Tag Archives: islam

What is Jihad: Abhula La Maududi

Muslims now a days find out various meaning of Jihad. Some says is a spiritual struggle within oneself against sin. Some describes as Jihad is not a violent concept. Jihad is not a declaration of war against other religions etc etc.

Let’s have a view of Abhuda Ala Maududi on this point . He (25 September 1903 – 22 September 1979), was an Indian-Pakistani scholarphilosopherjuristjournalistislamist and imam.

He strove not only to revive Islam as a renewer of the religion, but to propagate “true Islam”.

He believed that politics was essential for Islam and that it was necessary to institute sharia and preserve Islamic culture from what he saw as the evils of secularismnationalism, and women’s emancipation.

He was the founder of the Jamaat-e-Islami, the largest Islamic organisation in Asia. He and his party are thought to have been the pioneer in politicizing islam and generating support for an Islamic state in Pakistan. They are thought to have helped inspire General Muhammad Zia-ul-Haq to introduce “Sharization” to Pakistan.

 

The word ‘Jihād’ is commonly translated into English as ‘the Holy War’ and for a long while now the word has been interpreted so that it has become synonymous with a ‘mania of religion’.

 

The word ‘Jihād’ conjures up the vision of a marching band of religious fanatics with savage beards and fiery eyes brandishing drawn swords and attacking the infidels wherever they meet them and

.pressing them under the edge of the sword for the recital of Kalima

 

What Jihad Really is?:  Forcing views on others…

 

In reality Islam is a revolutionary ideology and programme which seeks to alter the social order of the whole world and rebuild it in conformity with its own tenets and ideals. ‘Muslim’ is the title of that International Revolutionary Party organized by Islam to carry into effect its revolutionary programme.

And ‘Jihād’ refers to that revolutionary struggle and utmost exertion which the Islamic Party brings into play to achieve this objective.

Objective to destroy all states:

Islam wishes to destroy all states and governments anywhere on the face of the earth which are opposed to the ideology and programme of Islam regardless of the country or the Nation which rules it.

The purpose of Islam is to set up a state on the basis of its own ideology and programme, regardless of which nation assumes the role of the standard-bearer of Islam or the rule of which nation is undermined in the process of the establishment of an ideological Islamic State.

Want to rule whole world:

Islam requires the earth—not just a portion, but the whole planet—not because the sovereignty over the earth should be wrested from one nation or several nations and vested in one particular nation. Islam wishes to press into service all forces which can bring about a revolution and a composite term for the use of all these forces is ‘Jihad’.

The Need and Objective of Jihad: Destroy un-Islamic civilizations

Those who affirm faith in Islamic ideology become members of the party of Islam.

In this manner, an International Revolutionary Party is born to which Qur’an gives the title of ‘Hizb Allah’ and which alternatively is known as Islamic Party or the Ummah of Islam’.

As soon as this party is formed, it launches the struggle to obtain the purpose for which it exists. The rationale for its existence is that it should Endeavour to destroy the hegemony of an un-Islamic system and establish in its place the rule of that social and cultural order which regulates life with balanced and humane laws, referred to by the Qur’an with the comprehensive term ‘the

word of God’.

Objectives of Jihadis as explained by Quran:

The Holy Qur’an enunciates only one purpose of the genesis of this party and that is:

“You are the best people, raised for mankind, exhorting good and warding off evil and believing in Allah.” (3: 110)

It is their objective to shatter the myth of the divinity of demi-gods and false deities and reinstate good in place of evil.

(1) “And fight them until there is no persecution and religion is professed for Allah.” (2: 193).)

(2) “If you do not do (that you are enjoined) there will be mischief in the earth and tremendous disorder”. ( 8: 73)

(3) “He is Who sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, he may make it dominant over all religions, even if the polytheists resent it”. ( 9: 33)

No system other than Islamic is allowed to be in existence :

Hence this party is left with no other choice except to capture State Authority. No party

which believes in the validity and righteousness of its own ideology can live according to its precepts under the rule of a system different from its own.

Extirpate rule of Opposing Ideology

it is impossible for a Muslim to succeed in his intention of observing the Islamic pattern of life under the authority of a non-Islamic system of government. All rules which he considers wrong; all taxes that he deems unlawful; all matters which he believes to be evil; the civilization and way of life which, in his view, are wicked; the education system which seems to him as fatal—all these will be so inexorably imposed on him, his home and his children that evasion will become impossible.

Hence a person or a group of persons are compelled by the innate demand of their faith to

strive for the extirpation of the rule of an opposing ideology and setting up a government which follows the programme and policies of their own faith, for under the authority of a government professing inimical doctrines, that person or group of persons cannot act upon their own belief. If these people evade their duty of actively striving for this end, it clearly implies that they are hypocrites and liars in their faith.

