Peace conference organised by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association Watford, to be held in Abbots Langley
From Watford Observer
12:03pm Tuesday 23rd November 2010
By Amie Mulderrig »
A peace conference organised by the Ahmadiyya Muslim Association Watford, is to be held in Abbots Langley this weekend.
Visitors are invited to the Henderson Hall, in the High Street, on Sunday, November 28.
The keynote speech will centre on “Respect to all holy scriptures – an Islamic perspective”, and will be delivered by Faiz Ahmad Zahid, Hertfordshire Imam of the community.
Muhammad Rafiuddin, president of the association, said: “This will be second such event held in Abbots Langley in recent years.
“We had very good turn out last time. The local community responded really well to our invitation and showed keen interest in learning about Islam’s peaceful message.”
There will be an opportunity to ask questions about Islam and refreshments will also be served.
Anyone interested in attending the event should email watford.ama@gmail.com or call Mr Rafiuddin on: 07725 722 726 for an invitation.
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Tuesday, November 9, 2010
On Iqbal day, 2010
Growing up in Pakistani educational system in the eighties, I was made aware of Allama Iqbal from the first day when I heard "lab pe aati hay dua" being recited in the school. The poem is prayer by a child that God may make his life a guiding light for others. Iqbal teaches the child that he must stand by the poor and help those in need. To be honset, children at school assembley just followed the tune. We had no idea what it meant. This was a generation which will grow up to live the democracy of post-Zia era and post-democracy Musharraf times. And now post-Musharraf democracy. We learnt that our collective lives were not a glowing beacon for people to follow, neither were we a generation to help our nation's poor and downtrodden. Iqbal's first dream is being broken every single day in Pakistan.We have seen enough carnage of racial, sectarian violence, a war in Kashmir, an insurgency in Baluchistan, a mutiny in tribal areas and the rise and further rise of terrorism. We have suffered natural calamaties of Biblical proprotions. Iqbal's prayer, recited by millions of Pakistani children remains unanswered.
During my middle school years, I was told that Iqbal was the person who saw the vision of Pakistan and Quaid e Azam fulfilled his dream. I imagined Iqbal, the wise sage, waking up from his dream in his candle-lit quarters, looking for a piece of paper to write down the description of this Divinely inspired vision. It turned out that this "dream" was a well thought out speech in a political conference, and later explained in a letter to the Daily Times, London. In these days, I became fond of Iqbal and borrowed his poetry books from the library and tried to memorize many of his poems. His Shaheen Momin was my hero, my ideal. His rhetoric of superiority of a praciticing Muslim and his message of revolution was very appeasing to me. At that time, I was also a keen reader of Naseem Hijazi, Barbara Cartland of urdu literature. Except for he was a man, and wrote novels around the glorious Muslim conquests in Middle-East and Europe. The comparison with Barbara Cartland is due to his fixation with just one era and with one aspect of history.
Iqbal's portrait appears in many offices across Pakistan. In many of his protraits, he appears in a contemplative pose with an eagle soaring in the background. The eagle or falcon represents a true Muslim. A soldier of Islam who is proud of his Islamic heritage and superior understanding of the world around him. To us, Iqbal was one of these super-Muslims. How bravely did he stand up to the British and Hindus to guide the Muslims to find their pride and recover their prestige. And Muslims of India did just that by creating Pakistan. I read about Captain Sarwar, Major Aziz Bhatti etc. and thought of them as personifications of Iqbal’s Shaheen. In the 80s, Gen. Zia’s american Jihad was taught in school books. India was always evil, Israel a mortal enemy and Russian was the official language in Hell. Iqbal’s selective poetry in school books, and many religious sunni teachers, no wonder Pakistanis have such a one-sided view of Iqbal.
Then I found Ghalib and Meer. Iqbal’s poetry did not seem as brilliant when I compared them. I discovered in college, that to consider Ghalib better than Iqbal was to confess that you preferred wine and women over your faith. But Ghalib’s poetry agreed with my thoughts more than Iqbal. Ghalib’s honesty and humour had much more to offer than Iqbal’s dry slogans. But when it came to politics, I was still in agreement with Iqbal. Muslims needed the strength of character, the military advantage to win their place in the world. Ghalib was always busy ruing his bad luck and failures. Meer was crying himself to sleep. But Iqbal was challenging the accursed satan himself. He even went as far as questioning God's Wisdom on why Muslims were in decline.
