seek My Good Pleasure (take them not as friends), holding secret converse of love (and friendship) with them: for I know full well all that ye conceal and all that ye reveal. And any of you that does this has strayed from the Straight Path. If they were to get the better of you, they would behave to you as enemies, and stretch forth their hands and their tongues against you for evil; and they desire that ye should reject
the Truth (60:1-2).
This verse strongly and explicitly forbids Muslims from taking disbelievers as their walis, but here, too, it does not refer to all non-Muslims in general. Rather, it refers only to those who 'have rejected the Truth […] and have driven out the Messenger and yourselves (from your homes), (simply) because ye believe in Allah your Lord'.
Precisely which non-Muslims this Quranic prohibition applies to is an issue that needs to be carefully understood. Conversely, we must also properly understand which non-Muslims this prohibition does not apply to. The Quran very clearly indicates that this prohibition does not apply to the general non-Muslims who relate with peace and goodwill with Muslims. Instead, it restricts this prohibition only to those non-Muslims who are enemies of Islam and the Muslims. Thus, the Quran relates:
Allah forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing kindly and justly with them: for Allah loveth those who are just. (8) Allah only forbids you, with regard to those who fight you for (your) Faith, and drive you out of your homes, and support (others) in driving you out, from turning to them (for friendship and protection). It is such as turn to them (in these circumstances) that do wrong (60:8-9).
These verses very explicitly show precisely what sort of non-Muslims the Muslims have been prohibited by the Quran to take as their walis, and, on the other hand, which non-Muslims this prohibition does not apply to. From this discussion, it is clear that Muslims can, indeed non-Muslims who do not bear any enmity against Islam and its adherents and are not engaged in any activities against them as their friends.
Critique of An Extremist Position
The above discussion clearly shows that the arguments of some people who claim that Muslims must never befriend non-Muslims and that such friendship is banned in Islam are completely wrong and absurd. These people have not understood the relevant Quranic verses in their totality. Thus, for instance, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab [the founder of the Wahhabi movement—YS] even went to the extent of claiming, 'A Muslim's faith in Islam cannot be proper, even if he believes in one God and has abandoned polytheism, till he harbours enmity for the polytheists.'
In a similar vein, a contemporary Saudi Islamic scholar, Dr. Sahal bin Rafa' al-'Aytabi, who teaches Islamic theology at the Ibn Saud University, Riyadh, claims that 'Islam has forbidden love for non-Muslims, but, still, instructs them to deal with them with decency.' He argues this on the basis of his own reading of the following two Quranic verses:
'Thou wilt not find any people who believe in Allah and the Last Day, loving those who resist Allah and His Messenger, even though they were their fathers or their sons, or their brothers, or their kindred. For such He has written Faith in their hearts, and strengthened them with a spirit from Himself. And He will admit them to Gardens beneath which Rivers flow, to dwell therein (for ever). Allah will be well pleased with them, and they with Him. They are the Party of Allah. Truly it is the Party of Allah that will achieve Felicity' (58-22)
and
'O ye who believe! Take not My enemies and yours as friends (or protectors)― offering them (your) love, even though they have rejected the Truth that has come to you, and have (on the contrary) driven out the Messenger and yourselves (from your homes), (simply) because ye believe in Allah your Lord! If ye have come out to strive in My Way and to seek My Good Pleasure (take them not as friends), holding secret converse of love (and friendship) with them: for I know full well all that ye conceal and all that ye reveal. And any of you that does this has strayed from the Straight Path' (60:1).
It is obvious, however, that Dr. al-'Aytabi's argument and reasoning is faulty. Neither of the above-mentioned two verses deals with non-Muslims in general. The first verse refers only to those non-Muslims who have waged war against God and His Prophet and are enemies of the religion of Islam. The second verse also refers to the same sort of people. Besides, the general context of these two verses also clarifies that it is only this sort of non-Muslims, and not all non-Muslims in general, that the verses refer to. This point is made clearer when we recall that the Quran makes the Prophet declare:
'Say: "No reward do I ask of you for this except the love of those near of kin." And if anyone earns any good, We shall give him an increase of good in respect thereof: for Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Ready to appreciate (service) (Quran: 42: 23).
On the basis of this verse, can anyone at all argue that it meant that the Prophet was demanding a one-sided love from these people, and that, in return for this, he hated them instead of loving them for being his near relatives? Of course not! Can any one claim that the Prophet hated his uncle, Abu Talib, who had protected him [Unlike Shias, Sunnis believe that Abu Talib, father of Imam Ali, did not accept Islam although till his death he provided protection to the Prophet from his Meccan opponents—YS]? Not at all! No one can make such a preposterous claim. Undoubtedly, the Prophet loved his uncle Abu Talib very dearly.
It is true that Islam is sternly opposed to polytheism and infidelity. But, this certainly does not mean that Islam commands Muslims to hate all non-Muslims. It certainly does not order Muslims not to love, on the basis of their common humanity or common nationality, those non-Muslims who are peaceful and well-meaning. From the above-quoted verses, it is evident that the Quran orders Muslims to deal justly and kindly with the non-Muslims who wish to live at peace with them and who do not oppress them. The Quran instructs Muslims to entertain good and noble feelings for such people, to be concerned, and to work for, their welfare, to be compassionate towards them and to help them in times of need. For, as the Quran says,
God does not forbid you regarding those who have not fought you on account of the Religion, and have not expelled you from your homes, that you should be virtuous to them and be equitable with them; surely God loves the equitable. God forbids you only regarding those who have fought you on account of Religion, and have expelled you from your homes, and have given support in your expulsion, that you should take them for friends; and whoso takes them for friends, those are the wrong-doers (Quran: 60: 8-9).
The words of Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab that I earlier quoted, which drip with extremism, are echoed by another Saudi scholar, the late Mufti of Saudi Arabia, Abdul Aziz bin Baz, in a letter that was a response to an article by the former rector of Al-Azhar, Shaikh Jad ul-Haq, where the latter had sought to justify good relations between Muslims and others and inter-religious dialogue and cooperation. Shaikh Jad ul-Haq had written, 'Muslims consider the followers of Judaism and Christianity as believers in God and Divinely-revealed religions. There is no difference among them as regards the basic principles of their Divine message.'
The Shaikh's argument can be critiqued, because it denies the basic difference between Islam and other religions, which is not permissible. Furthermore, today's Christianity and Judaism have departed from their true, original forms, and so cannot be said to be the same, in their basic principles, as Islam. Bin Baz pointed this fact out, but he went to another extreme by wrongly claiming, 'Undoubtedly, God has made it incumbent upon the believers to hate, and to be enemies with, the disbelievers and has forbidden them from loving them.'
It is obvious that this argument is absurd and erroneous. It represents a gross misinterpretation or misunderstanding of Islamic teachings. There is no basis for such a claim in the Quran. Rather, there are enough references in the Quran to challenge and rebut this argument. It is necessary to urgently critique and to do away with these wrong interpretations, which pose a major barrier in promoting better relations between Muslims and other peoples.
Messages in this topic (1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/communistpartyofpakistan/
<*> Your email settings:
Digest Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/communistpartyofpakistan/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:communistpartyofpakistan-normal@yahoogroups.com
mailto:communistpartyofpakistan-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
communistpartyofpakistan-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment