Damming Silence

[DarkStar]

It also depends on the student, as much as the teacher. Student's with lower intellectual capacities, tend to question their teacher less. They tend to follow the given line more, and are not critical enough. Especially, since their main objective might be to gain employment in the future, so no need to rock the boat. They whole heartedly agree to follow one religious sect/concept/group blindly, as it is in their financial interests to do so.

One of the famous scholars of the past (his name slipped my mind) has said that if you want to know the faults of your teacher, sit with those other than him. How many madrassa students in Pakistan do you find, that are willing to go and study in a madrassa that does not lean to their sectarian beliefs? Unless they do that, how can they compare and arrive at a just and fair assessament and correct understanding of Islam?

Although I must say, there are always exceptions to the rule. But most religious seminaries have their curriculum structured in a way to crush independant thinking, and stop critical enquiry. The worst thing that a student of knowledge can do, is close their minds to new and different ideas. Sadly, that is the first thing that some of the Madrassas teach.

Not every thing you write will be digested by every reader. Even reading newspapers and forming opinions requires a certain intellect, and what about studying religion? Of course intellectual capacity matters.

 

[muse]

Like communists blaming individuals and not the ideology of communism itself, for the murderous failures??

The position you are adopting is designed to ensure the ideas and instructors that created misguided students remain beyond critical review - and for you that's fine, but there seems to be growing numbers who seem to take issue with that.

 

[BanglaBhoot]

I wonder what are Ahmadi beliefs about non Ahmadis! and how would they treat minorities if they were a majority!
Ahmadis are always spreading anti-Pakistan propaganda against Pakistan in foreign countries. This is for FACT.
All such news are inflated to pave way to seek asylum in non-Muslim countries. This is FACT.
Once Ahmadi from Pakistan gets foreign passport, India become Mecca for them. And they go there for pilgrimage regularly. This is also a FACT.
In today's Pakistan no one is safe and anti-Pakistan elements are trying their best to ignite any sort of riots. Ahmadis should not act as the only victims.

This is also the problem that Bangladesh has also had to face in dealing with anti-Ahmaddiya violence. The following is an article I wrote in response to a documentary featured in BD about 4 years ago.

The AHMADIYYA’S – MUSLIM, HERETIC or PAID AGENT

I think the above title would be suitable for a book that I am considering writing on the question of the Ahmadiyya’s, their place in Islam and the reasons behind the sudden upsurge in hostility towards them in Bangladesh. A documentary on the subject has already been done - so I thought there was no point in following in someone else’s footsteps and certainly not on their biased and limited premises. I thought that the title ‘Muslim or Heretic?’ to be making a much too stark a choice (and an unnecessary one at that) and it also leaves far too little to explore. It implies a for or against argument which simply lacks creativity and it does not leave many options open for the director or writer.

It is clear that the documentary (‘Muslim or Heretic?’) presented only one perspective and was decidedly on the side of the Ahmadiyya’s. It is of course open to anyone to make such a choice but it should be explicitly stated and there should not be a pretence of objectivity or fairness. I have had the opportunity of viewing the documentary at the Russian Cultural Centre in Dhaka and was taken aback at the not too subtle slant in its construction. It is my opinion and belief that there is an alternative to the for or against debate or the Islamist vs. Ahmadiyya feud which seems to have consumed much of the time of the makers of the documentary. This apprehension is borne out by the comments on the official website which states: “The battle over Ahmadiyyas reflects a larger struggle for Islam’s soul – a struggle between liberal Muslims who believe ‘Islam is in the heart’ and extremists who are fighting for Iranian-style Islamic States. This documentary focuses on the growing crisis, and the resistance that is coming from Bengali activists.” This indicates to me a complete misunderstanding of the issues and a very sentimental approach to the questions facing Bangladeshi Muslims. The person who wrote that statement could not have a proper understanding of the political, social or cultural dynamics at work in Bangladesh.

The violent and vociferous campaign against the Ahmadiyya’s has so far resulted in the banning of their books and publications in this country. The title I have chosen for my book (‘The Ahmadiyya’s- Muslim, Heretics or Paid Agents’) has the advantage of laying everything out on the table and tends towards objectivity and balance. It does not appear to incline too much towards the Islamists that are now seeking the Ahmadiyya’s be declared non-Muslims by the government nor does it sway in favour of the leftists, secularists and feminists who seem to have agendas that go further than simply human rights and involves subversive activities against the state as well as defaming an entire nation.