But then I found Faiz. Ghalib had a match. Iqbal was No. 3 in the list. Faiz teaches us to be stubborn in the face of adversity, but he also keeps one foot in the dreamland. He trusts God's Wisdom and accepts that pain and persecution is all a part of our collective experience. He may have been a communist, but his metaphors are more closely connected to the Holy Scriptures than Iqbal's.
What was my reason to demote Iqbal from my list of literary heroes? (He still is on the list.. but somewhere at number 25 or below). I read a comment once that Ghalib resorted to writing Qaseedahs for the British Monarch. I also found a lament Iqbal wrote at the death of Queen Victoria, where he equated the day of her death to Muharram. I have no problems with people writing praises for the Kings and Queens. Both did what they though was right. But Iqbal’s deep study of Greek and modern European philosophy had an impact on his own thinking. He was a student of history, but was not such a great revolutionary as portrayed in the books. He himself denied in a letter that he never wanted a separate homeland for muslims, but was only throwing options to ensure peace in India. I think muslims in India made Iqbal into a celebrity too soon. As soon as he returned after his overseas education, he was treated like a leader. His poetry was lauded as the best in the whole country. But was his phiolsophy as sound as his linguisitic abilities? I find that today, everyone claims Iqbal to be one of them. Secularists love him because he condemned the mullah. Mullah quotes him as he was a Jihadist. Scholars like Ghulam Ahmad Pervez (of Tolu-e-Islam) claim that Iqbal was a rationalist like Sir Syed. Indians revere him, Pakistanis claim the ownership over Iqbal. What was Iqbal? I think, he was a poet, who could never make up his mind.
A freethinker like he was, Iqbal dismissed orthodoxy for most of his life, until he required guidance (or was pushed to seek it) by the Ahrar. In 1935, just three years before his death, Dr. Iqbal felt the urge to oppose the Ahmadiyya Sect, despite his four decades long active relationship with them. His close relatives were Ahmadis. His eldest son, Aftab Iqbal was sent to Qadian to study in the Ahmadiyya boarding school. These last three years of his life, gave Iqbal the popularity among the ultra-orthodox Ahrar, and later Jamaat e Islami and other deobad and even salafi-wahabi movements.
I would like to believe that Iqbal’s vision was a federation of fucntioning muslim provinces who followed rationalist Islamic ideology like his. But who can tell? Our Jihadis find the ailing, angry and vindictive Iqbal more agreeable.
During my middle school years, I was told that Iqbal was the person who saw the vision of Pakistan and Quaid e Azam fulfilled his dream. I imagined Iqbal, the wise sage, waking up from his dream in his candle-lit quarters, looking for a piece of paper to write down the description of this Divinely inspired vision. It turned out that this "dream" was a well thought out speech in a political conference, and later explained in a letter to the Daily Times, London. In these days, I became fond of Iqbal and borrowed his poetry books from the library and tried to memorize many of his poems. His Shaheen Momin was my hero, my ideal. His rhetoric of superiority of a praciticing Muslim and his message of revolution was very appeasing to me. At that time, I was also a keen reader of Naseem Hijazi, Barbara Cartland of urdu literature. Except for he was a man, and wrote novels around the glorious Muslim conquests in Middle-East and Europe. The comparison with Barbara Cartland is due to his fixation with just one era and with one aspect of history.
Iqbal's portrait appears in many offices across Pakistan. In many of his protraits, he appears in a contemplative pose with an eagle soaring in the background. The eagle or falcon represents a true Muslim. A soldier of Islam who is proud of his Islamic heritage and superior understanding of the world around him. To us, Iqbal was one of these super-Muslims. How bravely did he stand up to the British and Hindus to guide the Muslims to find their pride and recover their prestige. And Muslims of India did just that by creating Pakistan. I read about Captain Sarwar, Major Aziz Bhatti etc. and thought of them as personifications of Iqbal’s Shaheen. In the 80s, Gen. Zia’s american Jihad was taught in school books. India was always evil, Israel a mortal enemy and Russian was the official language in Hell. Iqbal’s selective poetry in school books, and many religious sunni teachers, no wonder Pakistanis have such a one-sided view of Iqbal.
