Archive for the 'Sharia' Category

22
Feb
08

Truthbooth Top 200 Articles in 10 Months

By Stefan Rosty

22/02Does God Exist?

22/02Islam: Religion of Peace

22/02انكار السنة فى مقدمة صحيح مسلم

22/01The Islamic History between Democracy and Despotism

24/12Statements of Belief

24/12Statements of Belief

20/12“Muslim!” Now Available In Insult Form

12/12Recommended Readings

09/12From Radical to Reformed Muslim

07/12How do the terrorists justify terror by citing Islam?

05/12Understanding Qur’an

02/12THE NUMBER TWO ISLAM

28/11Hisba : A Historical Overview

26/11Egyptian Exile

26/11Peace and Religion

23/11Useful Hints for reading the Quran

20/11Salman Rushdie is not the problem. Muslims are

20/11Violation of Human Rights: Either Forcing Women to Cover Their Hair or Uncover Their Hair: Is Headscarf Trick or Threat?

19/11Anti-al Qaeda base envisioned

19/11THE ISLAMIC CONCEPT OF STATE AND INDIVIDUAL

19/11Radical Reform : Ethics and Liberation

19/11The Quranists as persecuted Muslim scholars

13/11ISLAMIC SCIENCE

07/11Basic Islamic Concepts in the Light of the Quran

07/11Was Muhammad (p.b.u.h) Illiterate? Or did he write the revealed Quran with his own hands.

25/10Men are Maintainers and Supporters of Women

25/10Girl’s Share in Inheritance

25/10Restoring the Image of Islam

24/10TO DINO MOHAMADINOOO

24/10SOME IMPLICATIONS OF THE QURANIC MESSAGE FOR THE ECONOMIC SYSTEM

21/10Pilgrimage – The Lost Legacy of abraham

21/10Not a Single Verse of the Quran is Abrogated?

21/10Dogs! Are they dirty prohibited animals?

19/10Reinterpreting Islam

18/10MARY IN QURAN

18/10The Quranists are finally released !

12/10DEMOCRACY IN THE QUR’AN -III-

12/10DEMOCRACY IN THE QUR’AN -II-

11/10DEMOCRACY IN THE QUR’AN -I-

09/10“One must research Religion, and not just study it”

08/10IN THE SHADE OF DEATH – A CRITICAL READING OF SAYYID QUTB’S

04/10The Multiple Understandings of the QUR’AN

03/10Islamic Studies Textbook and Violence

02/10Personalities Renowned By Mother Names

01/10Did Al-Hajjaj Change The Qur’an?

30/09The Ulema (Scholars) —Who Are They?

30/09POLITICAL SYSTEM: Man-Made Systems

29/09Preface

29/09Ban Islam?

27/09Fanatics and terrorists misguided

27/09Islamophobia

26/09A Statement From

24/09The Suicide Bomber

22/09Fasting

22/09Internet: The Modern Battlefield of Jihad

22/09Abrogation, The Biggest Lie Against Quran

22/09Submitters (Muslims) Vs. Believers (Mumins)

22/09What is Heaven?

22/09What is Religion?

22/09WAR IN THE QURAN

21/09What Is Islam ?

21/09Salat Timings of Quran, part-II

16/09FREE-MINDS.ORG

15/09OBEDIENCE TO THE PROPHET (PBUH) III

15/09OBEDIENCE TO THE PROPHET (PBUH) II

15/09OBEDIENCE TO THE PROPHET (PBUH) I

15/09Lailat’ul-Qadar: The Night of Manifestation of a New World

15/09Zikr

14/09Polygamy

14/09DIVORCE

14/09“GOD Alone” (Islam based on the laws of the Holy Book)

14/09Inheritance and Testament

14/09Islamic Etiquette

12/09On the Search for Divine Revelation Outside of It

12/09ISLAM AND THE WEST: CLASH OF CIVILISATIONS?

10/09Digression from Iqra

08/09Sunnah – The Misconceived Dogma That poisoned Islam

08/09ISLAM HIJACKED

07/09QURAN: A Reformist Translation

06/09Qur’an and Hadith: The Final Debate

06/09Hadith plagiarized from the Bible

06/09Islamic Teachings From The Bible

06/09SOME PROMINENT HADITH FABRICATORS

06/09LIST OF INTERPOLATIONS

06/09Apostasy, Freedom and Da’wah

06/09Islam is wonderful, but I can’t stand the Muslims

04/09Miraj – The True Story

04/09BUKHARI EXPLAINS QURAN

04/09THE BEST HADITH

04/09Sheikhs of Alazhar: Quranists are Apostates; and the Evidence from the Holy Book Proves Their Guilt

29/08Dogmatism, Modernization and Islam

22/08The Terrorist’s Propaganda Works!

22/08Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahab

22/08Islamic Studies Textbook and Violence

22/08We Need Dearabization of Islam

22/08ISLAM & CHRISTIANITY

14/08Quranic Day & Night

14/08What Is Salat?

15/07Why I Chose Islam Instead of Judaism

15/07What has been said concerning the Rejecters of the Sunnah.

10/07Christianity or Paulinity?

28/06A Critique of Mawdudi’s view on Islamic Change as a SYSTEMATIC PROCESS

27/06ISLAM: A CHALLENGE TO RELIGION

27/06Is Islam a Failure?

27/06Only One Question

26/06Protected: Prophets & Messengers

25/06REVERTING ISLAM BACK TO ITS TOLERANT ROOTS

25/06ISLAMIC DEMOCRACY AND MUSLIM TYRANNY:Peaceful Solution For The 21’st Century

25/06THE CRUCIFIXION/RESURRECTION OF JESUS

19/06Timings Of Salat According To The Quran

19/06The History of Hadith

19/06Cases Of Corrupting Quranic Truth (Misinterpreted Verses)

19/06Useful Hints For Reading The Quran

17/06Chronological Order of the Quran

17/06People of The Elephant – But Who?