The writing of such a book must of course also have a purpose or perspective (rather than just simply being informative) and mine would be to present the country in a truer and better light which does not view Bangladesh as a nation of mindless fanatics continually obsessed with religion. Rather I would like to see Bangladesh portrayed as a nation that takes pride in its religious heritage but is decidedly against a union between church and state and on the whole tolerant of other faiths and beliefs. I would like to show that on the fringes of our society are groups that are desperately trying to push the country in one of two extremes. We are already aware of the Islamic groups some of whom are seeking the creation of an Islamic State on a Wahhabi foundation or platform and on the other side are the leftist and secular outfits that wish to see the complete elimination of religion from Bangladeshi society and culture. Neither of these agendas has wide or mass appeal but are being propagated nevertheless. The Islamist groups are more prone to conducting violent agitation and the leftists and secularists are prepared to take part in seditious and subversive activities against the State. The Islamists have support and funding from Islamic governments and charities based primarily in the Middle East while the leftists and secularists are backed in part by the Americans, Europeans and Indians as well as invested with Jewish money and brains. It is for this reason that these activists have to constantly prove the presence of Islamic terrorists in Bangladesh so their sources of funding do not dry up and they do not become consigned to irrelevance. In other words, they must prostitute themselves to their paymasters and sponsors in order to survive.

In some strange way, all this explains why Bangladesh, on occasion, appears to be engulfed in a metaphorical forest fire with the fire feeding of the wind and the wind feeding off the fire and in the middle there is a great deal of smoke. The politicians in an effort to prevent the fire spreading have to make compromises and satiate the fires appetite but in the long run the fire subsides and everything goes back to normality. Unfortunately, it is usually the leftists, secularists and feminists that are the criminal fire starters as well as the wind that exacerbates the situation further. The foreign sponsors and paymasters just add gasoline to the flames when it suits their purposes. The political parties are usually helpless onlookers or in the case of the AL active instigators and agitators. The political scenario is only one element of this whole set up and necessarily not even the principal one. The question left unanswered by the documentary was whether the Ahmadiyya’s are part of the wind or of the fire or of neither.

For this reason when the issue of the Ahmadiyya’s exploded onto the streets late last year it was not so much the religious differences that attracted me to this dispute but the accusations of the Islamists (and many non-Islamists) that the Ahmadiyya’s were paid agents of a foreign power as well as part of a Jewish-Hindu conspiracy. This allegation was never fully addressed in the documentary and it did not help the director’s credibility (writing for The Daily Star does not raise your credibility but substantially hinders it) by having Shariar Kabir (as well as Mohiuddin Ahmed and Ajoy Roy) participate in its making: a person that is notorious for his Indian leanings and sympathies. To make matters worse was the inclusion in the documentary of a human rights activist married to a Jew who works for a television network whose journalists were arrested in Bangladesh for subversive activities and subsequently thrown out of the country. This human rights activist is also noted for her Indian connections and sympathies as well as having an overtly anti-Islamic agenda.

At no point was any leader of an Islamic group (most pertinently the leaders of Hifazate Khatme Nabuwat Andolon) interviewed in the documentary and when a bearded Islamist type appeared he was shown brandishing a lathi or bamboo pole and chasing after someone or making provocative statements. If any such leader was requested to have a one on one interview with the director, for inclusion in the documentary but then refused, then that should have been made clear at the outset. I would have liked to know very much the reason for this frenetic violence and emotional expression from these people but none at all was given. In writing my book therefore, I would have to research both sides and try to provide a balanced argument and appraisal of the facts and opinions on the subject.