Then I found Ghalib and Meer. Iqbal’s poetry did not seem as brilliant when I compared them. I discovered in college, that to consider Ghalib better than Iqbal was to confess that you preferred wine and women over your faith. But Ghalib’s poetry agreed with my thoughts more than Iqbal. Ghalib’s honesty and humour had much more to offer than Iqbal’s dry slogans. But when it came to politics, I was still in agreement with Iqbal. Muslims needed the strength of character, the military advantage to win their place in the world. Ghalib was always busy ruing his bad luck and failures. Meer was crying himself to sleep. But Iqbal was challenging the accursed satan himself. He even went as far as questioning God's Wisdom on why Muslims were in decline.
But then I found Faiz. Ghalib had a match. Iqbal was No. 3 in the list. Faiz teaches us to be stubborn in the face of adversity, but he also keeps one foot in the dreamland. He trusts God's Wisdom and accepts that pain and persecution is all a part of our collective experience. He may have been a communist, but his metaphors are more closely connected to the Holy Scriptures than Iqbal's.
What was my reason to demote Iqbal from my list of literary heroes? (He still is on the list.. but somewhere at number 25 or below). I read a comment once that Ghalib resorted to writing Qaseedahs for the British Monarch. I also found a lament Iqbal wrote at the death of Queen Victoria, where he equated the day of her death to Muharram. I have no problems with people writing praises for the Kings and Queens. Both did what they though was right. But Iqbal’s deep study of Greek and modern European philosophy had an impact on his own thinking. He was a student of history, but was not such a great revolutionary as portrayed in the books. He himself denied in a letter that he never wanted a separate homeland for muslims, but was only throwing options to ensure peace in India. I think muslims in India made Iqbal into a celebrity too soon. As soon as he returned after his overseas education, he was treated like a leader. His poetry was lauded as the best in the whole country. But was his phiolsophy as sound as his linguisitic abilities? I find that today, everyone claims Iqbal to be one of them. Secularists love him because he condemned the mullah. Mullah quotes him as he was a Jihadist. Scholars like Ghulam Ahmad Pervez (of Tolu-e-Islam) claim that Iqbal was a rationalist like Sir Syed. Indians revere him, Pakistanis claim the ownership over Iqbal. What was Iqbal? I think, he was a poet, who could never make up his mind.
A freethinker like he was, Iqbal dismissed orthodoxy for most of his life, until he required guidance (or was pushed to seek it) by the Ahrar. In 1935, just three years before his death, Dr. Iqbal felt the urge to oppose the Ahmadiyya Sect, despite his four decades long active relationship with them. His close relatives were Ahmadis. His eldest son, Aftab Iqbal was sent to Qadian to study in the Ahmadiyya boarding school. These last three years of his life, gave Iqbal the popularity among the ultra-orthodox Ahrar, and later Jamaat e Islami and other deobad and even salafi-wahabi movements.
I would like to believe that Iqbal’s vision was a federation of fucntioning muslim provinces who followed rationalist Islamic ideology like his. But who can tell? Our Jihadis find the ailing, angry and vindictive Iqbal more agreeable.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
The Death of Tolerance; Angela Merkel, Melanie Phillips and Rupert Murdoch
Melanie Phillips in her recent Spectator article has painted a grim picture for the future of Europe. This was in the light of Chancellor Merkel's recent comments about the failure of multiculturalism in Germany. I have no doubt that the German Chancellor's concerns are legitimate and Europe is indeed failing to assimilate the large number of non-EU immigrants into the mainstream culture.
I also agree with the opinion that various religious views held by these immigrants may be a reason for their failure to be accepted by their ethnic European neighbours. Radical Islam is a concern for everyone, Including a vast majority of those immigrant who have come to Europe to escape the tyrannical "Islamic" governments in their homelands.
Here is my problem. The far-right has always been around. Germany has seen its fair share of this in the past. Many European countries have seen a resurgence of right-wing politics in recent years. This is expected during every economic downturn. When jobs are scarce, when the state benefits system is under pressure, it is always immigrants who become the scapegoat.
Melanie mentioned Ahmadi Muslims in London being persecuted by the local extremists. This was apparently an example of how bad things are. Extremist Muslims are running amok in the heart of the western world! Tower Hamlet is an independent Sharia state and Hijabis are terrorizing innocent Londoners. This is not a good argument against immigration. Against Bigotry and misplaced cultural practices yes, but not against immigration.
I am an Ahmadi Muslim. There are many thousands of us living in London. Yes, we suffer from persecution in various Muslim countries, and yes, even in this country, orthodox Muslims oppose us at every opportunity they get. They have even campaigned against building of our mosque and have helped EDL and BNP to prevent our community projects from going ahead. The problem is bigotry. Its not only brown people from overseas bringing their evil ideologies to our shores. We have our own, home grown bigotry to deal with as well.
