Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Banu Musa

  • entry
    1
  • comments
    16
  • views
    1,942

Yoel

3,062 views

 

Reposting my old post and summarizing some comments to it.

Quite a few Christians, especially Protestants, claim the following combination of beliefs that I find highly disturbing:

1) That “pharisaic” Judaism and its central text, Talmud, are “satanic”

2) That Islam is similar to Talmudic Judaism and therefore, by extension, is also “satanic”

3) That the entire world must support the state of “Israel” and that Palestinians are bad, because they don't support it.

 

Since I studied in traditional anti-Zionist rabbinical institutions, I am well familiar with this topic and I would like to say a few words about it.

Interestingly enough, these beliefs represent in a distilled form the original core idea of Zionism and demonstrate its origins very well. In colonial times, various British and American Protestant theologians of the early 19th century started spreading the idea of the “restoration of the Jews”. Based on their peculiar interpretation of the Christian Bible, they came to believe that if the Jews will gather in Palestine and establish there their own state, such event would trigger the Second Coming of Christ. Apparently, this idea originated from the Catholic Jesuit circles, but found a solid ground among the Anglo-Saxon Protestants, some of whom came to believe to another weird idea that they are the descendents of the original Hebrew tribes and therefore have the right to control Palestine. This website has a large collection of historical articles about these developments within Protestant groups.

Contrary to Judaism, these people viewed Jews as a race and not a religion. The colonial West in the 18th and 19th centuries was in general obsessed with racial and nationalist theories. The Church condemned the Jewish Talmud since the Middle Ages, primarily because it sharply criticizes the Christian Trinity doctrine and because is written is a style that most Christian couldn't comprehend. After the series of liberal revolutions, more and more assimilated Jews became emancipated in the Western society, but due to the spread of nationalism, new anti-Jewish currents emerged in the West. In contrast to traditional anti-Judaism of the Church, these new currents were based on racial mythologies.

Some assimilated Jews picked up the “brilliant” solution that early Christian Zionists offered for them: to establish their own state, based on the “enlightened” Western values of secular nationalism and colonial attitudes to non-Western people. Theodor Herzl, the founder of political Zionism, wanted originally to convert all Jews to Christianity, but later modified his views and supported “plain” secularization. Here comes a major paradox: those British and American Christians who supported this idea really wanted the Jews (and everyone in the world) to become Christians, but wished them to move to Palestine, where they could serve as allies of the colonial West. They didn't want anything “Talmudic”; they just wanted to create another “civilized” Western colonial state like South Africa.

Traditional Talmudic Jews, on their hand, were totally opposed to Zionism, because the Talmud explicitly forbids this idea of gathering in Palestine and establishing their own state. This idea contradicts the basic Jewish belief that only the true Redeemer sent from God can gather them in a miraculous way and even that is not universally accepted. According to some more esoteric Jewish teachings, the future messianic Redemption of universal harmony will transcend state politics altogether.

This is the real Zionist “conspiracy”: the entire Zionist movement started as a result of cooperation between Anglo-Saxon Protestants and anti-traditional assimilated Jewish nationalists. The Talmud as such plays no role in classical Zionism, except that some isolated concepts from it were adopted as secularized slogans, often in a completely twisted fashion. 90% of Jewish Zionists, let alone the Christian ones, are unable to read the Talmud at all. At best, they may consider it an important historical piece of Jewish literature. Typical high-rank supporters of the Zionist state like bankers and politicians are usually totally secular and have no serious Jewish education. As long as they thinks and acts like their right-wing Protestant Christian fellow ruthless businessmen, they are “cool”. If they would act "Talmudic", they wouldn't fit into the club.

Since the Zionists captured and twisted the minds of many Jews, new heretical varieties of Judaism emerged from this confusion. Such notorious fascists as Baruch Goldstein or Meir Kahane undoubtedly considered themselves followers of the Talmud. We hear now chief rabbis and famous religious figures supporting Zionism and spreading hatred against the Palestinians and Muslims. How did this happen? Simple enough and in some ways quite similar to Wahhabi currents in Islam.

The Talmudic corpus and related literature is a very large and complicated collection of texts, which may be compared to the Muslim Hadith collections. The Quran (5:32) contains an explicit quote from the Talmud and affirms the basic traditional Jewish belief that the Talmud contains supplemental parts of Moses' prophecy, which has been transmitted through oral narration. The above verse is found only in the Talmudic literature and not anywhere in the Bible. A number of other verses in Quran also have parallels in the Talmud and not found in the Scripture.

Besides orally transmitted information from the prophets, the Talmud contains many legal decisions that the Talmudic sages derived using certain logical rules, which were also transmitted from Moses. It also contains historical rabbinical decrees, esoteric interpretations of the Scripture, theological and ethical discussions, various folk legends and even ancient medicinal remedies. Those Christians who tried to study the Talmud and came to hate it didn't get what it is all about. The Talmudic literature is a extremely large and diverse collection of discussions about all sorts of things, recorded during many centuries mostly in Persia and written in a very Persian multilayer story-inside-story style. The largest and most reliable collection is called “Bavli”, which means the Babylonian or Iranian Talmud. It's written mostly in Sassanian dialects of Aramaic, not in Hebrew.

Practical law or advices comprise only a fraction of the Talmud and are a matter of debates and analysis. Many narrations and interpretations are rejected by the Talmudic text itself, but were still considered worth recording or allowing an esoteric interpretation. In some cases, parallel narrations allow to decide, which variant is more reliable in practice. A number of schools within Judaism, somewhat like Islamic madhhabs, derive various laws from the Talmud by somewhat different rules. One school considers a certain narrator or some text more practically reliable than another etc.

No one in traditional Judaism, since the Middle Ages, derives any law directly from the Talmud without consulting first classic commentators and existing practical legal literature. Proper understanding of the Talmud requires years of systematic study and reading lots of commentaries.

Maybe, this link to another Shiachat thread could help the readers to understand where most of these old Christian accusations come from. Anti-Muslim writers use the Ahadith in the same exact fashion, taking things out of context or by amplifying weak rejected narrations.

Many Talmudic discussions are related to similar theoretical issues. Capital punishment was abolished in Judaism about 2000 years ago, because no one is considered righteous enough to serve as a judge or witness for such serious cases. Even when capital punishment existed, it was very rarely practiced by the line of tradition that became what's known today as rabbinical Judaism. Only very directly committed offenses, with at least two righteous male witnesses and a proper warning, could lead to death penalty. In many cases, the Talmud discusses, whether some weird and disgusting actions could be punished, in theory, by a human court, or whether one who did them may perform certain religious rituals. Such discussions also help to understand the metaphysical, philosophical and esoteric underpinnings of various laws.

One classic example that Christians constantly use against the Talmud is that a Jew who kills a non-Jew is exempt from death penalty. First of all, some commentators explain that it only applies to people who worship idols and have no morality, and not to Christians and Muslims. Murder of a Jew or non-Jew is a terrible sin, whether punishable by human means or not. Second, the Talmud lists many other situations when a murderer is exempt from penalty. The general line in the Talmud is to find all possible ways and arguments to avoid death penalty. A court who would kill even one person in 70 years would be considered a “bloody court” and some sages provided a logic that, in Islamic terms, avoids “hudud” altogether.

Another classic example Christians use against the Talmud that it allegedly teaches that sex with a girl below 3 years is permitted. Absolutely not! What it says that if such undoubtedly disgusting act happened, the girl would still be considered a virgin and her honor would not be blemished.

The main and most famous complaint against the Talmud is its alleged teachings of Jewish supremacy. The Talmud never considers non-Jews “subhuman”. That's simply a fabrication. But it does contain pretty harsh statements about idol worshipers and teachings about the Jews' being a people who receive special and unique blessings from God, if they carefully follow Judaism.

One main source of controversy and potential misunderstanding is that the Talmudic texts sometimes conflate the terms "goy" (non-Jew) and "akum" (abbreviation of "Star worshippers"), because most non-Jews, when the Talmud was written, were "by default" idol worshippers of various kinds. Careful analysis of parallel narrations shows that all this negative stuff is about idolaters. The Talmud praises non-Jewish monotheists, including some Persian kings and other people.

Another example. Current standard editions of the Babylonian Talmud (Sanhedrin 37a) contain the following: Therefore, humans were created singly, to teach you that whoever destroys a single soul of Israel, Scripture accounts it as if he had destroyed a full world; and whoever saves one soul of Israel, Scripture accounts it as if she had saved a full world. The oldest version of this Talmudic quote correspond exactly to the Quran 5:32 and don't mention Jews in particular. The Yerushalmi Talmud, the Midrashim and several other parallel transmissions of this quote also don't mention the word "Israel". Even in the case of the common Babylonian Talmud editions, this quote makes a difference between Jews and immoral non-believers, but does not, exclude non-Jews who practice an ethical monotheistic religion, as it is easy to prove by the internal logic of the same Talmudic tract, which praises non-Jewish monotheists and equated them with the Jewish High Priest who served at the Jerusalem Temple (Sanhedrin 59a). In Islamic terms, this is an example of a "weak Hadith".

The basic practical Talmudic structure of categories of believers/unbelievers, as their are interpreted in Judaism, goes as follows:

Good people:


  1. Torah-observant Jews, who receive special blessings for following Moses' prophecy. A convert to Judaism is a Jew. According to traditional Judaism, it doesn't matter, whether Jews today are descendents of the ancient Hebrews or Khazars or Romans.

