My critique on “Prophet Muhammad’s (s.a.w) Hadith of the Fly is confirmed by Science” at the request in a FB post by our Nayyar Usmani

My critique on the article 

“Prophet Muhammad’s (s.a.w) Hadith of the Fly is confirmed by Science” 

at the request in a FB post by our Nayyar Usmani

A respectable member of our group, Nayyar Usmani had sent me a link on FB to"Prophet Muhammed's (s.a.w.) Hadith of the Fly is confirmed by Science"  for my comments as I am known to strongly question this particular hadith. Here is my response.

Scientific data is collected over years and scrutinized by controlled and double blind trials on human beings.The material is then presented to a scientific journal who has very stringent rules for acceptance. Once published it is subjected to peer reviews from numerous centers. In due course it is ether accepted by the scientific and general community or rejected. 

What we have  here is a joke, to put it lightly. The article is published at a website “Top Stories; The Only Magazine For Stories”. The site does not introduce itself. At a glance at the Home page, it appears to be an Islamic location boldly displaying such questions as “Can I be treated by a non-Muslim (Christian, Jew) doctor whether male or Female ? Or Is it true that a person who utters kalima at-tawhid (La ilaha illallah) 70.000 times goes to Paradise directly?” 

The author does not have a name (at least I could not fine one). Who is he? What is he? We do not know. His style, knowledge and manners are reflected in his statement “Principle skepticism of authentically transmitted narrations that pertain to facts demonstrated by ancient and modern science, or whose scientific worth is just now coming into view, is the wont of stagnant minds and diseased hearts for which there is no cure save the mercy of our Lord OR Even the muscaphobic critics of this hadith are forced to admit” 

It is a long article. The major part involves a discussion of bacteriophages, potentially attractive therapeutic agents. However, there still remain many important questions that must be addressed before lytic phages can be widely endorsed for therapeutic use. Only the last short paragraph in the article mentions the “scientific evidence”.The author does not seem to have any inkling of the required strength of evidence for a scientific proposal. He has supported his big scientific claim solely on the basis of a thesis for PhD submitted by Ms Joanne Clarke a week earlier at Macquarie University, Australia! According to her, at a  presentation at the Australian Society for Microbiology Conference in Melbourne recently “Our research is a small part of a global research effort for new antibiotics, but we are looking where we believe no-one has looked before”. All the excitement is because flies have been used as a source. The flies are treated by ethanol and crude extract is obtained. They are now trying to identify the specific antibacterial compounds which could ultimately be chemically synthesized. No further details are provided by the author. Nor has he given any references for independent verification.  

To sum up, the author has given us incomplete information that a thesis for PhD has been submitted in a University in Australia suggesting that flies, like viruses and fungi may be a source for producing antibiotics. We do know of the thesis has been accepted. No reference or link has been provided for independent verification. 

Nobody in the scientific world will ever accept this — mere presentation of a thesis for PhD — as scientific evidence for anything. It will not even be regarded as a serious material to go on. The thesis should be accepted, the group then should work on it, publish their experiment and results in a Scientific Journal. Now the scientific community will come into action. After arguments and counter arguments, the results may be accepted or rejected. All the excitement created by the author is because “flies” are being tested which immediately brings to mind the hadith. The organism is chemically treated. The crude extract obtained will then be tested for any specific antibacterial compound. It is wrong if not stupid to conclude that the thesis is upholding the suggestion that dipping the fly and then throwing it away will transmit antibacterial compound into the liquid. This is what the “hadith” has stated. It is hilarious if not baseless and misleading to create a headline on this basis at a website “Prophet Muhammad’s (s.a.w) Hadith of the Fly is confirmed by Science”. It is a far cry from extracting antibiotic from a fly by chemical treatment (if it is proved, hopefully) to dipping it into a drink, throwing it away and continue drinking. These art two entirely different procedure with completely disparate results.

This brings me to the point that the bright young Professor from AKU Saad Shafquat had made in his post. Why should those who believe in uncritical conformity with the full hadith literature, check out with science and google a hadith? If the Holy Prophet has said dip, throw and drink, then just do that. How does a thesis submitted in Australia make a difference? Does not this attitude, as a matter of fact betray a lack of confidence in our beloved Prophet? On the other hand, we consider, may the Lord Creator guide us this hadith as mu‘allal. Hence we throw the fly out and may or may not drink the liquid. 