17/06The Satanic Versus Unexpurgated

17/06Protected: The Real Salat

16/06Does the code of the Quran confirm the 24434 format?

14/0619 – Fact or Fiction?

14/06Meshiha Deghala

11/06About Us

09/0619 Questions for Muslim Scholars

08/06MY JOURNEY FROM THE CHRISTIANITY OF AHLUL SUNNAH WAL JAMAAH TO THE ISLAM OF THE PROPHET

07/06Dajjal

05/06Ahmed Deedat

31/05A Collection of Ahmed Deedat’s Debates High Quality Videos

30/05Mahdi

28/05The numerical structure of the Quran

27/05The Quaranic Code 19 video

27/05Hadith of the Verse of Rajm

27/05Makkan and Madinan Revelations

24/05Studies

24/05Prophets of Islam

23/05Books

23/05Islam Way of Life

22/05Islam

22/05Messengers and Prophets

22/05Salat , Zakat and Hajj

22/05Hadith and Sunna

22/05Quran

22/05Articles

22/05NOT REFORM BUT RETURN TO THE QURAN

22/05THE QURAN AND THE SECTS

22/05REASONS FOR ADDITIONS TO TO THE ESTABLISHED RELIGION AND FOR INVENTION OF HADITHS

22/05RAJM: STONING TO DEATH

22/05WHAT IS MEANT BY OBEY THE MESSENGER (PROPHET)?

22/05SECTS

22/05ATTITUDE OF THE FOUR CALIPHS TOWARD THE HADITHS

22/05CONTRADICTORY HADITHS

22/05WOMEN IN THE QURAN AND IN THE FABRICATED RELIGION

21/05where was mohammed? part 4,5,6

21/05where was mohammed? part 1,2,3

21/05Warning to Your Loved Ones!

20/0540 Guiding Principals of Islam

19/05Isra and Mi’raj

18/05Prophet Muhammad (a.s.) in the Quran pt.3

18/05Prophet Muhammad (a.s.) in the Quran pt.2

18/05Prophet Muhammad (a.s.) in the Quran pt.1

18/05A Summary of General Manners of Living

18/05Purpose of SALAAT

18/05HARAAM according to the Quran

18/05The Word ‘Islam’ in the Quran

18/05What is Rooh?

18/05Al Hajj : How Muslims distorted Al Hajj (The Pilgrimage)

18/05The Ten Wise Jews: The Source Of The Qur’an

17/05Salat of Quran

16/05Qur’an alone

16/05Globalization: A Muslim Viewpoint

16/05Reviving the Ummah, how?

16/05Living through an uncreative tension: The case of Messianic thinking among Muslims

16/05The Book & the Quran

16/05Obey God and Obey the Messenger 2

16/05Obey God & the Messenger

16/05Islam as a system for everyone and the two categories of people in the Quran.

13/05Evolution in the Light of the Quran

12/05Evolution and the Qur’an

11/05Zakat in the Quran

11/05The Trust

11/05What Is Salat?

09/05“Rethinking Tradition in Modern Islamic Thought” by Daniel Brown.

09/05THE HADITH CONSPIRACY & The Distortion of Islam

09/05Quranic Principles about the position of ‘Hadeeth and Sunnah’ in Islam

09/05The Myth of Hadith!

08/05CONTRADICTIONS BETWEEN THE HADITHS AND THE QURAN

08/05Human being was created from earthly materials and water according to a divinely guided evolution

08/05Ma Malakat Aymanukum

08/05Halal & Haram

08/05Similarities between the Bible and the Qur’an

08/05Salat

08/05Code 19

06/05WHAT THE BIBLE SAYS ABOUT MOHAMMED

06/05“How Can We Observe The Salaat Prayers By Following The Quran Alone?”

06/05A Statistical Analysis of the Holy Qur’an

06/05Muslims and the Necessity of Knowledge of Non-Muslim Scriptures

05/05Satan: The Master Hypnotist

05/05On Israel, Palestine, and Terrorism

02/05Nusemantics In The Quran

02/05If Muslims are Terrorists, then Jews and Christians are Terrorists to the Factor of 666!

25/04Applying the Concept of “Limits” to the Rights of Muslim Women

25/04THE REAL HIJAAB

Advertisements
22
Jan
08

The Islamic History between Democracy and Despotism

By: – Ahmed Mansour

It is hard to brief the Political History of Muslims in a few pages, this history that circles around the Right Guided Caliphs and the other caliphs, so it is much harder to make this brief study cover another deep religious and political matters. But we would still have to stop at a certain conclusive moments in the Islamic history that we will give an indicated address. We will start with the state of the prophet Mohamed.

The prophet’s state: Consultation “Al-Shora” = The direct Democracy :

The main feature here is that Consultation “shora” was an obligatory duty for every Muslim. It came from the Basic belief of Islam which is “ There is no God except Allah” and the Muslim individuals were practicing it in mosques “Just like performing the five Prayers”. And this feature is divided into certain meanings, in the following Koranic verses:The Democracy is a part of the Islamic belief, because it is only Allah who is unquestionable, but everyone else is questionable. ( Al-Anbeyaa 23) and the Prophet Mohamed was ordered to practice Democracy ( Al-Omran 159). And this means that everyone that disdains to practice Shora, he would be rising himself over the prophet, so he will make a god of himself … and the repeating of the Pharaoh’s despotism that lead him to reclaim Godhood and destruction of himself and his people. So Despotism is a big disbelief with Allah, and the Democracy is one of the main Islamic beliefs.

And because democracy is a part of the Islamic belief, so it is to become an obligatory duty like praying. And we here point out to the fact that the Order to practice Democracy took place at Meka -before even the Muslim establish their state in Medina – at Democracy sura. And the order were written in a nominal sentence which means permanence and affirmation in the Arabic language.