  2. Righteous non-Jews, who follow the prophecy of Noah and receive special blessings. Muslims are usually included in this category or in a somewhat different respected category of people. Trinitarian Christians are included by many opinions, but it's a matter of debate. Some schools of thought completely equate Muslims and Christians with the Jews on social and spiritual level. More liberal rabbinical authorities include all ethical people into this category, including polytheists and atheists, using basic ethics as the main criterion of righteousness. I personally agree with this opinion.

It's a duty for Jews to support, love, help, treat well, respect all good people.

Bad people:


  1. Classic idolaters of Antiquity. In times of peace, Jews must treat them well and with hospitality, deal with them fairly, help their poor, but the basic attitude is to stay away from them, not to get too friendly and not to help them too much.

  2. Ex-Jewish outright heretics and non-believers. The worst category in the Talmud. No love, no good treatment here. According to some hardcore opinions, they may be killed even without a court decree. To secular Jewish readers: No, neither me nor most Orthodox Jews today accept this attitude. People get confused and come up with all sorts of ideas. Some atheist definitions of nature or philosophical ground of being are more theologically sound than some other people's weird ideas about God, who may better decide, who is a heretic and who is not.

The “gray zone”:


  1. Many classic sources of rabbinical law say that the Talmud condemns only the seven ancient Canaanite tribes who practiced human sacrifices or other ancient nations like the Romans who would come to a circus to entertain themselves watching animals tearing people apart or forcing slaves to fight each other to death. So, even someone would erect today a statue, proclaim it as a deity and bow to it, there is still room to disregard this behavior, love and respect such a person. Or, esoterically, one may say that everything is a reflection of God's names and this person in his heart really worships God. On the other hand, because the status of Trinitarian Christianity is a matter a debate in Judaism and because the Church systematically persecuted, killed, tortured and humiliated the Jews until recent times, there are many Orthodox Jews who avoid having close friendship with Christians and have negative opinions of their religion. For Christian readers: No, I don't agree with this attitude and many Orthodox Jews don't. But there is enough room for opposite opinions here. More inclusively minded Orthodox Jews tend to value ethical behavior over religious beliefs, while more hardcore Orthodox tend to regard people as heretics and idolaters for any slight deviation. In any case, traditional Judaism requires to treat everyone nicely and fairly.

Traditionally, Islam was always considered the closest religion to Judaism. Christianity, on the other hand, was often viewed negatively, although there are many highly positive opinions on it, i.e. by Menachem Meiri, Jacob Emden and Elia Benamozegh. Very many classic commentaries to the Torah and Talmud were written in Muslim countries, often originally in Arabic. Most classical schools of rabbinical law were established in Muslim countries.

The Zionists turned the Jewish history upside down. They discarded the long history of Jewish-Islamic cultural synthesis and invented the myth of “Judeo-Christian” civilization. Classical Judaism with its Talmud, which explicitly forbids the Jews to create a state in Palestine and which was written in a “politically incorrect” region (Iraq and Iran), has no place in classical secular Zionism.

But here comes a surprising twist. After the Nazi genocide of millions of European Jews, the Zionist movement captured the attention of most Jews who were well familiar with the long history of traditional Christian anti-Jewish hatred. But the Zionist's best allies and the originators of their ideology were some Protestant sects who don't exactly like Judaism. So the Zionists projected the history of Christian anti-Jewish persecution on the Muslims. To be fair, persecutions did happen under various Muslim rulers, but they were not nearly as common as in the Christian world and they were actions of certain corrupt individuals and not an integral doctrine of religion. The Jews perfectly understood that, but the Zionists seized the moment after the Nazi genocide and managed to confuse many people. Another factor that helped this confusion was that the governments in some Muslim countries made the conditions of the local Jewish communities unbearable after the Zionist state was established and forced them to leave the Arab countries. This was a very bad move, which only popularized Zionism and helped to created this new myth of anti-Jewish Muslim hatred. The final factor is the Salafi/Wahhabi type of Muslims who basically copied the old Christian hatred against the Jews. So, two very anti-traditional and somewhat similar movements, both strangely connected to Anglo-Saxon Protestantism in their ideology - Wahhabism and Zionist pseudo-religion - started fighting each other and polluting the world with their ideas.

As a result of all that, new forms of “religious” Zionists emerged. All negativity against the idolaters and oppressive types of Christians that one can find throughout the history of Judaism was redirected in a highly amplified and concentrated form to the Muslims. The fact that this negativity has to do with theology (idols and Trinity) was ignored. On the contrary, Muslims became somehow equated in this Zionist twisted version of Judaism with the worst kind of idolaters, who should be normally still treated nicely and without trying to dominate them. But here is a catch: one may kill “even the best of idolaters”, according to the Talmud, during a military combat. The “religious” Zionists declared that their state is in constant war with the Muslims who want to kill all Jews. Such twisted logic basically gives a license to kill. The same exact logic is used by Wahhabis who removed the concept of “Ahl Al-Kitab” from their version of Islam and consider everyone at permanent war with Muslims.

There is a good book written by Yakov Rabkin, A Threat from Within: A Century of Jewish Opposition to Zionism, which explains how traditional Judaism and Zionism are totally incompatible. The author is an Orthodox Jew and a history professor. I strongly don't recommend books written by anti-religious authors (Israel Shahak) or fanatical right-wing Christians (David Duke, Israel Shamir), because such authors usually have no serious knowledge of Judaism and often promote hatred against both Jews and Muslims under a mask of “anti-Zionism”.

I hope this rough introduction is clear enough. If people here will find these topics interesting, we could go into more detailed discussions. There also also esoteric trends in Judaism, kind of similar to Bektashis or Alawites, who tend to emphasize things like personal devotion and non-literal interpretations over fixed rules.

My main interest on this forum is not battling Zionism. I am trying to apply Henry Corbin's methodology to Jewish philosophy and esoterica, and I find studies of Hadith and Irfan in comparison to Talmud and Kabbalah very refreshing and important.

16 Comments


Recommended Comments

  • Advanced Member

Whoa! This unbelievable. Than you so much for this enlightening discussion on Judaism. I had some vague knowledge of the Talmud; most of it was negative. But this is so informative. So I have the following questions, if you don't mind answering :-)

 

1) When it comes to revealed verses, are they to be found in the Torah or the Talmud?

2) Is it correct to say that the Torah and the Old testament are the same thing?

3) What's your opinion of the this New Age obsession with the kabalah? What I mean is Madonna, baphomet, and devil worship?

4) Do Jews believe in the Psalms of David (AS) (Zabur)? Does it actually exist?

Lastly, I just make a point in saying that I find it really cool, that akin to Shia Islam where a verse of the Holy Quran has tafseer and ta'weel ( hidden meaning) we see a similar trend in traditional Judaism. Also, I really wish the world would learn the truth about Zionism vs and actual Judaism!

 

Thank you and keep up the great work!

 

Salman

Link to comment
  • Advanced Member

Thank you Yoel. That was very enlightening. I guess my next question is, are the Neturei Karta the original adherents of Judaism, or are they a cult or a sect of Judaism. 

 

Thank you!

 

Salman

Link to comment
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, salman1 said:

Thank you Yoel. That was very enlightening. I guess my next question is, are the Neturei Karta the original adherents of Judaism, or are they a cult or a sect of Judaism. 

 

Thank you!

 

Salman

 

Neturei Karta has two meanings:

1) A traditional Orthodox community of Lithuanian and Hungarian origin centered in Jerusalem, which existed already in the 18th century or earlier and which was strongly opposed to the establishment of the Zionist state and always aligned with its Palestinian neighbors.

2) An international movement of anti-Zionist activists representing various trends in Hasidic and non-Hasidic Judaism. I am more familiar with this group, because I never lived in Palestine.

In both cases, there is nothing cultish or sectarian about this groups. They just try to preserve highly conservative varieties of authentic pre-Zionist Judaism. Some people who align with Neturei Karta are more modern and don't see a problem in listening to secular music, watching movies with less than proprietary dressed actresses, but share the same traditional rejection of Zionism. Hundreds of thousands of other Orthodox Jews also completely reject Zionism and believe that the establishment of the Zionist state was a heresy or a mistake of apocalyptic proportions, but prefer to just live a quite life in North America or Europe instead of showing up at Palestinian demonstrations.

Edited by Yoel
Link to comment
  • Advanced Member

This article is, as I understood, trying to present Talmud as legit to the Muslims. It's not and it can't be.

Musa a.s. came to Beni Israil with "of Tewrat" (min et-Tewrati). Et-Tewrat is a full Law and "min et-Tewrati" means that he came with not all of the Law. Proof for this is in all the words from 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., to Beni Israil.

But, 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., came with Et-Tawrat, not its part, he came with full the Law. This means that Beni Israil had all of the Law with 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s. Not a single command as law was reaveled to them after him a.s.

As you said, ayet 5:32 refers to something what is contained in Talmud, which, as I understood, was written according to oral narrations and that happened in Babylon. All of this means that 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., lived and came to Beni Israil before Babylon happened, right?

As, I know, there's a passage in Torah, which is recognized as Et-Tewrat, which is describing death of h. Musa a.s. I think nobody can say that this was written by Musa a.s. I hope you know who wrote this.

Why I told that Talmud is not legit to Muslims?