In my researches on the Ahmadiyyat Movement I came across a succinct but critical description of their beliefs and doctrines but surprisingly no where is it described as a religion, faith or even a sect:

“A cult within Islam founded in 1889 by Ghulam Ahmed, Ahmadiyya’s believe that Ghulam Ahmed was the reincarnation of Jesus Christ, and this was the fulfillment of the messianic expectations of Christianity being Jesus Christ’s return, Judaism, Islam and other religions. In other words, they believe this was the Second Coming of Christ. They believe that Jesus survived the Crucifixion, lived to be 120 and that His tomb can be found in Kashmir (this lie surfaces in many cults following a book written by a fraudster called Nicholas Nontovich. Nontovich was proven a liar and a fraud by explorers who tried to verify even one of his findings, all were proven false). This group are [sic] very large (believed to be about 74 Million), believe they are the true Islam, and are vigorous in their condemning of Christianity. Most Ahmadiyya’s are from Pakistan or India. Many have come to America and Europe. There is a large concentration of them in England with 77 meeting centres and a main mosque in Putney.” (An Encyclopedia of Religious Cults by Shaun Aisbitt)

This brief description seems to be accurate and does not digress fundamentally from the Ahmadiyya’s own documents as well as from orthodox Islamic sources. I can only assume that the Ahmadiyyat Movement is as intolerant and arrogant as any other messianic cult or fanatical grouping but not sufficient enough for it to be considered a threat or dangerous and certainly not deserving of the punishment meted out to it by the Islamic groups in Bangladesh or Pakistan. I think it is probably the assertions of Ghulam Ahmed that he is the Messiah, Mahdi or a Prophet (not the Prophet) which annoys most of the orthodox Islamic believers as these distinctions appear meaningless and to me nonsensical. From a Christian and Islamic theological standpoint the claims of Ghulam Ahmed are supremely preposterous. Still this would not be sufficient reason to oppress or intimidate this group there must be something more compelling for that to happen.

The strongest argument against the Ahmadiyya’s is actually a constitutional and legal question not based on theology or obscurantist argument. If we accept the constitutional provisions concerning religious freedom and tolerance does this provision equally apply to groups that are intolerant and if put in a position of power would most likely subvert the rights of others practicing a different faith such as Christianity and orthodox Islam? Orthodox Islam professes tolerance but the same cannot be said of the Ahmadiyya’s. In an article written by Louis J. Hammann Ph.D. and published by The Ahmadiyya Movement in Islam Inc. it is stated, “… not only did he [Ghulam Ahmed] affirm that he had ‘a special resemblance to Jesus’ but, on the negative side, that he had been sent … ‘so that I should demolish the doctrine of the cross. I have been sent,’ he goes on, ‘to break the cross and slaughter the swine.” Elsewhere in the article Ghulam Ahmed is quoted as saying that the Christian misconceptions about Jesus have had an, “unwholesome and poisonous influence of which has for long been noticed in the morals of the Muslims of this country [India].” (May 15, 1985)

In regard to orthodox Muslims, Ghulam Ahmed has reportedly stated that, “All Muslims who have not entered allegiance to Maseeh Maw’ood (Mirza) [Mirza Ghulam Ahmed] even though they have not heard the name of Maseeh Maw’ood, are kaafir and out of the fold of Islam.” (Aai’nae Sadaaqat, Page 35; Ahmadiyya’s booklet Review of Religions). This seems to have preempted the orthodox Muslims from declaring the Ahmadiyya’s as non-Muslims and most recently it is reported that, “… on the occasion of their centennial inauguration, the head of the Qadiani cult accused all the Muslim ummah to be disbelievers and liars and practically extended the Mubahala (religious prayer challenge of June 10th 1988 on General Zia ul Haq calling for his death by God) to all the Muslims.” (Idara Dawat-o-Irshad, USA)

These pronouncements if not expressly renounced by the Ahmadiyya’s should disentitle them to any protection under the constitution as their beliefs are in contradiction to the letter and spirit of the constitutional provisions and its ethos (I personally do not think the framers of the constitution had any idea what they were doing but that’s a different story) and ironically for the same reasons with Islamic doctrine also. There is no evidence however that the Ahmadiyya’s are paid agents of any State but the same cannot necessarily be said for the supporters of their cause. This does not exclude the possibility that the Ahmadiyya’s may have some nefarious design similar to secret societies in the West that have not yet been uncovered but as we would treat religious leaders (e.g. Bangla Bhai) with automatic suspicion should we not do the same for a cult that preaches intolerance or have we all become hypocrites.