If you have the ime and desire, here is my critique on the full article: 

The article declares:

[[“The Holy Quran contains scientific miracles that have been already confiremed scientifically . These Holy Scientific verses were revealed more than 1400 years ago , at the time of Prophet Mohammad there were many other different miracles to make people believe . Because Quran will be the last reveald Book till life ends , God has made it overflowing Book with miracles that suit every age and its kind of civilization . As we live now in the age of science , we find that there are ….” 

Just as the hadith on camel milk and urine reveals knowledge of dietetics and natural medicine, so does the hadith of the fly reveal knowledge of preventive medicine and immunology. In this respect the command in these hadiths, as in many others, denotes an advisory Sunna of permissibility, not a literal obligation. “The command [of immersing the fly] denotes counsel (al-amru lil-irshad) so as to counter disease with cure.” Al-Qastallani, Irshad al-Sari (5:304).

Despite the abundance of supporting evidence for the authenticity of these medicinal narrations (camel and fly) on the one hand and for their scientific viability on the other, certain voices continue to reject them on both counts. Principle skepticism of authentically transmitted narrations that pertain to facts demonstrated by ancient and modern science, or whose scientific worth is just now coming into view, is the wont of stagnant minds and diseased hearts for which there is no cure save the mercy of our Lord.”]]

Our Holy Text is our treasure of the teachings of our Deen, its  beliefs and doctrines; its basis of morality and ethical principles. It does not deal with any of the mundane subjects like medicine, finance etc. These are left to human effort and intelligence.

The article describes at length about Bacteriophage. A few of his remarks:

[[“Recently experiments have been done under supervision which indicate that a fly carries the disease (pathagens) plus the antidote for those organ-isms. Ordinarily when a fly touches a liquid food it infects the liquid with its pathogens, so it must be dipped in order to release also the antidote for those pathogens to act as a counter balance to the pathogens.

Only in modern times was it discovered that the common fly carried parasitic pathogens for many diseases including malaria, typhoid fever, cholera, and others. It was also discovered that the fly carried parasitic bacteriophagic fungi capable of fighting the germs of all these diseases.

These fly microbiota are bacteriophagic or “germ-eating”. Bacteriophages are viruses of viruses. They attack viruses and bacteria. They can be selected and bred to kill specific organisms. The viruses infect a bacterium, replicate and fill the bacterial cell with new copies of the virus, and then break through the bacterium’s cell wall, causing it to burst. The existence of similar bacteria-killing mechanisms in two bacteriophages suggests that antibiotics for human infections might be designed on the basis of these cell wall-destroying proteins. Science 292 (June 2001) p. 2326-2329.

It is established that house flies are carriers of dangerous pathogens of animals and humans. Even the muscaphobic critics of this hadith are forced to admit that no one at the time of the Prophet, upon him peace, knew that flies carry such harmful organisms. Whence the observation that “under one of its wings there is venom”?

So then, flies are not only pathogenic carriers but also carry microbiota that can be beneficent.”]]

This is only a part of what the author has to say about Bacteriophage. I quote here the conclusions of an article "Antimicrobial Agents and Chemotherapy;Bacteriophage Therapy"  from “PMC: PubMed Central, a free collection of biology and medicine journal articles”:

“In summary, bacteriophages have several characteristics that make them potentially attractive therapeutic agents. They are (i) highly specific and very effective in lysing targeted pathogenic bacteria, (ii) safe, as underscored by their extensive clinical use in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union and the commercial sale of phages in the 1940s in the United States, and (iii) rapidly modifiable to combat the emergence of newly arising bacterial threats. In addition, a large number of publications, some of which are reviewed in this minireview, suggest that phages may be effective therapeutic agents in selected clinical settings. Granted, many of these studies do not meet the current rigorous standards for clinical trials and there still remain many important questions that must be addressed before lytic phages can be widely endorsed for therapeutic use. However, we think that there is a sufficient body of data—and a desperate enough need to find alternative treatment modalities against rapidly emerging, antibiotic-resistant bacteria—to warrant further studies in the field of phage therapy.”