Talmud probably contains a lot of sayings of Musa a.s., but it also contains a lot of sayings of h. 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s. They (Jews) rejected him a.s. as Mesih and they changed his words and they even changed owner of those words. This is why we cannot accept anything from Torah, unless we're 100% certain that it's something we know from the Qur'an.

The Qur'an contains all 7 "revelations" and some of them are Et.Tewrat, El-Injil, Zebur and Dhikr. These 7 are totally different and they use for different purposes. Since the Qur'an contains all of them there's no need for any of them for us Muslims. It's, if I can compare, as some book was published in 7 parts, then publisher published all 7 in one book. But Almighty "Publisher" said that he'll be hafiz of the Qur'an.

We should never forget that of all the people Jews and mushriqoon hate us most and we cannot take as ewliya' those of the Jews and the Christians who are ewliya' to each other.

On the other hand, there's ummah amongs them who're mu'minoon.

Allah swt knows best

Link to comment
  • Advanced Member
9 hours ago, Aladin from Azra tribe said:

Talmud probably contains a lot of sayings of Musa a.s., but it also contains a lot of sayings of h. 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s. They (Jews) rejected him a.s. as Mesih and they changed his words and they even changed owner of those words.

The Talmud does contains many sayings that seem identical to supposedly canonical or apocryphical teachings of Jesus. Even more interesting is the fact that they appear here and there is Jewish traditions recorded much later. The real historical picture is much more complicated. Christianity started largely as a movement within Judaism up until the 4th century, when the Roman Empire adopted its own acceptable narrow range of versions of Christianity as its own official religion and gave the Jewish followers of Jesus the choice either to abolish the law of Moses or exactly to reject Jesus outright. To put it simply: imagine they tell you that if you accept Jesus, you must eat from now on pork and worship him as an incarnated triune god. Some Christian philosophers and mystics, especially in the Eastern Orthodox tradition did a lot of work to rectify their theology, but the damage was already done. The Roman Church forced those Jews who still believed in a some non-standard form of christology either to get out or to accept the new anti-Jewish religion tainted will idol worship and old Roman imperial cults.

Now, precisely in Sassanid Persia and Arabian Peninsula there were still fairly traditional Jewish groups who believed that Jesus was a prophet and a messianic figure in some sense. There groups were still around in medieval Muslim countries up until 12th-13th century exactly because the Greco-Roman church was unable to destroy them there.

Much later, in 15th-16th century, amid the liberalization of Western society, you start finding prominent Jewish thinkers who thought that Jesus was a righteous man of wisdom and in some limited sense a messianic figure. Very carefully, because the church would still tell you: Eat pork, my dear, forget your old laws and accept a theology that at least in its crude interpretations smacks of sheep idolatry. And because most Jews, on the other hand, would remind you that everything related to Jesus was for centuries associated in the West with burning at the stake, mass murders by the Crusaders and other highly unpleasant things.

Anyway, it's complicated. :)

Edited by Yoel
Link to comment
  • Advanced Member

It's not complicated, just people are getting illusion (batil) as reality (haqq) and they are confused, under sihr.

'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., had two uncles: Musa a.s. and Haroon a.s., brothers of his mother h. Meryem s.a. This is why you'll find a lot of sayings which you can recognized as "similar to his". What Jews done is that they changed them and they accepted them as from somebody else, because they rejected (were kafiroon in) 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s.

His name is Joshua for Jews and they know for Joshua, son of Miryam a.s., "author" of "part of Torah".

As I said, there's a lot of reality (haqq) in Talmud for sure, but there's a lot of illusion (batil) too. We Muslims shouldn't take it, because it's very hard to distinguish one from another without a great knowledge from Him and there's no need to take anything from it, because all of its reality is in the Qur'an, if we care about reality.

Ayet about hate of Jews to Muslims is not in past (perfect) tense, it's imperfect, so its reality comes from the moment of its revalation.

All of the people of Kitab will know and accept reality about 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., before he dies (he's not dead yet). Jews should think about him, a lot.

Anyways, your article is not negative at all. I just wanted to add a few things I found related to what you wrote.

Allah swt knows best

Link to comment
  • Advanced Member
5 hours ago, Aladin from Azra tribe said:

His name is Joshua for Jews and they know for Joshua, son of Miryam a.s., "author" of "part of Torah"...
 

Ayet about hate of Jews to Muslims is not in past (perfect) tense, it's imperfect, so its reality comes from the moment of its revalation.

I am talking not about Jesus, but about Joshua bin Nun, the main disciple of Moses who is recognized by many Muslims as a prophet and successor of Moses, and who is mentioned (not by name though) in the Quran 5:22-23. The lines about Moses' death are also recorded in the Greek translation of the Torah (Septuagint) written long before Jesus, around the 3rd century BCE.

Regarding hatred, Muhammad encountered a number of Jews and Jewish group who exhibited hatred toward him and plotted against him. It was a fact of 7th century reality, but it does not mean that the Talmudic sages somehow hated Muhammad who was not born yet or that he was hated by 7th century Jews in India or China who never heard of him. In classical Jewish religious literature you can find various opinions about Islam and Muhammad, ranging from sharp criticism to love and conditional acceptance of Muslim traditions. The most common mainstream historical opinion was somewhat cautious sympathy to Muslims as fellow monotheists who practice many things similar to Judaism. The unfortunate current anti-Muslim hatred that you find often in today's Jewish communities is very recent and is politically motivated due to the confusion created by the Zionists and the Middle East conflict.

Edited by Yoel
Link to comment
  • Advanced Member

Who was Joshua's mother according to Judaism? Jesus is not 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s. Joshua, son of Miriam a.s. is him. This is the main error in thinking, taken from siners amongs Jews (fasiqoon).

You mentioned ayets 5:22-23 and these two and ayets after these are very interesting. In 5:23 "two men" were mentioned. Who're they? If one is Joshua ibn Miriam a.s. is Haroon a.s. (Aaron ibn Awram) other one? There were not followers of Musa a.s. amongs Beni Israil, except youth. They rejected all from Musa a.s. or it was very hard to accept these things they accepted.

1) This is why Jews lied on all of them. They said that Aaron ibn Awram a.s. made golden calf

2) They said that Miriam, their sister, s.a. was against Moses a.s., same as Aaron a.s. was

3) They said that Miriam s.a. was not pure, she had a problem with her skin, as a punishment from God

4) They rejected her son Joshua a.s. as Mesih, etc etc etc.

This is why they lied and made a story about Jesus, a centuries after real person 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., lived. To do so, they had to change oral narrations and this is why Talmud is very dangerous for the Jews.

You're forgetting that there were Muslims before Islam came to Arabs as the Qur'an. And Jews and mushriqoon were enemies of them too. Some of these Muslims were amongs Jews themselves, because being a Muslim is not in somebody's name, it's in what he recognizes and what he's doing.

Jews who knew/know about this were/are saying: "We were Muslims before", as stated in the Qur'an.

I'm totally sure that anybody who comes to Talmud with intention to know reality will conclude a lot about Musa a.s. and 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s. But, I'm inviting all to read about them from the Qur'an only, as it is easiest way to know the reality (haqq).

I am not making any difference between Muslims amongs Jews, Christians and Muslims as nation. Anybody who's recognizing and accepting reality from Allah swt Only is my brother, no matter what is his name.

Knowing about 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., is knowing about The Hour (es-Sa'at) and The Hour is very close...

Allah swt knows best

Link to comment
  • Advanced Member
3 hours ago, Aladin from Azra tribe said:

Who was Joshua's mother according to Judaism? Jesus is not 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s. Joshua, son of Miriam a.s. is him. This is the main error in thinking, taken from siners amongs Jews (fasiqoon).

 

Once again, I am not talking about Isa/Jesus, the son of Maryam, but about Joshua (يوشع بن نون‎‎). His father's name was Nun. His father was from the tribe of Ephraim. He lived in Moses' time. His wife was Rahab. His tomb is usually believed to be located in Palestine. Thousands of Muslims go there to pray. An entirely different person who name is spelled يوشع  in Arabic.

Link to comment
  • Advanced Member

We can't talk then. I asked about his mother and you're telling me about Joshua in Arabic. To understand names we have to understand word "ism" first. If you ever believe in 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., as somebody who lived in time of Musa a.s. and you accept him, I'll be glad to have you as somebody very interesting for dialogue.

Sorry if I ruined your blog entry.

Link to comment
  • Advanced Member
2 hours ago, Aladin from Azra tribe said:

We can't talk then. I asked about his mother and you're telling me about Joshua in Arabic. To understand names we have to understand word "ism" first. If you ever believe in 'Isa, son of Meryem a.s., as somebody who lived in time of Musa a.s. and you accept him, I'll be glad to have you as somebody very interesting for dialogue.

Sorry if I ruined your blog entry.

Not at all! You greatly entertained my blog entry.

As for 'Isa the son of Maryam - who is, let me repeat again, not the prophet Joshua bin Nun, but an entirely different person - please define in some meaningful way what do you mean by "accepting" 'Isa the son of Maryam. Who is, let me repeat again, again and again, not the prophet Joshua bin Nun, but an entirely different person? 