“May Allah forgive you (O Muhammad) Why didst you permitted them (to remain behind) till had become manifest to you those who were truthful and who were liars. Those who believe in Allah and the Last Day, will not seek permission (for exemption) from striving with their riches

and their lives. And Allah knows the righteous Only those will seek permission from you (to be exempted) who do not believe in Allah and the Last Day and whose hearts are full of doubts and in their doubts they waver.” (9: 43-45)

 

In these words, the Qur’an has given a clear and definite decree that the acid test of the true devotion of a party to its convictions is whether or not it expends all its resources of wealth and life in the struggle for installing its faith as the ruling power in the State.

 

Eliminate rule of un-Islamic system

It must be evident to you from this discussion that the objective of the Islamic ‘ Jihād’ is to eliminate the rule of an un-Islamic system and establish in its stead an Islamic system of state rule. Islam does not intend to confine this revolution to a single state or a few countries; the aim of Islam is to bring about a universal revolution. Although in the initial stages it is incumbent upon members of the party of Islam to carry out a revolution in the State system of the countries to which they belong, but their ultimate objective is no other than to effect a world revolution.

The same conception has been enunciated by the Holy Qur’an in the following words:

“What has happened to you? Why don’t you fight in the way of God in support of men, women and children, whom finding helpless, they have repressed; and who pray, “O God! liberate us

from this habitation which is ruled by tyrants”. (4: 75).

Hence it is imperative for the Muslim Party for reasons of both general welfare of humanity and self-defence that it should not rest content with establishing the Islamic System of Government in one territory alone, but to extend the sway of Islamic System all around as far as its resources can carry it.

Forceful conversation of un Islamic establishments:

The Muslim Party will inevitably extend invitation to the citizens of other countries to embrace the faith which holds promise of true salvation and genuine welfare for them. Even otherwise also if the Muslim Party commands adequate resources it will eliminate un-Islamic Governments and establish the power of Islamic Government in their stead. It is the same policy which was executed by the Holy Prophet (peace of Allah be upon him) and his successor illustrious caliphs (may Allah be pleased with them). Arabia, where the Muslim Party was founded, was the first country which was subjugated and brought under the rule of Islam. Later the Holy Prophet (peace of Allah be upon him) sent invitations to other surrounding states to accept the faith and ideology of Islam.

 

Historical Evidence of such wars initiated by Mohemmad and Khalifas

 When the ruling classes of those countries declined to accept this invitation to adopt the true faith, the Prophet (peace of Allah be upon him) resolved to take military action against them.

The war of Tubuk was the first in the series of military actions. When Hadrat Abu Bakr  assumed leadership ofthe Muslim Party after the Prophet have had left for his heavenly homes he launched an invasion of Rome and Iran, which were under the dominance of un-Islamic Governments. Later, Hadrat ‘Umar  carried the war to a victorious end.

The citizens of Egypt, Syria, Rome and Iran initially took these military actions as evidence of the imperialist policy of the Arab nation.

Islam a religion of violence: Danish study says

Islam a religion of violence; Quran directly incites terror, killing people of other faiths, Danish study says

Although Muslims and even some Christians call Islam a religion of peace, a new study by a Danish expert concluded that Islam, in fact, is a violent faith.

The study was reported by Jihad Watch, a group that records the killings done in the name of Islam, and WND.

Danish linguist Tina Magaard led a team of researchers who for three years studied the texts of the holy books of the world’s 10 biggest religions, the Jihad Watch report said.

“The conclusion was clear: ‘The texts of Islam [are] clearly distinct from the other religions’ texts as [they include] a higher degree call for violence and aggression against followers of other faiths.’

“There are also direct incitement[s] to terror … Moreover, in the Quran [there are] hundreds of invitations to fight against people of other faiths,” the report said.

Magaard, who holds a Ph.D. in text analysis and intercultural communication from the Sorbonne in Paris, said “it is indisputable that the texts [of Islam] encourage violence and terror.”

For instance, the study noted a verse in Quran 47:4, which states, “So when you meet those who disbelieve, strike their necks until you have inflicted slaughter upon them.”

“The fact that Islam is the world’s most violent religion is most likely the reason why Muslims since September 11, 2011, [have] committed more than 27,000 deadly terrorist attacks in the name of Islam. This corresponds to approximately 2,000 a year or five a day,” Jihad Watch pointed out.

Jihad Watch also noted that 80 percent of young Turks in the Netherlands “see ‘nothing wrong’ in waging jihad against non-Muslims.”

What is even more worrisome, according to the report, is that “the number of Muslims in the Western world is increasing dramatically and that they are becoming still more religious.”

It said “75 percent of Muslims inside Europe think that the texts of the world’s most violent religion must be taken literal.”

The Danish research also cited another study on 45,000 teenagers which concluded that “boys growing up in religious Muslim families are more likely to be violent.”

The author of that study, Christian Pfeiffer, from a criminal research institute in Lower Saxony, Germany, said even when other social factors are taken into account, there remained a significant correlation between “religiosity and readiness to use violence.”