“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, you take no part in them in the least; their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” (The Holy Quran, Al-Anaam, 6:159).

 

[DarkStar]

Like communists blaming individuals and not the ideology of communism itself, for the murderous failures??

The position you are adopting is designed to ensure the ideas and instructors that created misguided students remain beyond critical review - and for you that's fine, but there seems to be growing numbers who seem to take issue with that.

I don't know how you got that impression. I know for a fact, that many madrassas rely on obscure 18th century texts to teach their students, texts which were never meant to be employed the way they do.

I am not ensuring anybody or any ideology is beyond critical review, in fact I welcome it.

I guess i'm not articulating my view in the correct manner.

 

[Flintlock]

The strongest argument against the Ahmadiyya’s is actually a constitutional and legal question not based on theology or obscurantist argument. If we accept the constitutional provisions concerning religious freedom and tolerance does this provision equally apply to groups that are intolerant and if put in a position of power would most likely subvert the rights of others practicing a different faith such as Christianity and orthodox Islam? Orthodox Islam professes tolerance but the same cannot be said of the Ahmadiyya’s.

Hmm...now where have I heard this argument before?

 

[muse]

Dark Star

Let me see if I can articulate better - what i am suggesting is that if we agree that communism and not certain indiviuals are to blame for the deaths of 35 million persons - then why are we not applying the same standard to the Madaris, that is to say why are we not saying that ideas that inform the instruction imparted are to blame for the ideas and attitudes of tulaba at the madaris?

My reason for putting this out is so that we as a conscious muslim peoples are honest in our deliberation, to me it is a requirement, if we are to attempt to be, struggle to be, conscious muslims.

 

[Logic note]

Dark Star

Let me see if I can articulate better - what i am suggesting is that if we agree that communism and not certain indiviuals are to blame for the deaths of 35 million persons - then why are we not applying the same standard to the Madaris, that is to say why are we not saying that ideas that inform the instruction imparted are to blame for the ideas and attitudes of tulaba at the madaris?

My reason for putting this out is so that we as a conscious muslim peoples are honest in our deliberation, to me it is a requirement, if we are to attempt to be, struggle to be, conscious muslims.

Dear muse

When you say conscious muslim , you take out the individuality from yourself . muslim means a group , a collective ideology .

Individuality comes only when you protect him from the domination of collective conscious of a group, and provide him freedom to express his thinking , this thinking can be against the collective religious ideologies . that means individual have right to criticise everything , including religious belief . remember dark ages of Medivial europe ended only when they started questioning their faith .
USA is a good example of this system, and thats why they attract the best individuals , which helps them to grow faster then all of us .

 

[BanglaBhoot]

Hmm...now where have I heard this argument before?

Special features of our constitution might make easy comparison impossible.

 

[T-Rex]

If one needs example of intolerance one should go to secular Turkey where the will of the few are imposed again and again upon the majority in the name of defending secularism. Turkish people are bullied into accepting secularism becuase the Turkisg generals love it, Islamic dress is banned in Turkey because these generals love to wear bikinis and pose as beautiful trannies. You won't find anyone more intolerant than these secular bigots of Turkey and other Muslim states. They are the worst enemies of democratic values; they are the scourge of this world and you can hear the voice of some them on this forum as well.

 

[DarkStar]

Dark Star

Let me see if I can articulate better - what i am suggesting is that if we agree that communism and not certain indiviuals are to blame for the deaths of 35 million persons - then why are we not applying the same standard to the Madaris, that is to say why are we not saying that ideas that inform the instruction imparted are to blame for the ideas and attitudes of tulaba at the madaris?

My reason for putting this out is so that we as a conscious muslim peoples are honest in our deliberation, to me it is a requirement, if we are to attempt to be, struggle to be, conscious muslims.

I understand what you were saying, the problem I had was getting my own point across to you.

Madaris are not uniform, nor are all religious scholars of teh same opinion on given matters.