Ms. Philips also states that a lady burnt alive in Bradford was somehow a victim of Islamic extremism. That as a gruesome murder. As far as I know, murder have been happening in England before immigrants arrived on their boats.
The West has always taken the higher moral ground when it comes to "lesser" nationalities. They have always been backward and ignorant, they have always shown resistance to reform or they have always been stubborn, stuck in their ways. This is why they come in their droves to enjoy a lifestyle of luxuries by exploiting our benefit system. They multiply and increase by being a burden on our state and we "the white people" must pay for it. During the years of plenty, increasing number of people, from all ethnic backgrounds started living on state benefits as in many cases it paid more than working for a living. Immigrants appear to have benefited more than the rest because they were the most disadvantaged. It was the state's job to make the best use of its human resource by discouraging dependence on benefits.
Western economies have increased because skilled and highly educated immigrants have moved to the financial capitals in search of a better life. While money has been generated through industry and innovation and by war mongering in the third world, the immigrant diasporas have influenced their surroundings. Like all immigrants before them, Normans and Norse, Turks and Romans, their influence can not be categorized as bad or detrimental. What is Western culture any way? Is it a set of practices which are required to remain unchanged forever? With increasing frequency, the cultures and practices of third world change to suit the demands of a changing world. New and more humiliating ways of finding daily sustenance are being invented in African and Asian slums. Thoughts of austerity frighten us. While it is the part of immigrant nature to live on meagre incomes, to fit their families within less than adequate housing , but to work hard and to provide for their dependants at home and in their homelands also is their duty. An immigrant is more cost effective for the West than an indigenous European. They cost less but have to offer their youth, their taxes and and their loyalties to a country for a very cheap price. Rejecting them will only create more suffering.
Then Melanie quotes Rupert Murdoch on a completely unrelated matter. Mr. Murdoch links immigration with the rise of anti-semitism in Europe. So now Muslims have caused this too? Hating Jews has been a very European/Christian trait. Melanie Philips thinks that Jews have an "ancient" right over Palestine. Same Jews who were doing fine until some anti-semites thought that they did not belong in Europe. Jews were immigrants who were stuck in their ways. They did not abandon their religion to conform to the Christian European customs. They stuck to their culture and Europe punished them for being so Jewish after all those centuries they had lived among them.
I guess it is time for another revolution in Europe. Philips, Murdoch and their ilk would love another cleansing of the West to bring it back to the pristine whiteness it was all those years ago.
I also agree with the opinion that various religious views held by these immigrants may be a reason for their failure to be accepted by their ethnic European neighbours. Radical Islam is a concern for everyone, Including a vast majority of those immigrant who have come to Europe to escape the tyrannical "Islamic" governments in their homelands.
Here is my problem. The far-right has always been around. Germany has seen its fair share of this in the past. Many European countries have seen a resurgence of right-wing politics in recent years. This is expected during every economic downturn. When jobs are scarce, when the state benefits system is under pressure, it is always immigrants who become the scapegoat.
Melanie mentioned Ahmadi Muslims in London being persecuted by the local extremists. This was apparently an example of how bad things are. Extremist Muslims are running amok in the heart of the western world! Tower Hamlet is an independent Sharia state and Hijabis are terrorizing innocent Londoners. This is not a good argument against immigration. Against Bigotry and misplaced cultural practices yes, but not against immigration.
I am an Ahmadi Muslim. There are many thousands of us living in London. Yes, we suffer from persecution in various Muslim countries, and yes, even in this country, orthodox Muslims oppose us at every opportunity they get. They have even campaigned against building of our mosque and have helped EDL and BNP to prevent our community projects from going ahead. The problem is bigotry. Its not only brown people from overseas bringing their evil ideologies to our shores. We have our own, home grown bigotry to deal with as well.
Ms. Philips also states that a lady burnt alive in Bradford was somehow a victim of Islamic extremism. That as a gruesome murder. As far as I know, murder have been happening in England before immigrants arrived on their boats.
The West has always taken the higher moral ground when it comes to "lesser" nationalities. They have always been backward and ignorant, they have always shown resistance to reform or they have always been stubborn, stuck in their ways. This is why they come in their droves to enjoy a lifestyle of luxuries by exploiting our benefit system. They multiply and increase by being a burden on our state and we "the white people" must pay for it. During the years of plenty, increasing number of people, from all ethnic backgrounds started living on state benefits as in many cases it paid more than working for a living. Immigrants appear to have benefited more than the rest because they were the most disadvantaged. It was the state's job to make the best use of its human resource by discouraging dependence on benefits.