This subject of producing antibacterial drugs from organisms like virus, fungi etc. is an ongoing process. Our author is over excited because one student in Australia has presented a thesis for her PhD to test for the first time that even flies can be a source of antibacterial substance. The hadith also speaks of flies. The two are connected to produce a headline . 

The author has delivered his main message in the last short paragraph:

[[“The latest research calls for a new antibody from the fly antidote

here is a new research titled “The new buzz on antibiotics” that was done only a weak ago …read this  study:

at the Department of Biological Sciences, Macquarie University,

“Our research is a small part of a global research effort for new antibiotics, but we are looking where we believe no-one has looked before,” said Ms Joanne Clarke, who presented the group’s findings at the Australian Society for Microbiology Conference in Melbourne this week. The project is part of her PhD thesis.

The antibiotic material is extracted by drowning the flies in ethanol, then running the mixture through a filter to obtain the crude extract.

We are now trying to identify the specific antibacterial compounds,” said Ms Clarke. Ultimately these will be chemically synthesised.”]]

A student at Macquarie university in Sydney, Australia has presented a thesis for her PhD. We do not know if this has been accepted. Nobody in the scientific world is going to accept this — a thesis for PhD — as scientific evidence for anything. All the excitement is because “flies” are being tested. The organism is chemically treated. The crude extract obtained will then be tested for any specific antibacterial compound. It is wrong if not stupid to conclude that the thesis is upholding that dipping the fly and then throwing it away will transmit antibacterial compound into the liquid. This is what the “hadith” has stated. 

“Quebec bans niqab for public services with neutrality law” My response to a query from Saad Shafquat in a Facebook Post

“Quebec bans niqab for public services with neutrality law”

 My response to a query from Saad Shafquat in a Facebook Post

After quoting Quebec Bans Niqab for Public Services Saad Shafqat had queried in his Facebook post “I’m wondering if this will prompt some of the niqab-wearers to relocate to a Muslim-majority country.”

To this I had replied “The Holy Quran does not prescribe any dress code for us. It ordains strictly to both the genders to look at each other with decency and respect and to stay miles away from indecency and promiscuity. Period.”

Saad Shafqat responded “Khalid Mitha sir then what is the possible motivation for niqab-wearers, if it’s not the holy word? Who or what are they trying to emulate? It is obvious that a niqab-wearer feels she is a better Muslim than others. There must be some compelling logic behind it.” Here is my reaction.

Sure, they all have some; not “compelling logic” but some plausible and satisfactory explanation for their beliefs and practices.This is true for the whole spectrum of different, diverse, conflicting and contradictory views, beliefs and practices that we Muslims cherish starting form the insistence on beard and exposing the knuckles to covering the head, to wrapping the face, to full body burqua, to complete segregation of genders, to the husband being the master and dominant (hakim and musallat) over wives, to prohibition of music and photography, to controversy about Shabe Bara’t, to the squabbling between the Deobandis and Barelvees and lastly of course to  the violent and disgusting route and direction of the Taliban, Al Qaeeda snd ISIS. All of them have some “compelling logic”, to use your term from the sources of Islam to support their view point. It is up to you and me to look into this material, think and ponder and then decide the right path for oneself. 

Niqaab certainly has been proposed in the Fiqh of all the Four Schools of Islamic Jurisprudence. The women, therein are commanded to stay in-doors for all their activities. No interaction with non-mehrem men; total segregation. Perchance they have to go out for “unavoidable” reasons, they are required to have a full body burqua. A satisfactory and meaningful discussion of Niqaab and Hijaab is beyond a Facebook Chat. It needs much more space. If you are interested and have time for it I have discussed this problem in two articles Hijaab: The Shari'ah Version v/s the late Twentieth Century Variant

 and Is it Correct to designate the Headscarf alone by itself as Hijaab of the Muslim Shari'ah?