Personally, I think the term "scholar" has been bandied around too easily, with the mushrooming of madaaris that have copied the curriculum of the daruloom Deoband. Any teenager, who has spent 7 years at a Madrassa, and passed his/her exam is farighu tahseel, is supposed to be a certified 'scholar' or Aalim. Wheras I believe if anything, that would be a first stage of becoming a student, rather than a scholar. We have more so called scholars now than doctors. Do we really need so many? How will increasing the quantity of scholars help a better understanding of Islam? I think we are compromising on Quality.

I agree that most madaaris are not fulfilling the role that they should, and the govt. must do more to ensure free state education of all children. If, however, a child has passed his/her matriculation, then they should be allowed to join a Madrassa if they want.

 

[asaad-ul-islam]

I understand what you were saying, the problem I had was getting my own point across to you.

Madaris are not uniform, nor are all religious scholars of teh same opinion on given matters.

Personally, I think the term "scholar" has been bandied around too easily, with the mushrooming of madaaris that have copied the curriculum of the daruloom Deoband. Any teenager, who has spent 7 years at a Madrassa, and passed his/her exam is farighu tahseel, is supposed to be a certified 'scholar' or Aalim. Wheras I believe if anything, that would be a first stage of becoming a student, rather than a scholar. We have more so called scholars now than doctors. Do we really need so many? How will increasing the quantity of scholars help a better understanding of Islam? I think we are compromising on Quality.

I agree that most madaaris are not fulfilling the role that they should, and the govt. must do more to ensure free state education of all children. If, however, a child has passed his/her matriculation, then they should be allowed to join a Madrassa if they want.

now, it's more like six years instead of the seven. My teacher, an alim by the way, and i have both become disillusioned with the current plot of scholars. reason being the emphasis on quantity and not quality. that's why you see a lot more idiots giving fiery sermons on how the pakistan army is "fitna" and that the suicide bombers should be supported.

however, I think you are focusing way too much on "deobandi" madaris. Take a good look at Al-Azhar, branded as one of the most "modernized" of schools. I've met scholars from Madina and Syria who've encouraged me to study at Dar-ul-uloom, Karachi, if I ever intend to become a student. Dar-ul-uloom and their cirriculum is much more comprehensive than any other cirriculum in the world. as a friend of mine, Sheikh Khamees (Syria and Al-azhar) said, "we just cover the basic ahadith, Dar-ul-uloom students go over the whole thing."

 

[DarkStar]

now, it's more like six years instead of the seven. My teacher, an alim by the way, and i have both become disillusioned with the current plot of scholars. reason being the emphasis on quantity and not quality. that's why you see a lot more idiots giving fiery sermons on how the pakistan army is "fitna" and that the suicide bombers should be supported.

however, I think you are focusing way too much on "deobandi" madaris. Take a good look at Al-Azhar, branded as one of the most "modernized" of schools. I've met scholars from Madina and Syria who've encouraged me to study at Dar-ul-uloom, Karachi, if I ever intend to become a student. Dar-ul-uloom and their cirriculum is much more comprehensive than any other cirriculum in the world. as a friend of mine, Sheikh Khamees (Syria and Al-azhar) said, "we just cover the basic ahadith, Dar-ul-uloom students go over the whole thing."

Well, are you talking about Darul uloom in Korangi? The one run by the mufti usmani brothers? I have a cousin who got his sanad from there. That is also a deobandi madrassa, but not as dogmatic as lets say Jamia Binnoria. Al Azhar has prestige, but little else. A good seminary in Karachi is Jami Abi Bakr.

Anyway, wherever one goes to study, it is the mindset of the student that matters. One needs to have an open and critical brain, and try to gain knowledge from a variety of sources, if possible.

 

[asaad-ul-islam]

Well, are you talking about Darul uloom in Korangi? The one run by the mufti usmani brothers? I have a cousin who got his sanad from there. That is also a deobandi madrassa, but not as dogmatic as lets say Jamia Binnoria. Al Azhar has prestige, but little else. A good seminary in Karachi is Jami Abi Bakr.

your cousin, that's awesome. May Allah give him knowledge of the deen, ameen.

Anyway, wherever one goes to study, it is the mindset of the student that matters. One needs to have an open and critical brain, and try to gain knowledge from a variety of sources, if possible.