Western economies have increased because skilled and highly educated immigrants have moved to the financial capitals in search of a better life. While money has been generated through industry and innovation and by war mongering in the third world, the immigrant diasporas have influenced their surroundings. Like all immigrants before them, Normans and Norse, Turks and Romans, their influence can not be categorized as bad or detrimental. What is Western culture any way? Is it a set of practices which are required to remain unchanged forever? With increasing frequency, the cultures and practices of third world change to suit the demands of a changing world. New and more humiliating ways of finding daily sustenance are being invented in African and Asian slums. Thoughts of austerity frighten us. While it is the part of immigrant nature to live on meagre incomes, to fit their families within less than adequate housing , but to work hard and to provide for their dependants at home and in their homelands also is their duty. An immigrant is more cost effective for the West than an indigenous European. They cost less but have to offer their youth, their taxes and and their loyalties to a country for a very cheap price. Rejecting them will only create more suffering.
Then Melanie quotes Rupert Murdoch on a completely unrelated matter. Mr. Murdoch links immigration with the rise of anti-semitism in Europe. So now Muslims have caused this too? Hating Jews has been a very European/Christian trait. Melanie Philips thinks that Jews have an "ancient" right over Palestine. Same Jews who were doing fine until some anti-semites thought that they did not belong in Europe. Jews were immigrants who were stuck in their ways. They did not abandon their religion to conform to the Christian European customs. They stuck to their culture and Europe punished them for being so Jewish after all those centuries they had lived among them.
I guess it is time for another revolution in Europe. Philips, Murdoch and their ilk would love another cleansing of the West to bring it back to the pristine whiteness it was all those years ago.
Monday, October 4, 2010
Don’t fight God. It is not for you to destroy me!
Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad of Qadian, The Imam Mahdi and The Promised Messiah (alyhis Salam) writes;
"The world does not know me, but He knows me Who has sent me. Those who wish my destruction are mistaken and extremely unfortunate. I am the tree which has been planted by the Lord God with His own hands.....
“O People! You must understand this for sure that I am accompanied by that Hand which shall remain faithful to me till the end of time. If your men and your women, and your young and your old, and your insignificant ones and your notables: all committed themselves to praying for my destruction—so much so that your noses get withered and wasted away due to your endless prostrations, and your hands become numb, even then God will most certainly not accept your prayers, and He will not
relent until His will is done. Even if I do not have a single human being with me, the angels of God will be on my side. And if you withhold your testimony, the stone will well night testify for me.
Therefore, do not wrong your souls. God leaves nothing unresolved. I consider as accursed a life which is tainted with falsehood and lies, and which, out of the fear of the creatures of God, evades to comply with Divine imperatives. It is certainly impossible for me to show any slackness—even if the Sun moved from one side and the Earth from the other to crush me between them—in carrying out the duty which God Almighty has at the moment entrusted to me, and for which Alone He has sent me. What is man? A mere worm and nothing more than a clot! How then can I, for the sake of this lowly creature, fail toabide by what the Self-Subsistent Being has commanded. Just as God decided between His prophets and those who rejected them, so shall He decide now. There is a time for the prophets to come and a time to depart: do mark it for sure, that I have neither made a seasonless appearance, nor shall my exit be unseasonable.
Don’t fight God. It is not for you to destroy me!"
[Tohfae Golarviyyah, Roohaani Khazaa’in vol. 17, pp. 49-50]
“O People! You must understand this for sure that I am accompanied by that Hand which shall remain faithful to me till the end of time. If your men and your women, and your young and your old, and your insignificant ones and your notables: all committed themselves to praying for my destruction—so much so that your noses get withered and wasted away due to your endless prostrations, and your hands become numb, even then God will most certainly not accept your prayers, and He will not
relent until His will is done. Even if I do not have a single human being with me, the angels of God will be on my side. And if you withhold your testimony, the stone will well night testify for me.