As to be expected, the Jihad Watch report immediately drew a negative backlash from supporters of Islam.

Imam Abdul Wahid Peteresen, of Copenhagen, said the research inappropriately took quotes out of context. He asked: If Islam truly advocates violence against non-Muslims, why has Islam not “eradicated all other faiths in the communities where Muslims are in the majority?”

http://www.christiantoday.com/article/islam.a.religion.of.violence.quran.directly.incites.terror.killing.people.of.other.faiths.danish.study.says/72088.htm

पूर्वजों का मनन-चिन्तन व युक्तियाँः- राजेन्द्र जिज्ञासु

  माननीय आचार्य सोमदेव जी की पुस्तक ‘जिज्ञासा-समाधान’ के प्रथम भाग का प्राक्कथन लिखते हुए मैंने आर्यसमाज की शंका-समाधान की परपरा की ओर आर्यों का ध्यान खींचा है। इस परपरा के जनक महर्षि दयानन्द जी महाराज हैं। इस परपरा को अखण्ड बनाना हमारा पवित्र कर्त्तव्य है। पं. गुरुदत्त जी, पं. लेखराम जी, स्वामी श्रद्धानन्द जी, पं. गणपति शर्मा, पं. धर्मभिक्षु, पं. रामचन्द्र देहलवी, पं. नरेन्द्र जी आदि ने जान जोखिम में डालकर इस परपरा को अखण्ड बनाया है। इस स्वर्णिम इतिहास में हम भी नये-नये अध्याय जोड़ें।

मैंने प्राक्कथन में सुझाया है कि प्रत्येक आर्य वक्ता व लेखक को शंका-समाधान, प्रश्नोत्तर करते हुए पूर्वजों का नाम ले-लेकर महत्त्वपूर्ण प्रश्नों के उनके द्वारा दिये गये मौलिक उत्तर जोड़ने चाहिए। पूर्वजों के साहित्य की सूचियाँ देने से कुछ न बनेगा। बहुत प्रामाणिकता से उनके दिये उत्तर उद्धृत किये जायें। कुछ उदाहरण देते हैं-

  1. 1. पं. लेखराम जी ने शैतान द्वारा पाप करवाने पर लिखा है- ‘‘वास्तव में शैतान को पाचन वटी मानकर पापों से बचना छोड़ दिया।’’
  2. 2. ऋषि ने खाने-पीने से बहिश्ती मल विसर्जन करेंगे तो दुर्गंधि व प्रदूषण होगा तो गंदगी मल-मूत्र कौन उठायेगा? यह प्रश्न किया तो मौलाना सना उल्ला ने लिखा कि यह बेगार काफ़िरों से ली जायेगी। इस पर पं. चमूपति जी ने लिखा- ‘‘तो क्या दोज़ख (नरक) भी उनके साथ बहिश्त में जायेगा अथवा स्वल्प काल के लिये वे नरक से छुटकारा पायेंगे?’’
  3. 3. बहिश्त में जब सुख-सुविधायें, खाने के पदार्थ, संसार जैसे होंगे तो स्वास्थ्य रक्षा के लिए परिश्रम, पुरुषार्थ करने की क्या व्यवस्था होगी? पं. चमूपति जी का यह प्रश्न कितना स्वाभाविक व मौलिक है!

अपने सिद्धान्तों की पुष्टि मेंःहमारे विद्वान् अवैदिक मान्यताओं व पाखण्ड-खण्डन के लिए अच्छे-अच्छे लेख व पुस्तकें लिखते हैं परन्तु अब एक चूक हमारे लेखक कर रहे हैं। अन्य मतों की वेद विरुद्ध बातों की तो चुन-चुन कर चर्चा करते हैं, अवैदिक मतों के साहित्य में वैदिक सिद्धान्तों के पक्ष में लिखे गये प्रमाण अथवा वैदिक धर्म की मान्यताओं की जो रंगत बढ़ रही है, उसका प्रचार नहीं किया जाता। पुराने आर्य विद्वानों से हम यह भी सीखें यथा सर सैयद अहमद लिखते हैं-

(1) ‘‘पहले आदम को केवल वृक्षों के फल खाने की आज्ञा दी गई। पशुओं के मांस के खाने की अनुमति नहीं थी।’’

(2) ‘परोपकारी’ में ‘तड़प-झड़प’ में अमरीका से प्रकाशित नये बाइबिल से प्रमाण दिये गये थे कि सृष्टि की उत्पत्ति के वर्णन में अब शाकाहार का ही आदेश हैं। माँसाहार का हटा दिया गया है।

(3) आदि सृष्टि में अनेक युवा पुरुष व स्त्रियाँ पैदा की गई, बाइबिल में यह वर्णन पढ़कर ऋषि की जयकार क्यों नहीं लगाई जाती। ऐसे-ऐसे प्रमाण खोज-खोज कर हम सब दें।