Which type of Christian missionary are you, by the way?  Never heard of this particular missionary position. :)

Edited by Yoel
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Add a comment...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Latest Blog Entries

    • By Warilla in Zaidia the middle path.
         3
      Series of lectures and text on obligatory knowledge for a Muslim.
      Please see comments section for further parts.
    • By Warilla in Zaidia the middle path.
         0
      This blog will have links to Google drive for various books and articles.
      1) The Book of Ritual Purity, The Book of Prayer, and the Book of Funeral Rites
      By   Imam al-Mutawakkil ‗ala Allah Ahmed bin Sulaymān  
      https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-J6TJqfxU2QeW2Pqef-O-xSsOIn1a9QU/view 
      2) Book of purity and Prayer Amali Ahmed bin Isa
      https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-FufomRp75-UI812N9Ql7q7oUvMrgnHg/view?usp=drivesdk
      3) Musnad Zaid 
      https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-JHURAyyzB4vIAeB4FIzYBRkl0NG6r8N/view?usp=drivesdk
      4) Musnad Ali Riddah
      https://drive.google.com/file/d/1-_D3WbAfefnBY-trWRmuK-xN-5A7VKTM/view?usp=drivesdk
    • By Warilla in Zaidia the middle path.
         0
      Taken from.Imam Rassi society
      The Zaydis have a set criteria in accepting or rejecting hadîths and narrated statements:
      1. Contradicting the Qur’ân—The Zaydis wholly reject any narrated report that clearly contradicts the Book of Allah. This is because the Qur’ân itself says: {Falsehood cannot approach it from the front and from behind. It is revealed by One All-Wise and Praiseworthy} (Q. 41:42). Also, there is a reported hadîth in which the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, said: ((I will be lied upon just as the prophets before me. Whatever comes to you on my authority, place it against the Book of Allah. If it agrees with it, it is from me and I said it; if not, it is not from me and I didn’t say it)). For this reason, our imams and scholars reject reports that clearly counter the Qur’ân.
      2. Collective-transmitted reports (tawâtur)—These reports are those that have been reported by a large 
      number of different narrators insomuch that there can be no doubt regarding its authenticity. This is the 
      reason why many of the early imams of Ahl al-Bayt related hadîths without relating their chains of narration. This is because these narrations have been mass-transmitted by all Muslims in such large numbers that their authenticity is established.

      3. The acceptance of the imams—With this principle, a hadîth is accepted if the imams of Ahl al-Bayt 
      agree upon its authenticity. Imam al-Manŝūr Billah al-Qâsim bin Muhammad, upon him be peace, said:
      “We do not know of any truthful hadîth on his [i.e. the Prophet’s] authority except that it is collectively transmitted, mutually agreed upon by the imams, and/or agrees with the Book of Allah. Otherwise, we can not guarantee if it is a lie upon the Messenger of Allah—whether deliberate or mistakenly.”

      4. Preference for the narrations of Ahl al-Bayt—Those reports that are narrated by Ahl al-Bayt are given preference over those narrated by other than them. This is because of their elevated status in the Qur’ân [e.g. the Verse of Purification Q. 33:33] and the Prophetic hadîths [e.g. the Hadîth of Two Weighty Things].

      5. Those mursal narrations of the imams—A mursal narration is a report whose chain does not go to the 
      Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, through a Companion; rather, it reaches a 
      sub-narrator who ascribes it to the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny. The majority of jurists accept mursal traditions as authentic. The mursal traditions on the authority of an imam are considered authentic by the Zaydis because one of the necessary attributes of an imam is uprightness (‘adl). Therefore, any hadîth the imam narrates is considered authentic, even if a Companion is missing.