Therefore, do not wrong your souls. God leaves nothing unresolved. I consider as accursed a life which is tainted with falsehood and lies, and which, out of the fear of the creatures of God, evades to comply with Divine imperatives. It is certainly impossible for me to show any slackness—even if the Sun moved from one side and the Earth from the other to crush me between them—in carrying out the duty which God Almighty has at the moment entrusted to me, and for which Alone He has sent me. What is man? A mere worm and nothing more than a clot! How then can I, for the sake of this lowly creature, fail toabide by what the Self-Subsistent Being has commanded. Just as God decided between His prophets and those who rejected them, so shall He decide now. There is a time for the prophets to come and a time to depart: do mark it for sure, that I have neither made a seasonless appearance, nor shall my exit be unseasonable.
Don’t fight God. It is not for you to destroy me!"
[Tohfae Golarviyyah, Roohaani Khazaa’in vol. 17, pp. 49-50]
Monday, September 13, 2010
میں یہ کس کے نام لکھّوں
میں یہ کس کے نام لکھّوں جو الم گزر رہے ہیں
مرے شہر جل رہے ہیں مرے لوگ مر رہے ہیں
کوئی غنچہ ہو کہ گُل ہو کوئی شاخ ہو شجر ہو
وہ ہوائے گُلستاں ہے کہ سبھی بکھر رہے ہیں
کبھی رحمتیں تھیں نازل اسی خطّہء زمیں پر
وہی خطہء زمیں ہے کہ عذاب اتر رہے ہیں
وہی طائروں کے جھرمٹ جو ہَوا میں جھولتے تھے
وہ فضا کو دیکھتے ہیں تو اب آہ بھر رہے ہیں
بڑی آرزو تھی ہم کو نئے خواب دیکھنے کی
سو اب اپنی زندگی میں نئے خواب بھر رہے ہیں
کوئی اور تو نہیں ہے پس ِ خنجر آزمائی
ہمیں قتل ہو رہے ہیں، ہمیں قتل کر رہے ہیں
مرے شہر جل رہے ہیں مرے لوگ مر رہے ہیں
کوئی غنچہ ہو کہ گُل ہو کوئی شاخ ہو شجر ہو
وہ ہوائے گُلستاں ہے کہ سبھی بکھر رہے ہیں
کبھی رحمتیں تھیں نازل اسی خطّہء زمیں پر
وہی خطہء زمیں ہے کہ عذاب اتر رہے ہیں
وہی طائروں کے جھرمٹ جو ہَوا میں جھولتے تھے
وہ فضا کو دیکھتے ہیں تو اب آہ بھر رہے ہیں
بڑی آرزو تھی ہم کو نئے خواب دیکھنے کی
سو اب اپنی زندگی میں نئے خواب بھر رہے ہیں
کوئی اور تو نہیں ہے پس ِ خنجر آزمائی
ہمیں قتل ہو رہے ہیں، ہمیں قتل کر رہے ہیں
عبید اللہ علیم
Monday, September 6, 2010
Error of their ways; Where Muslims have gone wrong.
Promised Messiah, and Imam Mahdi, Hadhrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (a.s) writes;
"It is a remarkable coincidence that Christians erred with respect to the rights of God, while Muslims erred with respect to the rights of human beings. That is, the Christian faith raised a humble man to Godhood, thereby compromising the obligations due to the All-Powerful, All-Sustaining Being Who has no equal in heaven or earth. But Muslims violated human rights by unjustly raising the sword and calling it jihad. In short, Christians adopted one path of violating rights, and Muslims adopted the other. Unfortunately for this era, both of these groups consider their own transgressions to be desirable. Each therefore emphasizes its own doctrine, certain that this alone is the straight path and best way to Paradise. Although violation of God’s rights is the greatest of sins, it is not my intention here to discuss this dangerous offense of which the Christian people are guilty but rather to make Muslims aware of the transgressions that they are committing against their fellow human beings.
It should be remembered that today’s Islamic scholars (who are called maulavis) completely misunderstand jihad and misrepresent it to the general public. The public’s violent instincts are inflamed as a result and they are stripped of all noble human virtues. This is in fact what has happened. I know for certain that maulavis who persist in propagating these blood-spattered doctrines are in fact responsible for murders committed by ignorant, egotistical people who know nothing of why Islam was forced to fight battles in its early history."
It should be remembered that today’s Islamic scholars (who are called maulavis) completely misunderstand jihad and misrepresent it to the general public. The public’s violent instincts are inflamed as a result and they are stripped of all noble human virtues. This is in fact what has happened. I know for certain that maulavis who persist in propagating these blood-spattered doctrines are in fact responsible for murders committed by ignorant, egotistical people who know nothing of why Islam was forced to fight battles in its early history."
British Government and Jihad, Published more than 100 years ago.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)