(4) ब्रह्माकुमारी वाले बार-बार ईश्वर की सर्वव्यापकता का खण्डन करते हुए कई कुतर्क देते हैं। इससे ईश्वर मल-मूत्र में भी मानना पड़ेगा। जहाँ क्रिया होगी, वहाँ कर्त्ता होगा ही। जहाँ कर्त्ता होगा, वहीं क्रिया होगी। सृष्टि में कहाँ गति नहीं। परमाणु में भी विज्ञान गति मानता है। वेद भी डंके की चोट से यही कहता है। जगत् शब्द ही गति का बोध करवाता है फिर ईश्वर की सर्वव्यापकता में संशय क्या रहा? क्या गंदे नालों में कीड़े-मकोड़े पैदा नहीं होते? इन्हें क्या ईश्वर नहीं बनाता? ईश्वर का नाक ही नहीं, उसे दुर्गंधि क्यों आयेगी? उसका शरीर ही नहीं (अकायम) उसे मल क्यों चिपकेगा? ये कुछ संकेत यहाँ दिये हैं। मैं तो पूर्वजों की इस शैली को ध्यान में रखता हूँ। आगे कभी फिर इस पर लिखा जावेगा।

क्या बिस्मिल्लाह कुरान में पारसियों की नकल से लिखा गया ?

मुस्लमान कुरान के बारे में दावा करते हैं की कुरआन मुहम्मद साहब पर नाजिल हुआ (उतरा ). ये खुदा का नवीनतम ज्ञान है जो खुदा ने अपनी पुरानी किताबों को निरस्त कर मुहम्मद साहब को दिया .

कुरआन की शुरुआत बिस्मिल्लाह से की जाती है . कुरान के अधिकतर सुरों की शुरुआत बिस्मिल्लाह से ही हुयी है . इस लिहाज़ से ये कुछ खास हो जाता है . अधिकतर कार्यों को करते हुए भी बिस्मिल्लाह पढ़ना शुभ माना जाता है यहाँ तक की सम्भोग करते हुए भी बिस्मिल्लाह पढने की रिवायतें हदीसों में मिलती हैं.

व्यक्ति कुछ लिखना आरम्भ करने से पहले सामान्यतया कुछ न कुछ ऐसे शब्दों का प्रयोग करते हैं . जैसे भारतवर्ष में जब कोई व्यकित किताब या कोई लेख इत्यादि लिखते हैं तो ॐ, जय श्री राम इत्यादि शब्दों का प्रयोग करते हैं .इसी प्रकार के शब्दों का प्रयोग अरब और उसके आसपास के इलाकों में होता था .

इसी प्रकार पारसी भी अपनी किताबों के साथ ऐसे ही कुछ शब्दों का प्रयोग किया करते थे . जिसके अर्थ बिस्मिल्लाह होते थे . अनेकों विद्वानों का यह मानना है कि बिस्मिल्लाह आयत कुरान के लेखक ने पारसियों की किताबों से लिया है .

क्या बिस्मिल्लाह पारसियों से लिया गया है ?

ये देखिये सेल साहब क्या लिखते हैं :-

प्रत्येक अध्याय के शीर्षक के बाद , केवल नवें अध्याय को छोड़कर , मुसलमान बिस्मिल्लाह लिखते हैं जिसका अर्थ है महानतम दयावान के नाम पर .यह उनकी सामान्य प्रचलित पद्धिति है जिसे जो हर लेख या किताब के प्रारंभ में लिखते हैं . JEWS भी इसी तरह के शब्दों का प्रयोग करते हैं जैसे –भगवान के नाम पर , महान  भगवान् के नाम पर , इसी तरह इसाई महान भगवान् और उसके पुत्र के नाम पर लिखते हैं . लेकिन मुझे लगता है कि ये तरीका मुसलामानों ने पारसीयों से लिया है जैसे कि उन्होंने दूसरी बहुत सी चीजें पारसियों से ली हैं . पारसी अपनी किताबों के आरम्भ में “ BENAM YEZDAN BAKHSHAISHGHER DADAR” लिखते थे जिसका अर्थ बिस्मिल्लाह अर्थात “महानतम दयावान के नाम पर” पर ही होता है .

अब जरा तफसीर जलालैन के लेखक के विचार इस बारे में जानते हैं .

Picture2

 

Picture3

क्या बिस्मिल्लाह के बाब ( अध्याय ) में आप ने दुसरे मजहब की (तकलीद नक़ल ) की है ?