“Banning My Hijab Is Like Banning Me From Praying”; A Gross Exaggeration leading to Distortion of Islamic Shari”ah

“Banning My Hijab Is Like Banning Me From Praying”

A Gross Exaggeration leading to Distortion of Islamic Shari”ah

As per newspaper "The Guardian" of Tuesday March 14, the Court of Justice of European Union  says garments can be banned as part of general policy covering religious and political symbols. No wonder the news immediately trickled into the social media. Imam Asad Zaman shared a link from Aljazeera reporting in full the verdict of of the EU court. As expected, several opinions

were expressed. One of them "What the Hijab means to me"  quoted from Aljazeera of November 2016 is really interesting. It expresses the thoughts and feelings about the hijab of women from Nigeria to Uruguay. However, I am really concerned by an article "Banning MY Hijab is Like Banning Me From Prayer"  in the Huffington Post of March 14, 2017 by Basma Elbaz, Contributor, Editor-in-Chief & Blogger because it sounds as an exaggeration and distortion of Islamic Shari’ah. 

The writer starts with very balanced and mature statement: “It is absolutely fine to dislike hijab, to see it unnecessary or ugly. I will respect your opinion” followed by her objection: “But it is certainly a clear discrimination when you prevent me from wearing it”. More about it later. 

As a PPK Muslim I am greatly disturbed by her next statement: “This ruling makes it obvious that the court does not understand what hijab is for a Muslim woman. Wearing a hijab is not an accessory, it is part of the religion, and so banning it is like asking me not to pray”. This is an extremely misleading and ignorant reading of Shari’ah on hijaab. 

To start with, I would like to entreat all to keep our mandatory prayers completely out of this super-charged controversy over Hijaab. Prayers is our core and foremost duty since the days of Prophet Ibrahim, conveyed to us by a continuous chain. It is the most important of the Four Pillars of Islam; it is our cherished identity; it is the first item in our examination on the Day of Judgement. It serves as a unifying factor for the Ummah, allowing Muslims from the four corners to stand in one line, shoulder to shoulder on hearing the Azaan.  

The importance of hijaab does not come even close to it. Granted, it is a crucial part of our Eemaan. But can the writer tell me what is Shari’ Hijaab and what are its requirements? We see all sorts, style and color of “Hijaab” on the streets: a woman in short skirts and skinny jeans, in a form fitting maxi, in an elegant, attractive and colorful dress with dark read lipstick, in an outfit with shining embroidery and even a barbi doll turns into a “hijaabi” if she has a designer head covering —a muddled thinking.

As I have pointed out earlier the popular use of word “hijaab” is erroneous and misleading. What does the word hijaab means?

The Quran uses this word in Ayah 53 of Surah Ahzab (no. 33), as  meaning a “screen, curtain or shield”. 

The lexicon has two suggestions:

First, “the religious law that controls the clothes that Muslim women can wear”. Indeed the Classical Jurisprudence (Fiqh) of Sunni Islam describes in detail the requirements of hijaab.

Second, “the head covering that some Muslim women wear when they are outside”.Unfortunately, this is the popular usage of the word. But this new meaning has no basis in our Shari’ah which has a list of essentials for hijaab. (see below)

Based on the Quranic ayahs 30-31 in Surah Noor (no. 24) and ayahs 32-33, 53 and 59 of Surah Ahzab (no.33), the Sunnah and Hadith all the four schools of thought of traditional Sunni Islam have unanimously agreed that “hijaab” prescribes  the following dress and code of conduct for Muslim women:

  1) Women to stay indoors; home is their workplace

2) Total segregation of genders at all levels

3) If a woman has to step out of her home out of necessity, she should be covered in loose cloak as a sort of outer garment from head to foot (burqua, abaya) covering the neck also. Our Somali sisters in Minnesota provide a good example of this dress.

4) A veil on the face; compulsory by three schools; optional by Hanafia but recommended.

This has been the standard practice of hijaab in the Muslim world for centuries.In recent times, it started going through a process of amendment and modification mainly under the demands and needs of the universal changing pattern of life. It has been eroded part by part and step by step. I am not aware if any source in the Shari’ah supports these alterations.The final metamorphosis was seen in mid nineteen seventies when the “headscarf” alone irrespective of anything else became the sole objective and manifestation of dress code for Muslim sisters  and persistently referred to as “hijab”. This practice received a great momentum when the headscarf came to be regarded as “flying the flag of Faith”, a sort of Muslim identity in our confrontation with our previous colonizers and present “West”—“enemies and killers of Muslims”. This outlook was generously bank-rolled by petrodollars and ratcheted up by the Saudi-Wahabi propaganda machinery.