      6. The chain of narrators should be free of criticism and the text should be free from impossibilities—Those narrators in the chain must be free from valid criticism and the text of the report must be consistent, non-contradictory, or free from things like anachronisms.
      7. Reliability of the narrator—The narrator must be upright and not guilty of open disobedience and major sins.
      8. Those reports of the opponents that the Zaydis use as a proof—The Zaydis also consider the reports of the opponents which agree with their doctrines. For example, Imam Ahmed bin Sulaymân, upon him be peace, compiled a book of hadîths called Usūl al-Ahkâm in which he narrated numerous hadîths of their opponents that he used as a proof for Zaydi jurisprudence.
      9. Enemies of Ahl al-Bayt—Those narrators who showed enmity and hatred towards the Ahl al-Bayt in their lifetimes and afterwards are not considered reliable narrators—even if they were amongst the Companions.For example, the narrations on the authority of Companions like Wâ’il bin Hujr, Jarîr bin ‘Abdullah, and Marwan bin Hakam are not considered reliable.
      And Allah knows best!
    • By Warilla in Zaidia the middle path.
         0
      Imam al-Hādi ila al-Haqq, Abul-Hussein Yahya
      bin al-Hussein bin al-Qāsim bin Ibrāhīm bin Ismā’īl bin Ibrāhīm bin al-Hassan bin
      al-Hassan bin Ali bin Abi Ťālib, upon them be peace. As we can readily notice from
      his lineage, he was a Hassani sayyid.
      Also, on his mother side, he was a Descendant of the Prophet, peace and
      blessings be upon him and his progeny. His mother was Umm al-Hassan bint alHassan bin Muhammad bin Sulaymān bin Dawūd bin al-Hassan bin al-Hassan bin
      Fātima bint Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny.
      He was born in Medina in the year 245 AH/860 CE. His mother was
      pregnant with him during the lifetime of his illustrious grandfather, Imam al-Qāsim
      bin Ibrāhīm ar-Rassi, upon him be peace. She delivered the child in Imam ar-Rassi’s
      dwellings, and the imam—acting upon the Prophetic Sunnah—recited the call to
      prayer in his grandson’s ears and supplicated for him.
      Imam al-Qāsim then asked his son al-Hussein what he will name the child.
      When al-Hussein responded by saying “Yahya,” Imam ar-Rassi, upon him be peace,
      is recorded to have then said: “By Allah, he will be the Master (Sāhib) of Yemen!”
      This prophecy came true when Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, migrated to
      Yemen and became its Imam. Imam ar-Rassi, upon him be peace, would not live
      long enough to see his grandson fulfill this prophecy because he only lived one year
      after the birth of Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace.
      Although little is known of his childhood, Imam al-Hādi followed a
      rigorous system of education—an education befitting of a Descendant of the Prophet
      who was to attain the Imamate. Also, judging from the scholastic output of his
      forbears, especially Imam ar-Rassi, the young al-Hādi was inundated with study of
      the various sciences associated with theology, jurisprudence, Qur’ānic exegesis,
      philosophy, logic, language, etc.
      His upbringing in Medina especially made him susceptible to the various
      trends and areas of knowledge. Medina was the hub of the Muslim empire and one of
      the centres of Islamic learning. Although, the political capital of the Muslim Empire
      was in Iraq, Medina still held a high place of esteem and scholarly ambition. It is the
      City of the Prophet, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, and the home
      of one of the most sacred mosques in the world. It was a garrison town that hosted
      Muslims from all over the Muslim world and served as a headquarters for those
      serious about the study of divine knowledge. That withstanding, there was a vibrant
      trend in Medina that enabled the young Yahya to pursue his studies at the highest
      levels.
      His son, Imam Muhammad, upon him be peace, narrated that his father
      completed and mastered the sciences of divine knowledge at the age of 17. One can
      readily see the depths of his knowledge when one looks at the books that he
      authored. We will take a brief look at some of the areas of knowledge that he
      mastered utilizing his works.
      Imam al-Hādi: The Linguist
      Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, was a man of letters who demonstrated
      knowledge of the various sciences of the Arabic language in his works. His Qur’ānic
      exegeses and responsa literature demonstrated his knowledge of word derivation and
      extraction. For example, in one of his replies to a question regarding the meaning of
      the verse: {“If Allah desires, He could leave you astray. He is your Lord…”} (Q.
      11:34), he demonstrated that the phrase {leave you astray (yughwiyakum)} is derived
      from the word “to punish” (ghayya). Therefore, the leaving astray of a person is said
      to refer to Allah’s punishment or chastisement.
      Another instance of his mastery of the Arabic language is his use of metered
      prose. In this, he followed the example of his grandfather, Imam ar-Rassi, upon him
      be peace, who oftentimes wrote his treatises in poetry form. One example of Imam
      al-Hādi, upon him be peace, writing in prose is his Jawāb li Ahl as-Sanā`, where he
      addresses the theological concerns of the people of Yemen using rhythmic poetry.
      Imam al-Hādi: The Exegete (Mufassir)
      Although there are two books of Qur’ānic exegesis (Kitāb at-Tafsīr and
      Ma’āni al-Qur’ān) authored by Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, these books no
      longer exist. However, there are some extant works where Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, 
      engaged in Qur’ānic exegesis.
      For example, in one of his replies, he has many sections that begin with the
      title “The Meaning of the Exalted’s statement…” In these sections, he interpreted
      seemingly difficult Qur’ānic passages.
      He also authored several works in which he, upon him be peace, sought to
      interpret the meaning of “Celestial Chair” (al-Kursi) and “Divine Throne” (al-‘Arsh)
      in verses, such as {His Celestial Chair extends over the heavens and the earth} (Q.
      2:255) and {The Most Gracious is established on the Throne} (Q. 20:5). The
      majority of Muslims have agreed to retain the literal import of these verses and
      discouraged interpretation; yet, Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, did not hesitate to
      apply a figurative meaning to both terms.
      Imam al-Hādi: The Hadīth Scholar (Muhaddith)
      Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, compiled hadīths in works such as Kitāb
      al-Ahkām fil-Halāl wal-Harām. His methodology towards the hadīths was simply to
      relate those narrations on the authority of his ancestors. For example, he may relate a
      hadīth with the following chain:
      My father related to me on the authority of his father —his
      grandfather—his ancestors, upon them be peace—the Messenger
      of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny, who
      said: ((Friendship is security and separation is a bad omen)).
      There are also instances where he related a hadīth with a chain containing
      narrators other than his ancestors. For example, in the same Kitāb al-Ahkām, he
      related the following hadīth:
      My father related to me on the authority of his father —his
      grandfather—Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Uwais al-Madini—Hussein bin
      ‘Abdullah bin Damīra—his father—his grandfather—’Ali bin Abi
      Ťālib said: The Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon
      him and his progeny, said: ((There’s no marriage except with a
      guardian and two witnesses)).
      Although, this chain contains some of his ancestors, it also contains narrators other
      than them.
      In addition to relating Prophetic hadīths, Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace,
      also related the statements of the imams of Ahl al-Bayt, upon them be peace. He
      related the statements of Imam ‘Ali, Imam al-Hassan, Imam al-Hussein, Imam Zayd,
      and even his grandfather, Imam ar-Rassi, upon them be peace. However, in most
      cases, Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, did not relate the chain of narrators when
      he reported hadīths.
      By the time Imam al-Hādi was born, the sciences of hadīth had been
      developed. Indeed, He lived in a generation after the likes of Imam Ahmed bin
      Hanbal, Imam al-Bukhāri, and Imam Muslim. Hadīth and its sciences were
      widespread before Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, was born because Imam alBukhāri died in 256 AH and Imam Muslim died in 268 AH. Their compilations of
      hadīths were available during the lifetime of Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace.
      Since that is the case, a common question is “Why didn’t Imam al-Hādi,
      upon him be peace, utilize the various sciences of hadīth developed by scholars like
      Imams al-Bukhāri and Muslim?” As we mentioned, he rarely narrated reports with a
      chain of narrators between him and the Prophet, like al-Bukhāri, Muslim, and others.
      Modern critics of Imam al-Hādi and his school have also asked this question and
      criticized his rulings based upon this.
      It cannot be said that he was ignorant of such sciences because he lived in
      Medina and studied many of the sciences related to the religion—hadīth being one of
      them. The importance placed upon listing the chain of narrators (sanad), was
      something current before and during the life of Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace.
      Indeed, in his book Al-Muntakhab, he narrated hadīths from the texts of scholars like
      ’Abdur-Razāq and Imam Mālik bin Anas with complete chains.
      We reply by saying that in most cases, his narrations are generally without a
      complete chain of narrators because he cited well-known hadīths and refrained from
      relating the chains because of their notoriety. For example, in his Kitāb al-Ahkām, hecommonly said: “It has reached us on the authority of the Messenger of Allah, peace
      and blessings be upon him and his progeny…” without relating a complete chain.
      He mentioned his own methodology when relating hadīth in Al-Muntakhab:
      Verily we have only compiled, in this chapter, those reports with
      authentic narrations from the narrators of the Generality so as to
      prove to them with evidence. That way, we can overcome them by
      using narrations deemed reliable by them.
      More than likely, he figured that those who wanted to identify and verify
      the chains could refer to the already extant books of hadīth. This is why he never
      authored a compilation of hadīths. Also, the books in which he related the most
      hadīths are books of jurisprudence, not books of hadīth. He sought to justify his
      positions by these narrations, not justify the authenticity of these narrations.
      Even in his texts concerning theology, history, or the imamate, he stated
      that the narrations he cited could be found in the books of the Generality. For
      example, in this text Uŝūl ad-Dīn, he said:
      The community agrees that the Messenger of Allah, peace and
      blessings be upon him and his progeny, said: ((Al-Hassan and alHussein are the masters of the youths of Paradise, and their father
      is greater than them)).
      He acknowledged the existence of such narration in the texts of the general body of
      Muslims. That withstanding, there would be no need to relate a complete chain of
      narrators.
      Imam al-Hādi: The Jurist
      He became an accomplished jurist during his time and the “Hadawi School”
      was named after him. His jurisprudential rulings are available in his books: AlMuntakhab and Kitāb al-Ahkām. He also addressed many issues of jurisprudence in
      his letters to individual provinces and people. However, the basis of his
      jurisprudence is in the two aforementioned books which are called the “Two
      Collections” (al-Jāmi’ayn).
      He utilized the first two of the existing methodologies to derive rulings (e.g.
      the Qur’ān and Sunnah); however, he differed with many of the jurists of his time in
      the third source of jurisprudential derivation. As this third legal source, Imam al
      Hādi, upon him be peace, utilized the statements and consensus of the Progeny of
      Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him and his progeny. According to him,
      their individual and collective statements and actions were a firm proof for the
      Prophetic Sunnah. Similar to the Sunnite jurist, Imam Mālik bin Anas, who
      contextualized the first two legal sources using the actions of the people of Medina
      (amal al-Madīna), Imam al-Hādi based the understanding of the Qur’ān and Sunnah
      upon the individual and collective opinions of the imams of the Ahl al-Bayt, upon
      them be peace.
      In those issues where the imams of the Prophetic Household agreed, their
      consensus and collective actions formed a definitive and irrefutable proof. For
      example, Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, narrated:
      Regarding wiping over the leather socks (al-khuffayn), slippers,
      leggings, a head-scarf, a turban, and a cap, the consensus of the
      Progeny of Allah’s Messenger, peace and blessings be upon him
      and his progeny, is that it is not permissible to wipe over any of
      those things.
      However, in those issues where the Descendants disagreed, there was room for one
      to choose an opinion out of their rulings.
      Imam al-Hādi: The Mystic
      Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, as evident from his writings, was also
      adept in the area of Islamic spirituality. Although he did not author texts specifically
      dedicated to the spiritual path like his grandfather, al-Hādi nevertheless attained a
      semblance of spiritual mastery. For example, his biographers reported regarding his
      scrupulousness:
      One day, [Imam al-Hādi] entered after having purified himself for
      the prayer [by making ablution]. He took a rag and washed his face with it. He then said: “To Allah we are from and to Allah we will
      return! This rag is from the tithe [donated to give to the poor]!”
      When I mentioned it, he said: “It is not even lawful for us to wipe
      our faces with it or shade ourselves from the sun with it!”
      Imam al-Hādi’s scrupulousness and spiritual awareness didn’t even allow him to dry
      his face with the scraps of cloth donated to charity!
      Among his writings that address the issue of the spiritual path is the last
      chapter of his Kitāb al-Ahkām entitled: “The Book of Asceticism (az-zuhd),
      Manners, and Other Things Related to the Perfection of Character.” In this chapter,
      he addressed topics such as seeking forgiveness, giving in secret, controlling anger,
      dreams, and showing off—just to name a few. As evident from this text, Imam alHādi, upon him be peace, perceived the spiritual path in terms of character
      reformation and adopting praiseworthy habits.
      Although his sense of spirituality would be seen as “sober” compared to the
      ecstatic nature of the Sufism prevalent during his time, his success in the Path to
      Allah was evident by the miracles attributed to him by his biographers. We will
      relate some of them, insha-Allah.
      One of them said:
      There was my young son with me who couldn’t talk. I sought some
      medicine for him, but to no avail. I decided to carry him to Mecca
      with me. On the way, a letter from al-Hādi, upon him be peace,
      came to me. We took his seal, placed it in water, and gave it to the
      boy to drink. All of a sudden, he began to speak clearly! A group
      of people witnessed the boy speaking, some of whom knew him
      when he couldn’t talk!
      Another one of them said:
      A man used to hurl insults at the companions of al-Hādi, upon him
      be peace, during the day of Mīnās. Al-Hādi supplicated against
      him that Allah sever his fingers. The man’s fingers began falling
      off until his wrists. He died as a result.
      Imam al-Hādi: The Imam
      Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, was also recognized as an imam during
      his lifetime. This title entailed that he was recognized by his contemporaries as
      suitable for leadership based upon certain qualifications stipulated by the Qur’ān and
      Sunnah.
      He attained the Imamate on 284 AH. Before that time, when the tribes of
      Yemen were embroiled in disputes, they wanted someone just and independent to
      arbitrate between them. They sent a message to Medina to have a Descendant of the
      Prophet, known for his piety and knowledge to come to Yemen and arbitrate.
      Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, answered the call and proceeded to
      Yemen. As a result of his fairness and knowledge, the people of Yemen collectively
      decided to make him their imam—fulfilling the prophecy of his grandfather, Imam
      ar-Rassi, upon him be peace. The people pledged allegiance to him on the conditions
      that he revive Allah’s religion and the Prophetic Sunnah, fight the enemies of Allah
      and the religion, and command the good and prohibit the bad. He assumed this role
      and was labeled “the Imam of Yemen.”
      His most abundant literary output occurred during his Imamate. This
      demonstrates that he was not just a statesman preoccupied with power and rule only;
      rather, he was an imam whose primary goal and concern was the protection of the
      people’s beliefs and practices. His many letters to provincial governors and
      refutation of deviants demonstrate this.
      Imam al-Hādi: The Theologian
      The role that is the most important to us for this present text is his role as a
      theologian. He authored a number of texts on theology, some of which includes:
      Kitāb Bāligh al-Mudarik, Kitāb fīhi Ma’rifat Allah ‘Azza wa Jalla, Al-Mustarshid fī
      at-Tawhīd, and Uŝūl ad-Dīn—just to name a few.
      Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, was a theologian concerned with the
      beliefs of those who were his subjects. He approached the subject of theology very
      seriously. Indeed, it could be said that in his works, no other topic occupied as muchof his energy as theology. As we previously mentioned, his primary concern as an
      imam was the protection of the people’s beliefs and their adherence to the Prophetic
      Sunnah as preserved through the Muhammadan Descendants, upon them be peace.
      In his theological works, Imam al-Hādi, upon him be peace, addressed
      issues such as Divine Oneness (at-Tawhīd) and its dimensions, Divine Justice (al-
      ‘Adl) and its dimensions, Prophethood and its dimensions, the Imamate of the Ahl alBayt and its dimensions, as well as the affairs of the Hereafter and its dimensions.
      Although his approach has been likened to that of the Mu’tazilites, he
      nonetheless, formulated some theological concerns utilizing methods unique to him
      and not prevalent amongst the Mu’tazilite school. That is not to say that he refrained
      from using terminology developed by the Mu’tazilites (e.g. “al-manzila bayna almanzilatayn“).
      However, judging from his approach regarding the Imamate of the
      Prophetic Descendants, he took a drastic turn from the Mu’tazilites who held to the
      Imamate of Abu Bakr.
      Imam al-Hādi: The Martyr
      During his Imamate in Yemen, he also engaged in military campaigns. His
      chief adversaries were the Qarmatians, a deviant sect of Ismā’īli Shi’ites. This group
      was so devious that according to historians, they overran the Sacred Mosque in
      Mecca and held the Ka’aba for ransom! A group of them led by a false-prophet from
      Kūfa named ‘Ali bin al-Fadl, marched towards Yemen. The Imam gathered a force
      and led the troops against Ibn al-Fadl.
      Al-Hādi, upon him be peace, continued to wage war against this deviant
      group until the end of his Imamate. He, upon him be peace, died at the age of 53
      from poison at the hands of one of the Qarmatians.
    • By Zainuu in Deen In Practice
         0
      The first month of Islamic calendar (the most 'violent religion' in the eyes of some people) starts with love. Love for the master of martyrs. Love for mothers and motherhood of Karbala. Love for brothers and brotherhood in Karbala. Love for Namaz. Love for the greatest sacrifice for the sake of humanity ever done in the history of mankind. 