Meantime the order of Democracy was put between the most two fundamental Islamic Duties in the Islamic belief, which are Praying and almsgiving. So it takes some terms of the praying in sense that it is obligatory to practice Democracy in Mosque and Home, and it is not permissible for anyone to act as a representative of any other individual in its practice. So it is a religious duty for every Muslim individual to attend the Democracy Meetings, which took place after the public pronounce “ Al-Azan” to perform a public council – not an assembly one- and discuss about everything. This is what the holly Koran told us, but the historical reference that was recorded during the Abbasyat Caliphate purposely ignored it along with the prophet’s Friday’s sermons. And both Democracy meetings and Friday sermons were mainly responsible for educating and cultivating the Muslim individuals to enable them to establish their first Civilized State in Medina.

We will be content with the Koranic speech about the Democracy meetings that was mentioned in the last three verses of Al-Nour Sura. And these three verses talked about some of the Mediona’s people who didn’t get used to attend these meetings, So they made excuses not to attend, or they sneak out of it. But the holly Koran warns them hardly of doing that and confirms the obligatory attendance for these meetings in order not to make the whole Society -including the sleeping majority- ruled by active minority and apply the representative administration, Then they apply the monocracy. And that what already had happened after the death of the prophet.

Now, we reach for a subsidiary feature, which is the political factor, which was clarified as:

1- The nation is the source of all authorities. And the prophet Mohamed while he was ruling the Islamic nation received the following words from Allah ““because of the mercy that god supplies you, you became soft with them, and if you was harsh and rough they would leave you alone. So forgive them and ask God’s forgiveness for them and consult them” and the quotation here is “and if you was harsh and rough they would leave you alone”.

The holly Koran says God supplied his prophet with mercy and he didn’t make him harsh or rough, because if he was so , they would leave him alone. And if that happened he will lose his sultan and his state. So what gives him the sultan and the state is their gathering and union around him, and before when he was in Mecca he was persecuted, and if they leave him he would be persecuted again. Then their gathering and union around him is the source of his sultan, and not from a divined authorization. And the wholly God made him soft with them to make them gather and union around him. And he worn him of being rough or they would leave him. So he ordered him to forgive them and ask God’s forgiveness for them and consult them, because they are his partners in ruling, and they are the source of his sultan and state.

2- And on the basis of previous principle the Islamic state doesn’t recognize the rule of the president and the Social Contract theory, because it demands the Society to directly rule itself. So when Allah talks about any political matter in Koran, the speech always addressed for all Muslims (Al-Nesaa58- Al-Nahl90- Al-Anaam151). Even the Word (yahkom – Rules) always cames with the meaning of judging, not ruling. (Review the word and its derivatives in the holly Koran) .

And the mechanism of the Islamic rule is based on the Shora, which guarantees the collective rule among Muslim individuals and the questioning for the people of trust “Oli Al-Amr” who were recognized in Koran as “ the people of experience” ( Al-Nesaa 59-83) . And this is not a utopian system, but it is a realistic, successful system who enables Muslims to establish their state. And it is very near to the modern system in Swiss and some European countries, where the president is just a regular employee for the people, they assign, fire and question him whenever they want. And whenever he is out of power, he becomes a regular citizen.

And correlating with this system comes the Islamic economy system which is based on the right of all society in positioning wealth, and the quotient right for Muslim individuals in wealth under a certain rules which prevents luxury and exploitative spending. To achieve a free of monopolization society.

Koraysh’s state during the judicious succession :

According to the direct Democracy that took place during the rule of the Prophet Mohamed we can answer the confusing question, which is: why didn’t the Prophet Mohamed assign a successor after him?And the answer is simply is that the society was able to rule itself according to its ruling mechanism. But there was an outsider evolution, which is the apostasy war. When the apostates tried to attack Medina and its people. This war witnessed the alliance of the military forces of Koraysh in Meka and the military forces of Koraysh in Medina, and in this critical time there ought to be victims to this alliance. And the first victim was Al-Ansar people. But the most prominent victim was the Democracy (the direct Democracy).

Before we explain the details we affirm a pure fact that the political rule in this time was full of despotism in many levels. So it is a matter of time that the prophet’s state would be beaten by this Era’s tools from outside(the apostasy war) and from inside ( Koraysh in Meka and Medina, specially the Amowyan People) . So it is normal that the direct Democracy of the prophet’s Era was changed to political despotism (in the Ammoyat Caliphate) and to religious despotism (in the Abbasyat Caliphate). And this gradual change costs the Muslims a lot of denominationalism war, assassinations and sectarianism separations that begun with politics and ends with separation in intellect and religion. From Khawareg to Sheaa.. And we still live the same since then.

And the next step in this road of pain would be what I call “the Korayshan State” in the judicious Caliphate’s Era which appears in a certain attitudes:

Alsakifa homage: this homage was the main reason of moving Al-Ansar away, after banishing their leader “Saa’d Ibn-Obada” and assassinating him in Syria. In return of that all Arabsubmitted to Koraysh only And it becomes a matter of arbitrariness and despotis (Omar the second Caliphate was about to kill Saa’d Ibn-Obada and Al-Habbab Ibn Monzer in this homage)

After Alsakifa homage there was a rearrangement process for the Korayshan people to satisfy Omowyans and Hashimyans. Under the rule of Abo-Bakr (the first caliphate). So Abo-Bakr appointed Zeyad “the son of Aba Sofian who votes against Abo-Bakr” as an army leader in the Apostasy war. And Omar used force against Ali’s defenders and he even was about to kill Al-Zobayr Ibn Al-Awam then he pays homage to Abo-Bakr.