I agree, if I ever do become a scholar, my intention is to practice ijtihad (in private, however). most of the students I see today, well, it's just dissappointing. majority of them do not have the heavy and comprehensive knowledge their teachers had, and what's worse is, they immediately start teaching courses.

my teacher went to a school in UK, then Dar-ul-uloom, but he still continues his studies and is a very humble person. I usually do not praise anyone, especially the pseudo ulema that are running around these days, but this guy is something else.

 

[DarkStar]

your cousin, that's awesome. May Allah give him knowledge of the deen, ameen.


I agree, if I ever do become a scholar, my intention is to practice ijtihad (in private, however). most of the students I see today, well, it's just dissappointing. majority of them do not have the heavy and comprehensive knowledge their teachers had, and what's worse is, they immediately start teaching courses.

my teacher went to a school in UK, then Dar-ul-uloom, but he still continues his studies and is a very humble person. I usually do not praise anyone, especially the pseudo ulema that are running around these days, but this guy is something else.

It's good to see the love and respect that you have for your teacher. A good teacher is a blessing, sometimes hard to find.

Although I would add one caution, one of the pious predecessors has said "To know the faults of one's teacher, one must sit with other than him". As long as nothing is taken blindly, and it is known that teachers also make mistakes, it is good to benefit from them.

 

[muse]

Logic

I understand what you are suggesting, but you may not have followed "conscious Muslim" - it is a constant challenege and if you read mr. niaz's post, you will see he points out a feature that has withered under the strain of dogmatism - Mr. Niaz points out that early Islam is marked by debate, discussion and constant questioning to refine - in fact, were muslim society to be free from the dogmatism and well, I will say it, free from the terrorizing that the ulema engage in, muslims could once agai exercise the RESPONSIBILITY to participate in discussion and debate - see, it is one very long conversation wherein the end is of little importance compared to discussions and debates that continue are participated in by majorities of muslims over all times. See, change and how we should adapt to it and effect it as we seek to be true to the essence of the muslim character, as we understand it's evolution in time and space.

What is open to change and what is not? even those who argue that there is nothing open to change cannot but acknowledge that they are part of a evolving dialogue -- which, one would think would give them cause to examine the basis of thier position......

Muslim refer to a collective and not individual, you say - why does is it a "either Or" proposition? isn't it both?



darkstar

I think the term "scholar" has been bandied around too easily, with the mushrooming of madaaris that have copied the curriculum of the daruloom Deoband. Any teenager, who has spent 7 years at a Madrassa, and passed his/her exam is farighu tahseel, is supposed to be a certified 'scholar' or Aalim. Wheras I believe if anything, that would be a first stage of becoming a student, rather than a scholar

.

I could not agree more. In fact, I would add that the education also be multidisciplinary, doctorate in specialized sections of religious studies and at least on other doctorate in humanities, social sciences and/or "hard" sciences - just that a genuine scholar in the islamic tradition is one of a more rounded education, otherwise we will have what we have now -- what is that Indian story of the three blind man who each describe a elephant touching and feeling it from their persepectives --- as a matter of fact, a technique you can use with students is to set up a display, break your students into groups and allow each group to view the display for a brief period of time and ask them to describe the display and you will see a demonstration of this idea.

Do we really need so many? How will increasing the quantity of scholars help a better understanding of Islam? I think we are compromising on Quality... One needs to have an open and critical brain, and try to gain knowledge from a variety of sources, if possible.

.


Well, we are a or at least hope to be, a free peoples and do not wish to meddle in the choices of free peoples, but imagine if we could come to a day when scholars are by requirement, educated in multiple disciplines - recall the osmani caliphs and the mughal emperors always had a technological, artistic vocation, whether jewelry making, brick laying, caligraphy. One day -- you know it seems to me that we over estimate how much time is required to effect certain changes - earlier Agnostic ad I were discusing that more muslims and non-muslims are reading writing and discussing and debating than ever before and when any idea or value comes to be accepted in society, actually by a relatively small segment of scoeity, change directed by that idea or value seems to pick speed, the same can happen with ulema and we can once again refer to them with gratitude and recognize their service and compassion, when we will refer to them as "benevolent scholar".

Returning to the Open and critical mind - this is but training, some will say prejudice and we will agree, on this we are prejudiced and proudly so.