Headscarf alone as hijaab has NO basis in Shari’ah. If there is one, I would like to know. As a matter of fact, the way it is combined with a Western or Pakistani dress, or combined with an elegant style, adornment and decoration makes it look like a patchwork or a parody. Albeit, head-covering plus a plain black loose abaya blends smoothly and meets important requirements of the classical Islamic jurisprudence; and therefore is commendable. I admire the Somali sisters in Minnesota who have the courage of their conviction to wear it in a Western Society drawing a negative reaction. May Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo reward them for their efforts.

This is the version of the classical Sunni Islam about hijaab formed by consensus of the four Schools of Thought in the ninth century. However, the Islamic scholarly opinion has grown and developed in the meantime, despite the verdict of Taqleed clamped in the thirteen century to stifle Muslim intellectual growth. There are number of eminent scholars with huge following, notably the distinguished intellectual, researcher and academician Javed Ahmed Ghamdi who do not consider the above quoted ayahs in Surahs Noor and Ahzab as prescribing any particular dress code for Muslim women or men. A particular form or style of dress is not the business of Islam according to them. The prevalent suggestions about dress as Islamic are partly due to controversial interpretation of the relevant ayahs and traditions and partly based on historical, social and cultural background. This group of Ulemaa, maintains that the Shari’ah has focused on a strict code of conduct and has ordained clear do’s and don’ts for inter-gender social interaction. This is the Islamic prescription to prevent any indecency and promiscuity in Society and safe guard the institution of Family which is the back bone of an Islamic Society. 

While the “hijaabis” have full right  —and are admired for that — to don their attire and cover their head due to their religious beliefs, they are not justified to call it “Islamic”; this amounts to labelling as sinners those who do not agree with them and do not insist on covering the head. These are two different views and attitudes among Muslims on this issue due to varying interpretation of the relevant religious literature. Lets agree to disagree and keep up mutual discussions and deliberations to find the correct solution. 

One final point. The opposition to the headscarf itself is not all religious; it is not a good example of Islamophobia; it cannot be labelled as racism. It is more a play of culture and value system. The wearer of headscarf feels elated and proud that she is upholding the honor of her religion. She has the satisfaction of sacrificing for her religion; of flying the flag of Faith. But it is very and naturally provocative to the opposing group, those who do not believe in it, Muslims and non-Muslims; as if she is pointing a figure at them; publicly displaying her modesty. To them, it looks odd and out of place; rather prudish. Let me quote the opposite example to illustrate my point of view: there will be commotion and strong reaction if teenagers come out in their ultrashort shorts in the streets of Karachi, Jakarta or Kuala Lumpur or bikinis are displayed on the beaches of these cities. This is certainly not a sign of Christo-phobia. We, Muslims have very strong sentiments against exposing the female torso.The liberal West is exactly the opposite; they take pride in exhibiting the woman’s body; France takes the cake in this. “Marianne” is a national symbol of the French Republic and often considered as a symbol of a certain idea of Frenchness. The American historian Joan Wallach Scott wrote in 2016 that it is no accident that Marianne is often depicted as bare-breasted regardless of where she is or what she is doing, as this reflects the French ideal of a woman, which has been used as an argument for why Islamic dress for women is not French. He added that the topless Marianne has become "...the embodiment of emancipated French women in contrast to the veiled woman said to be subordinated by Islam”. In the same year the French Premier Manual Valls said In a speech: “Marianne has a naked breast because she is feeding the people! She is not veiled, because she is free! That is the republic!”. Hence making a big deal of covering the hair in their own country is very irritating to the West. Wrong, yes but Islamophobia, No.

There are many advantages touted for the headscarf, as the sole manifestation of hijaab. They all may be true. But this does not make it a requirement of the Shari’ah. 

Statement from Hijabis: Sarcastic but Authentic

Statement from Hijabis: Sarcastic but Authentic

I received the following note on the Messenger from a lady Neurologist. I wish to share with you.