पारसियों और मज़ुसियों के दसातीर में हर नामह ( किताब ) की शुरुआत भी कुछ इसी किस्म के अलफ़ाज़ से होती है .मसलन मौजूदा इन्जील के बाज ( कुछ ) इफ्ताताई ( प्राकत्थन लिखना ) अलफ़ाज़ भी कुछ इसी तरह के हैं जिससे यह साबित हो सकता है कि आं हजरत ने इन्हीं या दसातीर से استفاده (सुना होगा ) और बिस्मिल्लाह से कुरान ए करीम की इब्तदाई करने में में इनकी तकलीद और इक्त्दा (नक़ल ) की होगी . लेकिन अव्वल तो इन्जील के कदीम (पुराने ) और सहीह नुस्खों में नहीं है जिससे बरअक्स ये साबित होता है कि ईसाईयों ने मुसलामानों की देखा देखी कुरान की तकलीद की है . अलबत्ता पारसियों की दसातीर का जहाँ तक ताल्लुक है तो नहीं कभी आप (हजरत मुहम्मद साहब ) यूनान तशरीफ़ ले गए और  न ही अरब में किसे मजूसी (पारसियों से सम्बंधित ) आलिम या किताब खाना और मदरसा का नामोनिशान था .

इस जमाने में तो मजूस की मजहबी किताबों का अपनी कौम और मुल्क में पूरी तरह ईसायत और रिवाज़ भी नहीं था . खास खास लोग बतौर तबरक (आशीर्वाद ) दूसरों की नज़रों से अपनी मजहबी किताबों को छुपा कर रखते थे ताकि दुसरे लोग नहीं देख लें . मुल्क अरब तक इसकी नौबत कहाँ पहुँचती और फिर आप ( मुहम्मद साहब ) खुद अपनी जुबान के लिखने पढने तक से वाकिफ नहीं थी की नौबत यहाँ तक पहुँचती .

रहा हजरत सलमान फ़ारसी का मामला सुरा एक गुलाम में कोइ मजहबी आलम नहीं थे . अगर आप इनसे (इस्तफादः استفاده) फायदा लेते करते तो वो उलटे वो खुद आप के मोताकित ( भाग , विश्वास करने वाले ) कैसे हो जाते और अपने मुल्क की हर तरह की नाकाबिल बर्दाश्त तकलीफ सहह कर आपकी खिदमत में باعش अनुकूल फखर क्यों समझते .

अलावा इसके दूसरी बात यह कि अगर आप आं हजरत ने दूसरों की तकलीद में ऐसा किया भी है तो इससे आप आं हजरत की محاسن माहानता  अच्छे कार्य में इजाफा होता है और इससे आप आं हजरत की इन्साफ पसंदी   बुलंदी फक्र का अंदाजा होता है कि आप आं हजरत में दूसरों की अच्छाइयों और भलाइयों से किनाराकशी न की जाए   और   उनको अपनाने का जज्बा मौजूद थाबूल . और खुले दिल दिमाग से उनको करने का दूसरों को भी मशवरा देते थे . मुतासिब ( किसी की सहायता करना ) मुआनिद ( बात न मनाने वाला )  शख्स से कभी इस किस्म की तौकह (शर्म) नहीं की   जा सकती है  नहीं इस्लाम ने कभी अछूते और नए होने का ऐलान नहीं किया बल्कि हमेशा आपने पुराने और करीम होने पर फक्र किया है . यानी यह कह इसके तमाम उसूल करीम और पुराने हैं जिनकी तबलीक ( उपदेश ) अलैह्म करते चले आ रहे हैं .इस में कोई नई बात नहीं है बजूज (सिवाय ) इसके कि नादानों ने गलत रस्मों रिवाज की तहों और परतों में छिपा कर असल हकीकत को गम कर दिया था इसने फिर परदे हटा दिए और असल हकीकत को चमका दिया. पस इस तरह खुदा के नाम इफ्तताह करीम ज़माना और करीम मज़हब से चला आ रहा हो और इस्लाम ने भी इस की तकलीद की  हो तो काबिल ऐतराज ब्बत्त क्या रहा जाती है ?

तफसीर जलालैन के लेखक यह स्वीकार करते हैं कि हो सकता है कि बिस्मिल्लाह पारसियों से लिया गया हो और यदि ले लिया तो फिर परेशानी क्या है ये तो मुहम्मद साहब का बढ़प्पन था .

लेकिन कुरान कहता है की कुरान की तरह दूसरी आयत कोई नहीं बना सकता . बिस्मिल्लाह भी कुरान का हिस्सा है . यदि तफसीर ए जलालैन के लेखक के मुताबिक़ यह मान लिया जाये कि बिस्मिल्लाह पारसियों से लिया गया हो सकता है तो यह तो कुरान की तरह की आयत हो गयी जो पारसियों ने खुद बना ली थी . यह आयत को पारसियों को अल्लाह ने नहीं दी थी .

जब पारसी कुरान की तरह की एक आयत बना सकते हैं तो फिर कुरान की तरह की दूसरी आयते क्यों नहीं बनायी जा सकती .