Koraysh managed to end the apostasy wars. And to prevent those Arabs from attacking them – considering the fact that they used to earn their living from steal and rubbery- they exported their military forces out of the Arabian Peninsula as soldiers under their command. And these forces widen the Islamic states under the name of spreading Islam. Then there was a new status after the Koraysh invented this method that contradicts with the holly Koran who affirms on fighting only for self-defense without any aggression and to punish the aggressor by imposing tax on him. But these conquests were based on aggression on countries and giving its people the choice between three options: becoming Muslim or paying the tax or War. And this how the gap between the Prophets State and the Korayshan State begins to widen.

In Omar’s Caliphate the gap increased to widen when he adds to Al-Ansar the people of the conquered countries who didn’t make anything wrong to Arabs or Islam, but they were conquered, rubbed, made slaves, paid tax and they finally became a low class citizen in the Islamic country. And in the main time the Army’s leaders were appointed as rulers for the conquered countries. Although Omar were very fair during his role, but this just was limited to Arabs only, so he forbids any non-Arab people to enter his Capital (Medina) fearing assassination. But he was finally assassinated by one of them who called Abo-LoaLoa.

After Othman took over he differed Omar in his just and strictness, so the Omowyans controlled wealth and power during his caliphate. And they made a lot of monopolization from the monies of the conquered countries and lifting a little piece for the rest of the Arabs who were the ordinary soldiers of these armies. And that was the main reason of the conflict that was known as “ the great sedition”. This great sedition began with rebellion against Othman which lead to his murder and ended up with separating Muslims into several fighting political parties to establishing a despotic rule based on power inheritance, revolutions and the use of the tribalism to reach and to keep authority.

The Korayshan state during the Ammoyan caliphate:

The main features of this state were “Exclusion, Despotism and enthrallment”.The Amowyans invented a new policy based on Exclusion in different levels. They prejudiced for Arabs against Non-Arabs who were given the name of “Almawaly” as a near status of slaves. And they prejudiced for some of Arab tribes against another to keep their state alive. They realized the importance of tribalism and they used it to strengthen their state.

Inside Korayshan people Amowyans were prejudiced for Hashemyians. And inside the Amowyans people the caliphate prejudiced for his son against his brother, and he appoints his sons for caliphate after his death and he deposes his brother, then the elder son take over and he appoints his sons and deposes his younger brothers. And the circle continues.

So the excluded people from the Political participation weren’t just Al-Ansar (at Abo-Bakr’s Era) or the people of the Conquered countries (at Omar’s Era) or the rest of Arabs (at Othman’s Era) or the rest of the Koraysh ( at Moawya’s Era) but it widened to include the caliphate’s brothers and cousins. The rest of the Arab tribes were contented by submitting to these rulers who ruled over them by force, intimidation and by controlling the Money House. So the Consulates groups were gradually shrunk to become a punch of tribes and army leaders and servants who were looking for the satisfaction of the caliphate.

And the Amowyan Policy of Exclusion, Despotism and enthrallment was correlated with the severity against the Non-Arabs and the Arabian rebels against the state. So they made three unprecedented actions in the first three years of Yazid’s Rule. In the first year they killed Al-Hussien and his people in Karbola. In the Second year they braked into Medina and they killed its people and captured its women. The next year they blockade and bombard the kaaba during the revolution of Al-Zobayr.

So we don’t wonder about AbdelMalik Ibn Marawan’s speech at 75 a.h. In Medina when he said “then, I am not the weekend caliphate (means Othman) and I am not the flatterer caliphate (means Moawya) .. So if anyone ordered me to fear God, I will break his neck” .

That indicated it was a despotic military rule based of pure force and intimidation and using every means to survive including religion, War, tribalism and Money. And those means contended together against the Amowyan State and destroy it.

The Korayshan State during the Abbasyan caliphate:

The Amoyans were specialized in trade, and that was the way they earn their position. So they stand against Islam in Meka then they supported it afterwards. But Al-Abbas Ibn el Mottalib the prophet’s uncle stayed in his disbelief working on keeping the proprieties of Hashimyans and pilgrims. And he fought against Muslims in Badr campaign. Then he returns to Meka to continue his religious trade while his friend Abo-Sofyan practices his “Secular” trade.During Meka Campaign Al-Abbas interceded for his friend Abo-Sofyan to the Prophet because he was a man of proud. Then the prophet pronounced the house of Abo-Sofyan as a safety house. But Al-Abbas stayed in Meka along with his son Abdullah in Meka although the prophet returns to Medina where he dies. Abdullah Al-Abbas’s son joined his cousin Ali Ibn Abou-Talib during his short caliphate as a governor of Basra, and when the caliphate collapsed he ran away with the House of Money ignoring his cousin’s invocation for him to return the money.

Then as we can see the despotic rulers were belonged to Amowyans (Abou-Sofyan, Al-Hakam Ibn Al-Abas) who were mainly concerned with getting money by anyway . And that was the policy of the military rule of Amowyans (the secular rule by our expression) or they were belonged to Abbasynians ( Abollah Ibn Abbas) who where a religion dealers aiming for Money and power. And this was the main difference between Amowyan and Abbasyan caliphate.

We can see this different in the two state’s policy. The Omwyan caliphate was an Arabic prejudiced despotic Arabic state. But the Abbasyan caliphate was a despotic religious state with a prejudiced religion doctrine. The history tells us that (Al-Akhtal) the Arabian Christian poet in the Amoyan Era was able to freely enter the Caliphate’s castle with his cross around his nick and he gladly gets out of there because he was Arabian. But the Egyptians –even if he becomes Muslim- had to pay tax. And in the Abbasian caliphate the caliphate was able to break the neck of any man who disagrees with him in politically or intellectuality by the accusation of atheism “Al-Zandaka”. Meantime there were a lot of real atheists living honored in the caliphate’s castle because they politically support the State against Al-Shea.