      It doesn't start with fancy wishes, roses and hearts. It doesn't start with celebrations, singing songs, dancing in happiness. It doesn't start with tours and trips. Neither it starts with any form of celebration in Islamic context nor does it start with anything remotely related to celebration. It starts with the moon sighting and tears. It starts with the slaps on faces and beating of chests. It starts with thirst and imagination of thirst. It starts with unity and imagination of unity. It starts with a sign of muslims reaffirming to their faith and when one reaffirms to something, at that moment he or she follows that with true heart. So, this is the time when faith is at it's peak. It starts with sacrifice and eagerness for sacrifice. It starts with a new season of Islam where the spirits are going to change their levels. If they ignore this time, their faith will degrade. If they utilize these moments their faith will upgrade. The new year of muslims starts with a welcome note to the most crucial and magnificent reality which is truth/Haq. This welcome note is emotional but it's essence is a call to faith. It starts with the Adhaan of Ali Akber (رضي الله عنه) to the call of help (Halmin Nasirin Yan Suruna) by Imam Husayn (عليه السلام). This is the peak of the beauty of Islam.

      Muharram starts with the arrival of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) in the desert of Karbala, a hot place near the banks of Euphrates river or one of it's canals. Imam is met by the first group from the Army of Yazeed led by Hur. I would only emphasize on necessary history as each and every point of history is just out of scope. Hur and his men are badly thirsty. Not only they but even their horses. But as I said, Muharram starts with a welcome note. Here is the first welcome note of mercy, love and humanity. Imam Husayn (عليه السلام)  provides them with water (as much as they want to drink). This was a message, a welcome note towards mercy and guidance of Allah to the bewildered. 

      Hur kept on noticing this. But as he was an employee of Yazid along with others, He did what he was asked by Ibn Ziyad. He stopped Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) from going to Kufa and removed their camps from the banks of Euphrates and didn't allow them any further access to water. He asked Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) about the objective of going to Kufa. Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) replied that they don't want war and have come for the guidance of the Kufans who have called him. Again, this was the Jihad of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) — Love, mercy and guidance of people towards Allah and Islam — and resisting the tyrants and evil in this way. 

      Hur — who caused all the initial trouble and because of whom the children of Husayn (عليه السلام) stayed away from water — found himself guilty. This was the real sword of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) that was struck on Hur and started to show it's impact since he met Imam and kept on growing until it became unbearable on the night before 10th of Muharram (Ashura). Here is a message. As, the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) has said that the greatest jihad is jihad-un-Nafs (Jihad with the self). The real battle that Hur fought in Karbala was against his own self. He fought against his desires on the night of Ashura. His weapon was the voices of thirsty children in the camp of Husayn (عليه السلام). His weapon was the mercy Imam showed to him. But what was he confronting. Hur was confronting an employee of Yazid in his self. An employee that said that 'somehow Yazid is your Emir and you have to follow his order.' The cancer of neutrality penetrated in his self which said 'What do you have to do with politics. You have a family and friends. Think about them. Stay out of this hassle. You are a soldier of an Army and a commander. Do your duty. Yazid is a drunkard, who cares? Husayn is the son of Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) , but who cares?' All these fearful, short-visioned, selfish and self-centered arguments were surrounding Hur and making him stay on the side of Yazid.

      This is a big lesson. Every soldier in the Army of Yazid was facing an enemy like this within their soul. Every human being on earth, more or less, faces this enemy. We might say a thousand words of truth, we might agree with everything right but our ill-self always confronts us with these arguments and stops us from understanding Haq. Hur had enough weapons. He successfully broke this siege and killed his enemy and with purity, humility, recognizing the truth with the eyes of heart went this time towards the rightful leader of the Ummah. He didn't go to Husayn to sympathise the children. He didn't go their to advice Husayn (عليه السلام). He didn't actually go to Husayn (عليه السلام). He travelled towards freedom. From a fake tyrant to the rightful leader. From a payed employee of Yazid to a self-seeking slave of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام). From ignorance and arrogance to awareness and humbleness. Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) accepted him and all people along with him. He himself became the 'leader of mujahids' in my eyes. It's better to call Hur (رضي الله عنه) Imam ul Mujahid (lesder of the Jihadis) because jihad was done by everyone in Karbala, but he provoked others too (atleast thirty people came to the camp of Imam Husayn from the other side). And he had a very less amount of time to decide on his fate. He certainly fought the most fierce battle against his nafs (self). 

      Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) was calling and testing. He was testing his companions and calling his enemies. These calls happened in many ways. With speeches and with actions. One of the ways among all these (for me) was even the Adhaan recited by Hazrat Ali Akber (رضي الله عنه) in the morning and everytime when it was the prayer time. Who matched the face of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)? Their were many good voices in Karbala. Many great scholarly people were their.  Each one of them was capable of reciting Adhan. Glittering beautiful faces as well as wonderful voices. So, why only Hazrat Ali Akber (رضي الله عنه)? Because the face of Ali Akber (رضي الله عنه) was like Prophet Muhammed (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). They were so similar that Imam Husayn used to say, "When I want to see my grand father. I see Ali Akber." Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) made Ali Akber's presence a reminder for the enemies that they are not fighting Husayn (عليه السلام) but rather they are fighting the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) himself. Adhan of Ali Akber (رضي الله عنه) was a signal to remind the calls of Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) towards faith. This holds a lesson for us that faith should be above everything. Call of every wali/guide/Imam towards Islam is a call of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)  himself. Imamat is not an inch separate from Prophethood. As said by Dr. Ali Shariati, "Islam without Justice and Imamat is an Islam without Islam". Each and every call to prayer had two indicators. One was the visual indicator. Other was the vocal indicator. Call by the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) towards Salaat. Call towards peace, justice and Islam: 'Hayya Ala Khairil Amal - Come towards the Good'. This was the mission of Husayn (عليه السلام) and the objective of Karbala.

      As I acclaimed, the master of martyrs was testing his companions again and again. Checking their faith and strengthening it minute by minute. At more than one moment, Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) asked his companions to leave him. More than once he told them about their fate if they stay with him. More than once, he told the purpose of his journey. Such that each and everyone of them became clear about it. Answers to these statements from the companions were mind blowing. This is what Imam said :
      "It is a fact that I am not aware of any companions more faithful and honest than my companions and any relatives more righteous and kind than my relatives. May Allah grant all of you a good reward. I think that the day of our fighting with this army has arrived. I permit all of you to go away. You are free to depart without any restriction and should take advantage of the darkness of night."
      I won't go in detail. But he gave them the certificate of Jannah. He even endorsed their piety. He declared them as the best companions. He even told them how to escape. But except a very few, none of them moved. How can they even leave? How can they love life or death or even Jannah with a thought that they left their Imam to get slaughtered in the hands of beasts? Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) was testing them. He was trying to debug even a single confusion in their heart. He was trying to eliminate even the thought of Jannah from their mind so that they only think of sacrifice for Allah. What a spirit! What can we say! Ask yourself what Imam Husayn(عليه السلام) asked to his companions in Karbala each and every time.