और काफिरों द्वारा बनाई गयी इस आयत का महत्व तो देखिये कि कुरान के अधिकतर सुरों की शुरुआत ही इसी से होती है

मुसलमानों का इस बात को मानना कि यह आयत पारसियों से ली गयी हो सकती है , मुसलमानों के कुरान के खुदाई किताब होने के दावे की धज्जियाँ  उड़ा देती है .

Pakistanis are basically Hindus, Pakistani lady scholar admits

A brave Pakistani lady scholar boldly states what many Indians won’t.

In a landmark confession of truth, an enlightened Muslim intellectual, Fauzia Syed, declared during a discussion on a television channel that all Pakistani and Bangladeshi Muslims are essentially Hindus, and that in rare cases, they might be Buddhists.

The lady activist lamented that a lot of Muslims, mainly Pakistani and Bangladeshi, have a hard time accepting the fact that their ancestors were Hindus who were converted by force of sword to Islam. The gutsy lady said this in a live television show while responding to the argument of radical Pakistani Muslim preacher Zaid Hamid.

Syed’s bold assertion of the truth is a clarion call to Hindus to wake up from slumber and re-educate and enlighten the Muslims of the sub-continent about their ancestry and massacres of their forefathers. Unfortunately till now, no Hindu has responded to her wakeup call.

Explaining her viewpoint lucidly, Fauzia said that most Pakistani Muslims believe they are the offspring of the Muslim invaders who came attacking the sub-continent from Muslim lands. But this is an unalloyed falsehood. Any person having a hint of common sense would know that the ancestors of more than 99 percent Pakistanis were Hindus. Unfortunately, Pakistan does not want to admit the bitter truth, nor are the Pakistanis prepared to hear it, she averred.

One simply marvels at the extensively propagated falsehood that Pakistani Muslims are progeny of Arab or Turk invaders. Equally dumb is the assertion that the forefathers of today’s Muslims in Pakistan and India were converted by Sufi saints. Anyone who reads the history of the sub-continent objectively would know that lakhs of Hindus were killed and forcibly converted by Muslim invaders on pain of death. The deep blood relationship between the Muslims and Hindus of the sub-continent is further reinforced by the fact that many surnames like Cheema, Bajwa, Ghakhar, Sethi and also Sehgal (or Saigols) are common to both communities.

Among other things, Fauzia pointed out that it is not wrong to call Pakistan a terrorist state because it has been sheltering terrorists for a long time. The truth was exposed when Osama bin Laden was killed in Pakistan by American
commandos.

It is indeed a sign of the dumbness of Hindu society that this bold Pakistani human rights activist has not been invited to speak in India and interact with the intellectuals, media analysts and common citizens about her incontrovertible true statement on a Pakistani television channel. In any case, the matter deserves the focused attention of the Hindu intelligentsia.

It is not late even now to invite Fauzia Syed to India for a meaningful ‘samvad’ at the India International Centre, New Delhi and then to make her address the Indians in various parts of the country. The opportunity should not be missed and Fauzia Syed must be invited to India for sharing her views with Hindus and Muslims of India. The failure of Hindu society in ignoring the bold and truthful assertion by Fauzia Syed confirms that we continue to be somnolent.

An honest reappraisal of the common heritage of India and Pakistan will totally support Fauzia Syed’s assertion. For centuries, geographically as well as politically, Bharat, i.e., India, included the entire landmass from Bactria (known as Vaahlik Pradesh), the entire Afghanistan, the present day Pakistan, today’s Bharat (i.e., India) and the whole of Bangladesh.

The indescribable savagery of the Muslim invaders unleashed against Hindus of the sub-continent was highlighted by the well known historian, Will Durant, in his book, The Story of Civilization, in the following words:

“The Mohammadan conquest of India is probably the bloodiest story in history. It is a discouraging tale, for its evident moral is that civilization is a precarious thing, whose delicate complex of order and liberty, culture and peace may at any time be overthrown by barbarians invading from without or multiplying within.”

Thus, the bold assertion of Fauzia Syed that the Hindus of Pakistan, nay of the entire sub-continent, were forcibly converted to Islam by sword is absolutely correct. It is time that the gory narrative of the slaughter of Hindu forbears of today’s Pakistani Muslims is brought out of closet and debated publicly by inviting the braveheart Pakistani lady scholar to India.

article is taken from the link below:

http://indiatomorrow.co/nation/3892-pakistanis-are-basically-hindus-pakistani-lady-scholar-admits

Leaving Islam…..Aditya Nandiwardhana

‘No matter how many good things you have done before you kick the bucket, if you are not a Muslim, then bad news for you. Even back then, I had a problem accepting that part of the religious teaching’

“In the afterlife, only Muslims get to enter paradise.”

That was what my Quran tutor told me when I was in fourth grade. The moment she told me that, I was really, really, surprised.