The Amowyan caliphate wasn’t established on a religious propaganda. It only used the low of Force. So it didn’t have to religiously justify its crimes against the prophet’s family and Medina and Meka. But the Abbasyan caliphate was established on a religious propaganda (getting contentment from Mohammed’s family by appointing one of his grandsons as a caliphate for the Islamic State) but after they established their state they persecuted all others including Ali’s Grandchildren with a slight difference. The caliphate had to get a religious justification from his jurists. So it is a low nation. But the low always comes from the caliphate’s jurists.

Shortly theAbbasyan caliphate was an obvious classical model for the religious state. Then the Fatimyans came afterwards with more fanatic religious policy. Then the Othmanyan State incorporated a medium policy.

Once, the caliphate Abo-Gafar almansor made a speech at Arafa day. He said “O, you people I am the God’s sultan in his land. I rule you with his guidance and he made me the keeper of his money, I give or prevent according to his will” so this Abbasyan caliphate ruled with the logic of the Middle Ages where the principle of “the divine right of Kings” were a common fact.

Finally:

What is left to say that the despotism’s culture was against the holly Koran’s legislation that established the prophet’s state. And while the Islamic Doctrine was written during these despotic religious States, we can say that there was the political exclusion process was paralleled to a an equal legislation exclusions to the Koranic verses that opposes Despotism, injustice and enslavement. And instead of it they established a whole new religion based on a false narrates of the prophet Mohamed and the changing of the Koranic concepts under the name of abrogation “Al-Naskh”. Even though that “Al-Naskh” means to write or to give a literal proof.Also they changed the Concept of “Al-Bayaa” -which means in Koran paying homage to hold on with right and defend it- to mean declaring submitting politically, religiously and Economically to the new sultan. Meantime they ignored the Concept of “Al-Malaa” in the holly Koran, which means the spoiling board that follows the ruler and they change it a new meaning which is “Ahl Al-Hall Wal-Akd” (the people of trust), Which contradicts –as we think- with the political reality. Because the center of influence mainly concentrated in the Women of the Abbasyan caliphates… they were the odalisques of the caliphate who became the mothers of the new caliphates.( except Zobayda the Husband of Al-Rasheed and the Mother of Al-Amin) those odalisques ruled the caliphate from behind the curtains in the Abbasyan (like Khayrazanah and Kabeha) , Fatimyan (like Shaghab) and Othmanyan caliphate ( like Woksalanah).

From a critical point of view to the Islamic Inheritance, It is clear for us that the Islamic State is a civil state based on the absolute right in thinking and justice for every Muslim individual, and the society’s absolute right in rule, wealth and security. And that happens with direct Democracy that may have been contradicting with the Middle Ages concepts, but it is convenient with our age. But it only needs Religion Enlightenment.

24
Dec
07

Statements of Belief

As we live in a world full of stereotypes, ever more so today, we believe that it is fundamental that we first identify and clarify our statements of belief. Doing so will erase any prejudice and judgments that might easily prevail once we assign ourselves any label whatsoever.That being said, we are followers and believers of Islam. While there might not be many sects under the umbrella of Islam, there are however many different manners of belief and practice when it comes to Islam. We believe solely in the Quran, as all that was descended upon all the prophets and messengers of God mentioned in the Quran. While we do consider the Hadith and all other holy texts to be often essential in explaining and highlighting some points in the Quran, we do not however take them to be indisputable words of God.The Quran alone, as it has directly descended to us from God, is what we regard as the source of all Islamic teachings. We therefore can look to the Hadith from a cricitical point of view, agreeing and disagreeing with its constituents whenever we see necessary.The Hadith and other holy texts might help us understand the context within which Islam descended. We value context and see that while the Quran is a transcendent text and is applicable to any age or time, it is still important to study its historical context to better understand it as a whole. The Quran is indeed timeless, however, some of its verses served immediate purposes specific to the time in which it descended. Similarly, the Quran does not stand as the sole governing power and that while it contains all the general codes of life, we still do require other governing bodies to lay down the complicated and detailed rules needed to serve daily needs and to suit our times.

We believe:

Any sort of aggression projected upon innocent human beings is wrong. This concerns both Muslim and non-Muslim communities and organizations. Whatever be it the cause, the act of using innocent lives to gain any right or power is impermissible.

As we derive all our beliefs from the Holy Quran, we see that to be a Muslim requires first and foremost that one accepts and lives according to the ‘Righteous Path’ (6:151,152,153). This should not be reduced only to the 5 pillars of Islam, as so popularly accepted. Also, Being a Muslim does not require any of the teachings stated in the Hadith unless they are purely a reiteration of those previously mentioned in the Quran.

In this same light, we find it perhaps important to highlight several of the commandments of the Quran that are fundamental to the religion and that have unfortunately often been misinterpreted, wrongly explained, and falsely inherited. Namely,

  • Unlike Sunni and Shia laws that condemn any apostate to death for rejecting Islam, the Quran allows for absolute Freedom of Faith (2:256, 10:99; 18:29).

  • Unlike the popular misbelief that Islam allows raids and attacks on other non-Mulsim entities in the name of Holy War, we believe in the Quran that states that war is justified only in the case of self-defense, not in offense.

  • Unlike in popular Sunni and Shiia practice where polygamy is allowed freely and wrongly misused, we believe that polygamy was made permissible by the Quran only under certain circumstances, namely, marrying mothers of the orphans of the men who had died during the war (4:3). This was mainly inserted in the Quran to solve the problem of all the women who were left widows when there husbands did not return from battle. Otherwise, Monogamy is therefore the main marital status permitted by the Quran.

  • Unlike accepted Sharia practice that rules that any thief should be punished by having his/her hand cut-off, we believe that as in the Quran, thieves must not have their hands cut-off but should rather be made to work in order to return what they have stolen. There should not be one absolute ruling that decides the punishment for a thief for there are many conditions that might differ the ruling from one case to the other. The cutting-off of hands was identified in the Quran as the utmost possible punishment for theft, not as the sole and only punishment for every act of theft.