“Many “Hijabis” today: NO WAY, you can’t look at my hair, its HARAM! Look at my tight jeans, my ankles, my arms, my neck and my face instead.”

In a lighter tone, it is trying to bring into spotlight socio-religious contradiction that we commonly come across. The head is calling the body immodest; vice versa the body is calling the head priggish.

Come to think of it, short shirt and skinny jeans should not raise any eye brows these days, specially in Europe and America. Put a scarf on the head, it readily gets eye catching. 

A Cartoon about Muslim Women and Shari'ah of Hijab -- Powerful and Meaningful

A Cartoon about Muslim Women and Shari'ah of Hijab 

Powerful and Meaningful 

This is just a Cartoon in the Social Media but very meaningful and beautifully focusses at a commonly made distortion in the Shari'ah female dress code. The headscarf, fancy and colorful is very often presented and regarded as the center piece of "hijab". By itself and standing alone, it is frequently labelled as "hijab". The cartoon very artistically highlights the underlying mockery and travesty of this approach.

There is another angle to this approach i.e. insisting on the headscarf as "the hijab" and regarding it as compulsory for all practicing Muslims. It is sinful not to do so. I admire the sisters who are practicing this in Twenty First Century America. It needs a strength of Character to do this. I am sure it gives them a "positive" feeling that they are doing their duty to their religion. I would request them to realise and acknowledge -- no, not to accept -- the other side of the coin. To the Muslims who do not accept this interpretation of Shari'ah (and of course the non-Muslims) the practice of framing the face by our sisters-in-Islam produces a "negative" feeling. It depicts Muslim women and Islam as anachronistic and reactionary. It presents a striking resemblance to the head cover that the Catholic Nuns adopted two millennium ago. The media is quick to embrace this. Whenever discussing Islam and Muslims, a few Muslim sisters with the headscarves or Men with white caps and long beards form the background. Let me make it clear. Those who believe in the scarf have a full right to be proud of it. Those who do not subscribe to it, similarly have a right to feel uneasy and disturbed by it. 

The First Requisite for Hijab

The First Requisite for Hijab

I find this Google Post by Mohammed Imraan very pertinent to the present day trend. The headscarf is portrayed as THE criteria for Hijab. Nothing else matters. It may be fancy and designer made. A short blouse and skinny jeans are acceptable. Eye catching colors and latest style are encouraged. Attend the Annual Convention of MAS-ICNA in Chicago to witness a large and shining variety of this late twentieth century version of Hijab running about in the Corridors. The only missing item is modesty.

Pick up any text on Fiqh - law and jurisprudence - of any of the Four Schools of Thought of Classical Sunny Islam, the First Specification for Hijab is what the Somali Sisters are wearing in Minnesota: A loose, free flowing and plain gown (preferably black) from shoulders to feet and a cover for the hair (NOT a fancy colorful scarf). Next requirement is a Niqaab (face cover), optional but recommended by the Hanafia and mandatory by the other three schools. The third precondition is segregation of the genders in all walks of life.

I am not trying to advocate this scheme. However it does prove that the modern and aggressive trend of depicting the ornamental headscarf as "flying the flag of Faith" has no basis in our Sharia'ah. It is a socio-political strategy based on anti-colonial and anti-imperialism i.e. anti-Western sentiments. It has strong cultural element. It aims at establishing a distinct identity: "us" against "them". It received a tremendous boost in the mid-seventies by the petrodollar of Saudi Arabia and its vigorous advocacy of Wahhabism. The media has taken this very seriously and insists on displaying a group of "Muslim Nuns" whenever they are referring to Islam.

Shari'ah Hijab is about modesty and decency with its primary focus on attitude and behaviour. It starts with a control on the eyes for both the genders and strongly discourages any sensuality or enticement for which the torso is the primary and main source.

Reading our Holy Quran v/s Chanting it; Is Islamic Shari'ah frozen in the Seventh/eight Century CE?

Reading our Holy Quran v/s Just Chanting it

Is Islamic Shari'ah frozen since the Seventh/eight Century CE?