I was raised as a Muslim, and like any other Muslim kid in Indonesia, I had to learn how to recite the Quran. My father hired a Quran tutor for me and I spent a couple of hours 3 days a week with her. I did not only learn how to recite the Quran from her, I also learned about Islam in general, about what Islam (well, at least her version of Islam) teaches us.

One of the things that I learned from her was that entering paradise is a Muslim privilege. No matter how many good things you have done before you kick the bucket, if you are not a Muslim, then bad news for you.

Even back then, I had a problem accepting that part of the religious teaching.

Here is the thing, I was born into the Muslim tradition because my father is a Muslim man. However, that was not the only tradition that I was born into.

My mother is a Catholic woman, a devout one in my opinion. When I was very little, I spent a lot of time with my grandparents from my mother’s side. They had to babysit me a lot because both my parents were working back then.

They had a lot of Catholic ornaments in their house – crucifixes on the walls, a statue of Virgin Mary, pictures of various saints, and many others. They would tell me stories about Jesus when they were babysitting me and I liked those stories.

When I was not being babysat by them, my father usually told me to perform shalat prayers with him. I did not know how to actually perform the prayers, of course, but I would just follow the movements from him.

That was my early childhood. I was always aware of the fact that my parents had different religious backgrounds. I did not have any problem accepting that fact – it all just made sense to me. I also knew that there were other people with other religious beliefs out there and thought that all of those different beliefs were as valid as mine. I had already identified as a Muslim at the time. If anyone asked me what my religion was, I would answer: Islam.

I never thought that my religion was superior to others, though. Until my Quran tutor taught me otherwise.

Becoming agnostic

I guess that was the starting point of the journey that led me to become an agnostic-atheist.

I had a problem accepting the doctrine of the superiority of Islam over other religious beliefs, that only Muslims can enter paradise after the apocalypse. I loved my grandparents and I thought that it was not fair that they were going to hell just because they believed in God in a different way than I did. As I grew up, I started having other questions regarding other aspects of Islam such as the role of women in the traditional views of Islam and LGBT rights, but I was also afraid to question those views further because I did not want to go to hell for doubting my faith.

It wasn’t until my second year of university that I finally stopped practicing Islam. I stopped performing shalat, I stopped going to the masjid (mosque) every Friday, and I stopped performing shawm (fasting) during Ramadan. I did not identify as a Muslim anymore. I was not an atheist yet at the time. I was kind of a deist, still believing in a “higher power” of some sort. But I had finally become a murtadin (apostate).

I was not open about my epiphany to my parents. I lived in a kost (a boarding house for university students) in Yogyakarta when I first stopped identifying as a Muslim, while my parents lived in Jakarta, so that made it easier for me. But every time I went back to my parents’ house in Jakarta, I would pretend that I was still a Muslim.

I would try to get out of the house every time it was near prayer time, because I did not want to pray with my father. Of course I could not always get out of the house during prayer time, so I had to pretend to pray with my father during those occasions.

“The main crisis that humanity faces now is not religion, as many atheists would suggest. it is the oppressive power structures that oppress lgbt people, religious minorities (including but not limited to atheists), women, the working class and other oppressed groups.”

Ramadan was the hardest challenge for me. I had to pretend that I was fasting and think of how to sneak food into my room without getting caught. Every time I went back to Jakarta during university break, I could not wait to go home to my kost in Yogyakarta.

Exploring Buddhism

I began to have curiosity about Buddhism during my first years of apostasy. I read a lot about Buddhism and also went to the local Buddhist temple near my kost to learn more about it. I used to meditate regularly, and I am still trying to now.

This artilcle was taken from the following web portal

 

http://www.rappler.com/world/regions/asia-pacific/indonesia/bahasa/englishedition/106964-atheist-islam

Sex Jihad and Western Disbelief : Yash Arya

http://www.raymondibrahim.com/from-the-arab-world/sex-jihad-and-western-disbelief/

The sex jihad is back in the news.  Last Thursday, September 19, during an address to the National Constituent Assembly, Tunisian Interior Minister Lotfi Bin Jeddo announced that Tunisian girls who had traveled to Syria to perform “sex jihad” had returned after being sexually “swapped between 20, 30, and 100 rebels and they come back bearing the fruit of sexual contacts [from pregnancies to diseases] in the name of sexual jihad and we are silent doing nothing and standing idle.”

[Sixteen-year-old Rahma: Her parents appeared in tears on TV bemoaning how she was “brainwashed” to join the sex jihad.]

Several video interviews with Tunisian females who went to the sex jihad further testify to the veracity of this phenomenon.  For example, 19-year-old Lamia, upon returning, confessed how she was made to have sex with countless men—including Pakistanis, Afghanis, Libyans, Tunisians, Iraqis, Saudis, Somalis, and a Yemeni, all in the context of the “sex jihad,” and that she and many other women were abused, beaten, and forced to do things “that contradict all sense of human worth.”  Now back in Tunisia, Lamia has been to a doctor finding that she is five months pregnant. Both she and her unborn are carrying the aids virus (read her whole story).