  • Unlike common belief, adultery is not punished by being killed or stoned (24:2). Its maximum punishment, for both man and woman, is a hundred lashes and that requires that there be 4 witnesses. In this same regard, any witness that falsely accuses another person of adultery is punished by 80 lashes. And above all this, the Quran still allows for forgiveness and mercy in some cases of adultery.

  • Unlike Sunni and Shia practices that have included many superstitious and non Islamic rituals within the requirements of the Pilgrimage, we believe that the Pilgrimage was made to cononorate the sense of togetherness and unity amongst Muslims and does not entail any specific acts or rituals (i.e stoning the devil or the touching of the black stone).

  • Unlike Sunni belief that forbids silk and gold to be worn on men and deem music, statues, dogs unlawful, we believe that in Islam, music, statues, gold and silk are lawful (7:3233, 16:116).

  • Unlike Sunni and Shia rulings that have allowed for the nurture of dictatorships and monarchs that have abolished any form of democracy, we believe that according to the Islamic teachings, government should be based on consultation and on the freedom of speech.

  • Unlike Sunni and Shia teachings that allow for abrogation of verses of the Quran whereby some verses can erase or replace any of the older verses, we believe that the Quran in its entirety is perfect and free of any contradictions. Any verse is included there for a reason and serves its own unique purpose.

This list is by no mean exhaustive, we are simply trying to clarify certain points of our belief system to avoid being categorized or stereotyped by the numerous of the false pretexts that surround Islam today. We believe in Islam’s coherent and flawless teachings, and though they might have been misinterpreted by some of Islam’s followers, this should by no means reflect the nature of Islam itself.


12
Dec
07

Recommended Readings

This post contains a link to Dr. Shabbir’s recommended readings. It contains books and articles on Islam, history, science and the Quranic message written by scholars and intellectuals of all around the world. The works are meant for further studies, reflection and many can be used as sources for writings.

Dr. Sayed Abdul Wadud

Bashir Abid

MA Malek

Maurice Bucaille

Misc

http://ourbeacon.com/?page_id=219

09
Dec
07

From Radical to Reformed Muslim

By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | Tuesday, December 04, 2007

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is Edip Yuksel, a Kurdish-Turkish-American author and progressive activist who spent four years in Turkish prisons in the 1980’s for his political writings and activities promoting an Islamic revolution in Turkey. He experienced a paradigm change in 1986 transforming him from a Sunni Muslim leader to a reformed Muslim or rational monotheist.

Edip Yuksel has written more than twenty books and hundreds of articles on religion, politics, philosophy and law in Turkish, and numerous articles and booklets in English. He is the founder of 19.org and the Islamic Reform organization. His personal site is yuksel.org. Continue reading ‘From Radical to Reformed Muslim’

07
Dec
07

How do the terrorists justify terror by citing Islam?

terrorist.jpg


Iqbal Latif – 10/3/2006

The Farewell Pilgrimage of the Prophet Muhammed was a significant historical event in the Muslims life. Although thousands of Muslims witnessed the Farewell (last) Sermon given by the Prophet Muhammed, the Hadiths books reported at least three versions of the same Sermon. For an event witnessed by over 10,000 people an accurate narration should have been available, but it has not. Continue reading ‘How do the terrorists justify terror by citing Islam?’

05
Dec
07

Understanding Qur’an

Is there a hope to “Reform” Islam

An analysis of the real roots of Islamic terrorism and possible solutions

T. Hamid

It is evident that Islam has been linked to violence for almost all of its history.

Sadly, this is to a great extent true. From the beginning of the invasion of most of

Europe, North Africa and some parts of the East by early Muslims in order to

convert them to Islam. Continuously until the modern crisis of “Islamic Terrorism”

that shocked the world on Sep 11th, that ended the lives of many innocent Jews

in Israel, that ended the lives of many innocent Australians in Bali attack, that

caused the catastrophe of bombing the train in Spain, and which has tortured to

death many innocent Westerners who live in the Islamic world.

Many people in the West tried to correlate the recent violence observed in the

Islamic world to lack of education, poverty, and a feeling of oppression blamed

on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict.

Unfortunately, the simple facts showed us clearly, and beyond doubt, that these

excuses are not the true causes of “Islamic terrorism”. Most of the leaders of

terrorism are highly educated people who range from Doctors, e.g. Alzawaheri

the second man and the real brain of Alqaida, lawyers, e.g. the first female

Palestinian terrorist, and University students, e.g. Mohammed Atta who was one

of the top organisers of Sep the 11th. In addition, most of the hijackers on Sep 11th were from Saudi Arabia, the richest

Islamic country. If the theory of poverty is correct, why then are the poor people

who live in Brazilia are not the ones who lead international terrorism?

Furthermore, Islamic Terrorism was minimal between the declaration of the state

of Israel in 1948, until the early 1970’s, when the Arabs were in a real war with

Israel.

If the Israeli/Palestinian conflict was the cause of terrorism, we would have found

terrorism booming between 1948 until the early 1970’s. On the contrary, it

dramatically increased in the late 1980s and until now when some Arabs states

have signed peace agreements with Israel.

This increase in terrorism directly correlates with the rise of Islamism in the late

1980s until now.

I have a Muslim/Arabic background, and I know how Muslims (including myself at

an early stage of my life) think, I clearly state that Muslims are using the excuse

of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict just to make the world hate Israel. It has nothing

to do with the current phenomenon of terrorism. Which was going to happen any

way, as a secondary phenomenon to expanding a violent version of Islam in later

years?

It is also difficult for any normal mind to comprehend that throwing concentrated

sulphuric acid on the face of young girls who do not wear the Islamic veil/scarf,

by the hands of the Islamic groups in Algeria, is related to the Israeli/Palestinian

conflict.