Pearls of Haqq has tweeted a method to "easily complete a recital of the Qur'ān this Ramadān". Why this insistence on a “complete recital” of our Holy Text. Is it a book of poetry or an album of songs? Through HIS sacred Text, Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo is addressing us, teaching us, pleading to us, warning us, guiding us and blessing us with good news in the Hereafter. It therefore becomes our solemn duty to read it very carefully, try and get the message HE is conveying to us and endeavour our best to act on it. I have never been able to understand this rush to chant through our Holy Text as a mantra, frequently and usually even without understanding the obvious meaning of the words being chanted. Apart from this practice being mindless and useless, it amounts to being disrespectful to your Creator: HE is addressing us; instead of paying attention to it we are just rushing by, ignoring HIS words and HIS message. It is totally understandable with the unfortunate among us who are illiterate and intellectually blank. Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo will hopefully bless them handsomely for chanting the text of the Quran without any clue to what is being said. But what about the educated class discussing on Twitter and Facebook? They fully and cleverly use their God given qualities of intelligence and critical thinking in mundane matters to achieve a high standard of living for themselves and their children. When it comes to matters religious, they have a hidebound approach dating back to the eight century CE of uncritical conformity to hadith literature despite the fact that the Holy Quran commands us persistently to think and ponder to understand our Deen. 

Yes there is lot of blessing in reading the words of Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo but what is “reading" in English, “tilawat” in Arabic and “parhnaa” in Urdu? Let me quote the dictionary: 1. To examine and grasp the meaning of (written or printed characters, words, or sentences).

2. To have the ability to examine and grasp the meaning of (written or printed material in a given language or notation):reads Chinese; reads music.

3.

a. To examine and grasp the meaning of (language in a form other than written or printed characters, words, or sentences): reading Braille; reading sign language.

b. To examine and grasp the meaning of (a graphic representation): reading a map

Please note that “to grasp the meaning” is central to the act of reading; same is true for “tilawat” and “parhna”.  If one cannot grasp the meaning then this act CANNOT be called as reading. It is  just incantation, chanting of a mantra or parroting a text. 

Our Lord Creator declares in HIS Book in Surah 102/8:

ثُمَّ لَتُسأَلُنَّ يَومَئِذٍ عَنِ النَّعيمِ

Then on that day you shall most certainly be questioned about the boons (timely blessings, Godsend, gift).  Shakir

There cannot be a greater gift or blessing from God Almighty than wisdom and intellect. Under this ayah we will most certainly be questioned about this talent and capability on the Day of Judgement as to how and to what degree we used it to understand, interpret and practice our Deen. If I have used it fully to build a strong career for me and my family but have refused to employ it to comprehend the Message of Islam conveyed to me by HIS beloved Messenger I better fall into sijdaa right away and cry for HIS forgiveness before it is too late. 

Interesting Remarks about Donald the Dirty and perhaps Reassuring

Interesting Remarks about Donald

  Dirty but Reassuring

Nicholas Kristof, Op-Ed columnist of New York Times had suggested on Twitter that Trump was pugnacious, pugilistic, preening and puerile. He then asked for other P words to describe him. The result was a deluge: “petulant, pandering, pathetic, peevish, prickly, pernicious, patronizing, Pantagruelian, prevaricating, phony, presumptuous, potty-mouthed, provocative, pompous, predatory and so many more, including the troubling “probably president.” He further added  “There’s something heartbreaking about the prospect that America’s next commander in chief may be a global joke, a man regarded in most foreign capitals as a buffoon, and a dangerous one.”

A short Twitter discussion: Look to Allah for help as guided by HIS beloved Messenger?

A short Twitter discussion

Look to Allah for help as guided by HIS beloved Messenger?

Hamzah wald Maqbul had tweeted this beautiful thought:

By Allah there are refugees, prisoners & orphan who remain unbroken inside & out because they have you Ya Rasūl Allāh!

عليك الصلاة و السلام!

I had responded :

Our beloved Prophet has referred us to Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo for help and guidance. 

Hamza Sahib was kind enough to point out to me in his retweet:

Our beloved Allāh has referred us to the prophet, sallallahu'alayhiwasallam, for guidance.