Other interviewed women have told of how they were “fooled,” or how their husbands (they being one of four wives) divorced and sent them to Syria for the sex jihad, with assurances that they would be guaranteed paradise in the afterlife.  One 16-year-old explained how her father ordered her to have sex with several jihadi “liberators.”

Due to the severity of this matter, since March, 6,000 Tunisians were banned from travelling to Syria; 86 individuals suspected of forming “cells” to send Tunisian youth to Syria have been arrested.

Back in April, Sheikh Othman Battikh, former Mufti of Tunisia, said before reporters that, “For Jihad in Syria, they are now pushing girls to go there. Thirteen young girls have been sent for sexual jihad. What is this? This is called prostitution. It is moral educational corruption.”

He was dismissed from his position as Mufti of Tunisia days later.

However, as I wrote back in June when reporting on the sex jihad phenomenon:

Muslim women prostituting themselves in this case is being considered a legitimate jihad because such women are making sacrifices—their chastity, their dignity—in order to help apparently sexually-frustrated jihadis better focus on the war to empower Islam in Syria.

And it is prostitution—for they are promised payment, albeit in the afterlife. The Koran declares that “Allah has purchased of the believers their persons [their bodies] and their goods; for theirs (in return) is the garden (of Paradise): they fight in His cause, and slay and are slain (Yusuf Ali trans. 9:111).

At any rate, while news that Muslim girls in hijabs are prostituting themselves in the name of Islam may be instinctively dismissed as a “hoax,” the fact is, Islamic clerics regularly issue fatwas permitting forbidden, if not bizarre, things.

The fundamental criterion is that they help the jihad to empower Islam.

For instance, not only did the original “underwear bomber” Abdullah Hassan al-Asiri hide explosives in his rectum to assassinate Saudi Prince Muhammad bin Nayef—they met in 2009 after the 22-year-old Asiri “feigned repentance for his jihadi views”—but, according to Shi‘ite talk-show host Abdullah Al-Khallaf, he had fellow jihadis sodomize him to “widen” his anus to fit more explosives.

Al-Khallaf read the fatwa that purportedly justified such actions during a 2012 Fadak TV episode.  After praising Allah and declaring that sodomy is forbidden in Islam, the fatwa asserted:

However, jihad comes first, for it is the pinnacle of Islam, and if the pinnacle of Islam can only be achieved through sodomy, then there is no wrong in it. For the overarching rule of [Islamic] jurisprudence asserts that “necessity makes permissible the prohibited.” And if obligatory matters can only be achieved by performing the prohibited, then it becomes obligatory to perform the prohibited, and there is no greater duty than jihad. After he sodomizes you, you must ask Allah for forgiveness and praise him all the more. And know that Allah will reward the jihadis on the Day of Resurrection, according to their intentions—and your intention, Allah willing, is for the victory of Islam, and we ask that Allah accept it of you.

Two important points emerge here: first, jihad is the “pinnacle” of Islam—for it makes Islam supreme; and second, the idea that “necessity makes permissible the prohibited.” Thus, because making Islam supreme through jihad is the greatest priority, anything and everything that is otherwise banned becomes permissible. All that comes to matter is one’s intention, or niyya (see Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi’s discussion along these lines).

Hence the many seeming contradictions in Islam: Muslim women must chastely be covered head-to-toe—yet, in the service of jihad, they are allowed to prostitute their bodies. Sodomy is forbidden—but permissible if rationalized as a way to kill infidels and/or apostates.  Lying is forbidden—but permissible to empower Islam. Suicide is forbidden—but permissible during the jihad—when it is called “martyrdom.”  Intentionally killing women and children is forbidden—but permissible during an Islamic jihad raid, as happened last weekend in both Peshawar and Nairobi.

One may therefore expect anything from would-be jihadis, regardless of how un-Islamic their actions may otherwise seem.

And yet, here in the West, many still refuse to believe the existence of such fatwas,habitually dismissing them as “hoaxes”—despite all the evidence otherwise: from a top Tunisian government official openly bemoaning the effects of the sex jihad on Tunisian girls, to several Arabic-language videos and reports of women discussing their experiences in the sex jihad.

Few things are more demonstrative of the arrogant mindset that proliferates amongst Western “progressives” than this inability to believe.

And it’s quite ironic:  for while supposedly “closed-minded” and “bigoted” conservatives tend to take the words, teachings, and deeds of Muslim clerics and jihadis at face value—and thus respect them as autonomous individuals—liberals, who always claim to “respect other cultures,” often reject as “hoaxes” any news that contradicts their culturally-induced worldviews—since apparently everyone in the world shares in their standards.

If that’s not an ethnocentric position—an especially dangerous one at that—what is?

 

author can be reached at :

https://yasharya.wordpress.com/