As one who was a member of one of the most fanatical groups in Islam, GI in

Egypt, and as a person who has resisted Islamic fundamentalism when I realized

its threat some 20 years ago, I feel that it is my obligation toward mankind to

declare that the origin of Islamic Terrorism is deeply rooted in the way Muslims

understand their religion. In other words, in Islamic teaching itself.

When you read the Quran, you will find many great verses that promote peace

and tolerance. But you will also find verses that can make you very violent and

intolerant toward Non Muslims.

Sadly, most Islamic scholars throughout the history of Islam, present it in a way

that promotes a very violent and intolerant attitude. And more sadly, the

oppressive religious system suppresses many attempts to understand Islam in

the light of the peaceful verses.

Not only that, but the majority of Muslims especially those in the Arab world, are

brought up in a manner that considers a peaceful understanding of the religion as

a sign of weakness rather than a sign of strength.

A violent understanding of Islam is based on the following fundamental beliefs

that are fixed in the mind of many, if not most, knowledgeable Muslims.

These are:

1- The concept of “Allnasech and Almansuch” .

2- The ignorance of the value of the word “the” .

3- Practicing Hadith of “Al-Bukhary” and other books while ignoring

unambiguous peaceful verses of the Quran.

4- Historical understanding of the verses rather than language-based

understanding.

5- Presenting only a special part of the verse to promote specific meaning

and ignoring the rest of the verse.

Let us now address the previous points separately and see if this violent way

of thinking could change.

1- The concept of “Allnasech and Almansuch”.

According to this concept and based on traditional Islamic teaching, certain

verses especially the later ones cancel the meaning of other earlier verses on a

similar subject.

Let us have a look at these two parts of the Quran to understand the above

concept.

Verse 1

“60:8 God forbids you not, with regard to those who fight you not for (your) Faith

nor drive you out of your homes, from dealing very kindly and justly with them: for

God loves those who are just. 60:9 God only forbids you, with regard to those

who fight you for (your) Faith, and drives you out of your homes, and supports

(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.”

Verse 2

{9: 29} Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that

forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger (Mohammed),

nor acknowledge the religion of Truth (Islam), (even if they are) of the People of

the Book (Christians and Jews), until they pay the Jizia (Humiliation Tax

according to traditional Islamic teaching and practice in history) with submission,

and feel themselves subdued. (Revelation Number 113).

Sadly, according to the concept of “Allnasech and Almansuch” traditional Islamic

teaching teaches that the “later” verse negated the “former” which obviously will

result in extremely violent understanding and practice.

This way of thinking (to cancel the meaning of the peaceful verses) is

based on the following verse in the Quran:

There are two ways to understand the above Arabic word as the origin of the

word “Nansakho”, is the verb “Yansakho” or its more powerful version

“Yastansikho”.

The first way of understanding the word ‘Nansakho” in the above verse, is to

abrogate (cancel the meaning) as in the following verse:

“22:52 Never did We send an apostle or a prophet before thee, but, when he

framed a desire, Satan threw some (vanity) into his desire: but Allah will cancel

(Yansach) anything (vain) that Satan throws in, and Allah will confirm (and

establish) His Signs: for Allah is full of Knowledge and Wisdom

The other way of understanding, the word “Nansakho” means (to write

and document something) as in the following verse:

“2:106 None of Our revelations do We

abrogate “Nansakho” or cause to be

forgotten, but We substitute something

better or similar: Knowestthou not that God

is able to do any thing?

“45:29 “This Our Record speaks about you with truth: For We were wont

to put on Record and write down (Nastansikho) all that ye did.”

The difference here is huge, as according to traditional teaching, the first verse is

canceled out. Thus ending in the violent verses canceling the meaning of the

peaceful ones, as those violent verses were proclaimed by the prophet

Mohammed at a later time.

On the other hand, if the word “Nansakho” is understood as ‘to write down anddocument’ the meaning of the verse could be that: If God has written of his

miracles or signs (Aia) in the books or did not write it down and consequently

people forget it, he usually comes with a better one.

As you can see, the interpretation which is based on pure Arabic language,

shows the real power of God in bringing new and better miracles and signs every

time which is compatible with the word ‘able to do anything” at the end of the

verse.

While understanding it as ‘cancellation’ of a meaning, it is not compatible at all

with the ability of God, as any one can cancel what he or she said.

I

n other words the concept of cancellation of the meaning is not compatible at all

with the end of the verse (see the black box above).

Imagine that, according to the concept of cancellation of the verses, most of the

peaceful verses in the Quran were considered “Mansuch’ or cancelled by the

violent ones and consequently it is not surprising to find the outcome of Islam is

almost always violent!!

2-The ignorance of the value of the word “the”

Many readers may wonder how these three letters can make such a

fundamental difference in the understanding of the Islamic religion.

It is as if some one told you give me a book, and then you can generalize the

meaning and apply it to any book. Whilst if he or she said to you “give me the

book’ then the whole meaning changes to a specific book that both you and the

speaker know.

To explain this point in the understanding of the Quran, please have a look on

the following verse:

“9:73 O Prophet! strive hard against the (Infidels) unbelievers and the Hypocrites,

and be very harsh against them.

Typical Islamic teaching generalizes the above verse to all Infidels. This

obviously will succeed into changing many followers of Islam into beasts.

The word “the” specifies the meaning to ONLY a certain item or group. Such

groups are defined by the following verse that specifies with whom the rough

treatment, violence, or fighting should be:

“2:190 Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not start attacking

others.

If the word “the” is considered in the process of understanding the Quran, many

the verses that promote violence against Non-believers (Infidels) will be specific

to ONLY those who start war on Muslims and can not be applied to any “Infidel”.

Can you see now how the word ‘the” can make such a difference!

3-Practicing the Hadith of Bukhary, and other books, whilst ignoring the

“unambiguous” verses of the Quran.