      Will you leave your Imam while difficulties have surrounded him? Will you leave him if he grants you Jannah? Will you leave him if he himself asks you to leave? What does wisdom say? Ask yourself. Are you so firm in faith that whatever might happen, you are standing behind your Imam (عليه السلام) and doing your duty? Ask yourself. Are you an employee of Allah, who is paid with happiness, security, health and wealth and promise of Jannah so that he can forget his divine duty if all his payments are delivered irrespective of his stances?  Or are you a slave of only Allah and follower of only his leaders and commanders appointed on you such that even if they themselves ask you to leave for your lives, you will not. What if, Allah is asking blood from you? Are you ready? Who can be more free in this world then the companions of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام)? Take a lesson here. Follow Islam irrespective of anything. We get into doubt: Our prayers are not accepted, our desires are not fulfilled, calamities keep on falling on us etc. Is this our vision of life? No. Our only mission and purpose of life is to obey Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى). Stay where he wants us to stay and refrain from something which Allah has asked us to refrain from. Allah will test you to see how much firm you are in following his commandments. 

      We see warriors, with all capabilities to break the largest armies in a battle alone, shying and controlling themselves in Karbala. Sayyed ush Shuhada (Imam al Husayn (AS)) stopped Abbas at every step from battling with the enemy. He even brought Hazrat Zaynab (SA) at one point for the same purpose. I won't mention the reason why Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) stopped Hazrat Abbas (رضي الله عنه). But how difficult it would be for a warrior like Abbas (رضي الله عنه) to control himself from attacking the enemy. How difficult it would be to obey the master of Martyrs (عليه السلام) and understand the fate at this moment. More difficult then understanding was accepting. Acceptance and understanding that made Abbas a Saqqa (water carrier) from an Alamdaar (flag-bearer). This was the time when Al Abbas (رضي الله عنه) became the symbol of patience. He changed his being and kept down his sword to obey his mawla and his brother. This proves how critical and crucial weapon is patience and endurance. How important it is to remain patient in order to sustain yourself on the path of Allah. The will of Allah can be for us or against us. We should put our heads down in front of Allah's will.  Ghazi Abbas (رضي الله عنه) teaches us how to contemplate on what Allah wants from us and then not only refraining from our own will but submitting to Allah's will in the best of ways. How he managed to take a broken spear on the battle ground while he had a sword with him? How he managed to only try to bring water to the camps and not breaking the other enemy fronts? How he managed to protect the water and gave his hands in doing so? What patience a person needs to refrain from drinking a drop of water even after his lips are dry and throat dying from thirst. This patience led Al Abbas (رضي الله عنه) to become the symbol of loyalty (Sarkaar-e-Wafa) in the history of mankind. Hazrat Abbas (رضي الله عنه) was not even an infallible but still he made himself so strong that whatever his brother and leader demanded from him he delivered. Only one thing that remained was water. Which led Abbas to such a level of regret and emotion that he denied his body to be taken to the camps. If we can't learn patience, perseverence, submission and loyalty from Hazrat Abbas (رضي الله عنه). This history is useless and just as important as a novel.

      Karbala startles us at every step. Their was even a child as young as 6 months. When Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) called for help, no one was their to answer except a 6 months old Ali al Asghar (رضي الله عنه). He fell on ground after this call. He was taken to ask for water by Imam Husayn (عليه السلام). Imam knew that he will be martyred. But another reality of Karbala is a father taking his own son to sacrifice for Allah and become an example in history. Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) never needed help so what was the reason of this call? It was nothing but a reminder to everyone. Imam (عليه السلام) warned humanity that 'don't let a time come upon your leader when no one will accompany or support him'. Imam was calling people to Islam, to guidance. But only a 6 months old could understand. It is a call that echoes in our ears every year to move towards Karbala and to move towards religion and guidance. Not only Ali al Asgher answered but his mother answered it. All the woman answered it. Bibi Umm Rabab (SA) became a symbol of motherhood in Karbala. This is how a mother should be. Woman should teach their children to become the pure and free servant of Allah because this is the greatest honor and they should be so strong and firm that if Allah asks them their dearest sons for sacrifice, they should deliver and content themselves with patience and thankfulness towards Allah. If mothers become like mothers of Karbala, every child will become a servant of Allah and fighter of Islam which would pave the way towards an ideal Islamic society. 

      At the end, before his sorrowful martyrdom, Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) addressed the faithless and inhumane army of Yazid. He introduced himself not as a warrior but as a divinely appointed Imam, who has got the highest honors in the eyes of Allah. He was introducing himself like this in order to guide them so that they refrain from what they are about to do and understand the path of Allah. So that they understand that what all rewards they will recieve after this act will be nothing in comparison to what they will loose. Their was a lot of wisdom and beauty in each word but cursed were those who were blinded by the pleasures of this world. 

      Imam said: "Even if you don't believe in religion, atleast be free in this world." Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) wanted people to become free from everything, even their soul and then choose according to reason because truth cannot be imposed. It is not necessary to deceive someone to follow the truth. If we remove all the veils of falsehood, evil and deception, the only thing left will be truth. Freedom is not to remove your hijab or even wear it to make people admire you. Freedom is not to pray because your parents will kick you or Allah will send you to hell. Choose religion not because you are born in such a family but because you are a human being and Allah has given you the right to think, contemplate and ask the best for yourself independent of anything. Choose anything in life on the basis of free will that only submits to Allah (the absolute). This is the perception Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) wanted us to work upon. Karbala if followed and read in a right way should change a person.  If it doesn't then the message is not delivered. It was a battle between free will and imposed will. Battle between freedom seeking revolutionaries and employees of evil. A battle between 'I stand with Husayn and condemn Yazid and I know what I'm doing' vs 'Husayn is good and Yazid is bad but we are employees of Yazid so do the duty.' It shows that evil is everything except truth and not even the companions of the Holy Prophet (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم) are immune from it. Even taking neutral grounds is a sign of ignorance and part of evil. 

      This takes us to the Zaynabi revolution. The start of the new year. The pledge and commitment to change our 'self'. The pledge to fight the evil within us to a level that only Allah's manifestation remains. Azadaari (mourning for Imam Husayn (AS)) is resistance. It is not a mere custom in which some people come, cry, beat their chests and go away as if nothing happened. It is not a majlis that starts with lamentation and comes to end with gheebah (backbiting). It is not a show-off place where you show the standards of food you serve in the form of tabarruk. It is not a place to compete that who will gather the maximum audience and who will provide the best in tabarruk. Neither it is about how many slogans of 'Yaa Ali' will be raised or how many people will faint during Masaaib (sorrowful happenings in Karbala). Tears are natural and not man-made. Only that person can cry on Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) who has the maarefat (wisdom) of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام). The people who do all that I said above except azadaari are making fun of Hazrat Zainab (عليه السلام) and her revolution. They are equivalent to those Kufans and Syrians who mocked and taunted the Ahl Haram when they were taken captive and dragged in the streets of Kufa and Damascus. Shame on such people and shame on the show-off they do in the name of Mourning. Shame on those who do politics in the name of azadari. Shame on those reciters and orators who do business in the name of Azadaari. This is the worst of insults that AhlulBayt (عليه السلام) have to bear. We sell our souls so cheap that we fight on some bits of food that we recieve after majlis. We are making a joke of ourselves and also a joke of our religion and our Imam. Azadaari is a custom of purity started by the Great Sister of Al Husayn (عليه السلام) and Imam Sajjad (عليه السلام) as a form of resistance to tyranny and cruelity. A person who is a true azadaar of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) and has percieved his revolutionary message will not sit down until he purifies himself and brings society towards Islam. He will not settle unless he becomes a pain in the gut for the tyrannic rulers. Who is the real mourner of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام)? The one who brought down the forts of oppressors and stood for the oppressed. As an example, Sayyid Hasan Nasrallah is the true mourner. His army are the true mourners of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام). It is not possible that a mourner beats his chest, cries on Imam of the oppressed but remains quiet in supporting 'The Husayn' of this time. It is impossible for a mourner of Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) to curse Yazid while stay quiet on the crimes committed by 'The Yazid' of the time or be supportive of it. Azadaari is not a dead custom and Imam Husayn (عليه السلام) is not a dead hero. It is indeed a living revolution that flows in our body and pumps through our hearts in the form of martyrs of Karbala and becomes manifest when we stand for justice and haq in the present time. 
      Our duty is to take the message of Husayn (عليه السلام) and implement it on our own lives. Our duty is to be kind, humble, firm, down-to-earth, tough in front of the world, soft in front of Allah. Our duty is to put up sacrifices in the path of Allah whenever needed. Our duty is to unite and set aside our differences. We should unite under the banner of Allah the great. This is what Azadaari teaches us. This is what Karbala teaches us. When only a few people who stood as one in front of the most powerful enemy of the time and defeated him, why can't we? When people celebrate new year, they take pledges. We have the most appealing history remembered just on the start of the year. We should also take a pledge.
      Commit yourself: you will practice taqwa, pray on time, practice patience and base your life on knowledge and faith.
    • By Last Chance in Poems for the Ahlul Bayt
         6
      Alone, in the dark, a young girl is weeping,
      Not knowing what her heart has always been seeking,
      So, now, to her Lord, she is finally speaking,
      Revealing the secrets she thought she'd been keeping.
       
       
      Her Lord listens to her with indescribable love,
      He watches her raise her weak hands, above.
       
       
      "My Lord, I beg you to enter my heart,
      To you, all my sorrows, I wish to impart,
      This emptiness, I can bear it no more,
      I feel I am drowning and you are my shore."
       