Hadith is considered by most Muslims as the “oral traditions” of Mohammed. No

one is considered to be a Muslim without following them, according to traditional

Islamic teaching. These started to be collected some 200 years after the death of

the prophet Mohammed by a man called Al-Bukhary, who was followed by many

others who also collected (as they claim) the oral traditions of Mohammed.

The best example to illustrate how following Al-Bukhary resulted in a catastrophe

in Islam. It is the hadith that justifies killing any one who converts from Islam to

another religion.

The Hadith is in a book called Sahih Albuchary and is considered by Al-Bukhary

as a correct Hadith or “ Hadith Sahaih”.

Let us have a look now at that Hadith, and compare it to what the Quran has

stated:

Hadith: “ It is not allowed for any Muslim to kill another Muslim except in the

following circumstances: if he committed murder, if he committed adultery, and if

he converted from the Islamic religion to another religion”

Look now at what the Quran states, to understand the difference:

18:29 Say, “The truth is from your Lord”: it is up to anybody to believe it or not to

believe it (convert or become Infidel)”

I think the difference is clear between the two approaches.

As the reader can see, applying that which is written in Al-Boukhary resulted in

justifying the threat of killing many innocent people such as Salman Rushdie (the

author of the book, Satanic Verses), and many innocent people who want to

have a different form of belief.

Whilst, to the contrary, the Quran gave full freedom for any person to believe in

what he or she wants.

The application of the Hadith mentioned above (called Hadith Almurtad or theconverter) has resulted in largely the domination of the violent version of Islam as

the Hadith, which was used to kill virtually any one who dares to understand

Islam in a peaceful manner.

4-Historical understanding of the verses rather than language- based one

(Jihad)

The exact meaning of the word “Jihad” is ‘to resist’. This could be to resist an

enemy who attacks you, or resist your desire to do evil.

Sadly, the word has been used throughout the history of Islam to attack those of

different religions.

The Arab invasion of Europe and many other parts of the world such as

Palestine, and North Africa are evidence of this. Since then, the word has

become linked to an attacking attitude, rather than its real meaning, which is ‘to

resist’.

It is like the word ‘gay” which typically means “happy”. Since its repeated use

describing homosexuals, it has come to refer to homosexuals rather than its

former meaning. The same has happened with the word ‘Jihad’ which is linked to

the violent attitude of most of current Islamic teaching. Whilst the original

language-based meaning (to resist), was forgotten by most Muslims, and is

virtually non-existent nowadays.

Muslims now have one of two choices. These are to understand the word in its

historical context which means that they are declaring war against Non-Muslims

all over the world, or to revert to the pure Arabic language-based understanding

of the words encouraging peace.

5-Presenting only a special part of the verse to promote specific meaning

and ignoring the rest of the verse

This point can be exemplified by the following verse that is used by many Islamic

organisations to recruit young people.

“9:36 and fight the Infidels all together”.

When Muslims read this verse, many of them especially the young ones, get very

motivated to practice the will of ‘Allah” and start thinking of attacking Non-

Muslims to satisfy the Creator and inherit the paradise.

What these fundamental Islamic groups are not showing to these young Muslims

is the rest of the verse, which is, “as they fight you all together.”

The whole verse is “and fight the Infidels all together as they fight you all

together” but the Islamic groups presents the first part only to support their violent

views. They hide the rest of the verse, as it will specify the fighting to ONLY

those who start war on Muslims.

As can be seen, the traditional way of understanding Islam has contributed to the

violence that has been committed by Muslims around the world.

It is so sad to see that so many people following such teachings, as those who

attempted reformation or tried to promote a peaceful way of understanding Islam

were prosecuted or killed.

I

tried to teach a peaceful understanding of the Islamic religion for more than 20

years. I have warned many people of the catastrophic consequences that will

happen from the expansion of such violent understandings.

Sadly the attempt was on a very small scale, and I failed because I was fighting

virtually by myself against the violent version of Islam that is supported by the

money of Saudi Arabia.

It is now the responsibility of Muslims to either accept the traditional teachings

which will encourage them declare war on all Non- Muslims, or to accept the

peaceful way of understanding their religion which can make them good human

beings.

I sincerely hope that they choose the second option!

Finally, I want also to say to all Muslims:

Do not resist the light …….. Do not love the darkness ………… Hate the violent

way of thinking, as it makes you appear as beasts ….. Your violent way of

thinking has resulted in the killing of many innocent people in the West ……. and

has resulted in killing many innocent children in Israel.

I

wish to see you one day demonstrating in your millions and saying to those

barbarous Islamic fanatics like Bin Laden, “Bin Laden …… you are the enemy of

humanity”.

Your “deafening silence” just shows that you support terrorism in your hearts,

and that you need to change.

I have been into Churches and Synagogues where they were praying for you and

for peace – and at the same time – your Muslim preachers in the Mosques are

saying loudly, “Oh Allah make their children Orphans, .. Oh Allah make their

wives widows, and even (most recently), Oh Allah make the uterus of the Infidels’

wives fibrotic”…………… If this is what you want your religion to be … do not

blame those who will say “shame on Allah, and shame on your religion”

If you mean God by the word “Allah”, then I assure you that the true God will

curse you forever for defaming his name.

 




Stefan Rosty Founded TruthBooth22.04.07

  • 471,912 hitz

“Virtual Insanity”

That's not nature's way Well that's what they said yesterday There's nothing left to do but pray I think it's time I found a new religion Waoh - it's so insane To synthesize another strain There's something in these Futures that we have to be told. JAMIROQUAI

RSS Genuine Islam

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

trashcontentz (by day)

November 2017
M T W T F S S
« May    
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

trashcontentz (by month)

Bookmarks

RSS 9-11 News

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS RationalReality.com

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS Selves and Others

  • An error has occurred; the feed is probably down. Try again later.

RSS المؤلف: احمد صبحي منصور