       
      She buries her wet face in the palms of her hands,
      For she knows that He, alone, understands,
      But she wonders if she is worthy of His mercy, so great,
      She wonders if forgiveness and love are her fate.
       
       
      "My Lord, I have neglected my soul,
      I never gave heed to my purpose or goal,
      And now, I need You to set my soul right,
      I have no-one but You in the midst of this night."
       
       
      Tears flow from her eyes like a thunderous river,
      As she awaits the reply from this Generous Giver,
      But He waits and He watches as she continues to cry,
      So she calls desperately into the night sky,
       
       
      "My Lord, You are everything I need,
      Of any happiness, You are the seed,
      I yearn for You to make my heart whole,
      To take Your place, this world previously stole."
       
       
      With nothing more to give, the girl gets to her feet,
      As longing for her Lord fills her every heartbeat.
      She raises her hands, one final time,
      Her soul weighed down by her forgetful crime.
       
       
      "My Lord, You are my only, last hope,
      Without you, I know, I won't be able to cope,
      To feel Your presence, my soul, I can sell,
      All I want is that in my heart, You dwell.
       
       
      My Lord, I want You to open my soul's eyes,
      And to put an end to my grievous cries,
      You said that Your friends feel no sorrow, nor pain,
      So befriend me, God, let this night not pass in vain."
       
       
      As she tires from this begging, her eyes slowly close,
      And she feels that her yearning, now surely, He knows,
      Her Lord looks lovingly at the slumbering youth,
      And knows that her words carried nothing but truth.
       
       
      So He enters her soul and whispers some words,
      Sweeter than the chirping of awakening birds,
       
       
      "...Call upon me; I will answer you," (40: 60)
      And more than this, what else could be true?
    • By Zainuu in Deen In Practice
         0
      For his sake, there are angels following one another, before him and behind him, who guard him by Allah's commandment, surely Allah doesn't change the condition of the people until they change their own condition; and when Allah intends evil to a people, there is no averting it, and besides him they have no protector.
      —[Ar-R'ad verse 11]
      This verse in the holy Qur'an states that Allah is the protector of human beings and he has commanded angels to protect us. No one else is protecting human beings. Even if someone says that I will protect you, I will defend you then he can only do so by the consent of Allah (صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم). So, no one has any authority to protect a person and the command belongs only to Allah. 
      But it doesn't mean that everything what you do, Allah will protect you. It doesn't mean that a human being cannot do anything about his destiny and in his defence. Here this topic becomes complex. 
      If Allah is protecting us through angels and he is our lord, the greatest, the mighty; that doesn't mean Allah is handling all our affairs and we are free to sleep in a corner, and all will be in place automatically by the command of Allah. Allah has given us two hands, two legs, a brain, a face and (the most important) a self (soul) that he has perfected for us. 
      "Wa Nafsinw Wamaa Sawwahaa"
      "And the soul and him who made it perfect"  [Surah Ash Shams 91:7]
      Now, we have to make use of all this. Isn't it enough to live a good life or to identify the Truth? Isn't it enough to forbid evil and practice good?
      True that Allah is our protector and Allah is our guide and no one is guided except the one guided by Allah. True that, all are poor and paupers except the one who is provided by Allah. As it is said by Maula Ali (عليه السلام) in his Munajaat: 
      "Mawlaya Ya Mawlaya, Antal ghaniyu wa Anal Faqeer wa hal yarhamul faqeera illal ghani"
      "My Lord, O my Lord, you are the rich and I am a pauper and who is merciful to a pauper except the rich."
      So,  does that mean we should stop planning, stop working and just ask Allah and move ahead. Does that mean we should accept what our vibes say and make decisions instead of making decisions through logic and reason and far-sightedness? No. Why would Allah grant us with the gift of different elements of the body if we have to close them off and just go with the flow. 
      Imam Ali (عليه السلام) says in Nahj ul Balagha:
      "All the illnesses and defects are in the soul itself and the cure to all our problems is also present in our 'self' only."
      Also, "The one who identifies his self (soul) has identified his lord." — Imam Ali (عليه السلام) 
      So, all this talk that 'All is written and we can't do anything and that which has to happen will happen etc' are not completely true. To say rightly, these are fake spiritual talks. As, Imam Ali (عليه السلام) clearly says that All is clearly within us. What are we searching for? What else do we need? 
      Now, arises the question of fate. If all what I said is true then what about fate? I am not a denier of fate. I agree that it exists. Existence of fate cannot be denied but it is not the ultimate reality. Our fate is in our own hands. 
      We can change it through our actions, supplications, good and bad deeds. When Allah sees what we are doing and how we are living and behaving, Allah changes it accordingly. My statement is an opinion but it can be easily verified through Qur'an, Hadith and also the views of Arifeen.
      Don't sit idle and don't think you are divine and you will hear a voice from unseen. Act according to your state and stay patient for the rewards. If you fail try again instead of saying that, "It is my fate. what can I do?" How do you know it is your fate!
      Imam Ali (عليه السلام) says, "A wise man is the one who thinks before he speaks whereas a fool is the one who speaks before he thinks." So, this is simply foolish to say that you failed or lost because Allah has destined that for you. You get what you sow. A person's actions, his quest for something is itself a tool to change his fate and destiny. And that is what the verse I stated above says. Definitely, Allah is our protector but:  '...Allah doesn't change the condition of the people until they change their own condition....'  [Part of the verse stated in the start]. This clearly means that Allah is protecting us but Allah has made us incharge of our own affairs and it's only we who can change our own condition. Accepting the destiny is wise if we know our destiny. But who knows his destiny except Allah, The Great, The All Knowing. 
      Instead of getting into this querrel of fate, human being should try to focus upon action. As Ayatullah Taqi Behjat (May Allah be pleased with him) says: "May God give us the tawfeeq to perform our duties, that we don't be deprived of [performing] actions, not from within ourselves, neither from outside of us." Performing actions doesn't mean denying fate or denying the authority of Allah. Rather, it means accepting the blessings and opportunities provided by Allah, exploring them and exhausting them in the best way possible. We should understand that when we pray, Allah wants that we would ask him about something huge which a person is really deprived off and feels it as his necessity. Rather than asking that which Allah has already provided. Besides asking from Allah we should pray that "May Allah give us the tawfeeq to see what Allah has already blessed us with." We should explore within ourselves. 
      "You presume that you are a small entity, but within you presides an entire Universe."
      The verse I started with is an excuse to explain this relationship between fate and action. Aim is not to discuss the correct interpretation of the verse itself but just a part of it. My aim is also not to do a detailed discussion on fate and action but rather to only address the confusion between the two things. Normally, we notice in our society that this discussion is quite prevalent. Like many big conflicts in the world, the conflict of fate and action also ends up into two extreme parties. One (which I might call a pretend-saint) that says Fate is everything and nothing is in our hands. Whereas other which denies every role of fate and destiny completely and declares actions to be the only basis of different events occurring in life. While both have their reasons, both are wrong. This conflict is important to be addressed because it has a psychological effect. Obviously, a person who thinks that all is written and he is powerless will do nothing. He will sit and keep on denying on the blessings Allah has bestowed him with. He will act like a hopeless lazy person who is deemed to deviate from his path. This notion even if small in quantity is an evil notion and will cause problems in ones life. 
      On the other side, the people who deny Fate and destiny. Such people are in true denial of god. This idea that only actions are the player behind what happens in life is also problematic because it cannot answer the many mysteries of life. Who can you blame for a natural disaster? The Japenese people, the Iranians; who are considered to be the most intelligent among the mankind live in those regions of the world where a lot of natural disasters occur. If we say that Japenese suffer because they are infidels then it would be the most lamest answer to the question. What about Iranians? So, actions matter but fate has it's own part. It is their to prove that Allah is the absolute and above everything. It doesn't mean that actions will not bear any fruit. Every action taken will have a reward or punishment but who knows when?
      So, let us harmonize this. Let us end the blind beliefs occurring in our society due to the notion that 'Fate is everything and all depends on fate'. As is stated in Surah Al Asr: 
      "By the passage of time! Surely humanity is in grave loss, except those who have faith, do good, and urge each other to the truth, and urge each other to perseverance." [103]
      So,  it is certainly important to act without thinking about the fate. Removing all these blind beliefs about fate will lead us to passivity. Though, it seems small but in our traditionalist society, this idiocity is a huge problem. It has even entered the mentality of the educated and literate people because naturally it has nothing to do with education. It is because of overthinking and wrong mindsets and understandings about fate and destiny. It is because of ignorance and being illiterate is not a bad thing but being ignorant is equal to infidelity. To clarify, I am not calling anyone infidel but rather calling ignorance as infidelity. 
      Let us also tell the arrogant human beings that whatever they might do, the destiny finally belongs to Allah. As is said in the above stated verse, in the last: '...and when Allah intends evil to a people, there is no averting it, and besides him they have no protector.'
      Fate is something that already exists like some fundamental basis of events, while action is something that we build upon our fate. If they are weak, they won't change our fate. If they are strong with a true devotion, they will change our destiny according to their nature. If it is an evil action, our destiny will become worse then what it was. If our action is good, our destiny will become better than what it was. 
      "So whoever does an atom’s weight of good will see it."
      [Surah Zalzala 99:7]
      "And whoever does an atom’s weight of evil will see it."
      [Surah Zalzala 99:8]
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Blog Statistics

    81
    Total Blogs
    450
    Total Entries
×
×
  • Create New...