My response:

I think each one of us is emphasising a different level and aspect of our Eemaan. Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo had sent a Messenger, our beloved Prophet to communicate with us and explain us the Divine design and purpose of life which he did completely and wonderfully. One of the important principles that the Messenger taught us is that we should look to Allah and only to HIM for our needs and desires. Prophet Mohammed sallallahu'alayhiwasallam then guided us diligently how to approach the Supreme Being to get HIS help and blessings. To my knowledge, he never claimed that he himself can give or deprive anything to anybody. And Allah knows best.

A Thought for Today

Islam, Pure and Peaceful needs no defense. ISIS, the "psychopathic monster" needs to be condemned: unqualified, with words followed by deeds. Especially by us Muslims. Why we? Because they parade under a black banner with our most sacred Shahada on it and they charge into their grisly and gruesome murders with our most thrilling and elevating slogan "Allah-o-Akbar". Disgraceful to us and our beautiful Deen.    

Secretary John Kerry thinks our Democracy bothers ISIS, a “psychopathic monster” Right? Wrong?

Secretary John Kerry thinks our Democracy Bothers ISIS

A “psychopathic monster” 

Right? Wrong?

I agree that ISIS is a “psychopathic monster” as you have stated Secretary John Kerry. But this is not because they are against our Democratic values. On the contrary they are capitalizing on the lapses of these values that we betray from time to time. Yes, it is an inhuman and barbaric body. Notwithstanding what follows, I am sure they need to be eliminated. They are against everybody excepting themselves and those who agree with them. This is entirely because of their perverse mind and draconian and maniacal policies. As I have said earlier It is not that our our Democratic values bother them. Probably they love them because it makes their heinous task easier. They have got their ammunition from events when the West has  digressed from these democratic values. It starts centuries in the past with the Imperial and Colonial history of Great Britain and Europe. This was obviously no democracy. It resulted in a lasting scar on the psyche of many nations. It is also responsible for the presence of millions of people from the “slave” nations in the “master” countries today. At the end of the first World War the division of the Middle East among the victors was everything but democratic. It is directly and positively responsible for the utter chaos and mind boggling confusion in that area. And ISIS is one of its off shoots. At the end of second World War there was a successful attempt to carve out a new country for seventeen million people of an Abrahamic Faith. There are perhaps many justifications for this action but democracy is certainly not one of them. At the conception of this movement at the turn of twentieth century, there were merely two percent folks of this Faith in Palestine. It was artificially, forcefully, systematically and diligently but anti-democratically pumped up since then Religion is taboo in the politics of the Western World as a function of democracy.  But they supported the creation of a state on strictly religious grounds on the basis of a claim in the Holy Scriptures of seventeen million people of a certain Faith and ignored the Holy Book of about one and half billion people of another Abrahamic Faith. This is any thing but democratic. The new state is now an occupation power. There is no attempt by the Western media and governments to ensure democratic rights for the original people of the land. The government of the country is using all the methods of an imperial power witnessed over the centuries to manage their subjects. To this day, they continue to forcefully grab more territory in the occupied land in open defiance of even their greatest benefactor and protector, USA. The international community, who is responsible for its creation in the first place has given them a free hand. Is this democracy or the lack of it? Our country, US is very conspicuous by ignoring basic democratic values in its relations with the new state. The classical example was the invitation to the Prime Minister to address the Congress in defiance of core democratic protocol. The repeated standing ovations that he got from the members of our esteemed congress reminded me of the huge crowd in the streets of Karachi similarly cheering their leader Altaf Hussein who was calling from London. I could not believe my eyes; it was demeaning, not democratic. In the nuclear field we have one standard for six million people of one Country/Faith and another for seventy eight million of another Country/Faith. In the former case there seems to be an international conspiracy “Hush, do not talk!”; in the latter case aggressive diplomatic efforts to successfully stop it. Do you call this democracy? To stop one from a nuclear dash is very right and laudable. To remain silent for the other is not democratic but unjust and unfair. In short, I totally agree with your assessment, definition and remedy for ISIS. The only point of difference: it is not our democracy but the frequent abandoning of our democratic values that has given the vicious and barbaric minds of ISIS fuel and energy. Cannot conclude without asserting that this is no attempt to suggest even an iota of justification for the depraved, disgusting and barbarians like ISIS.

Response of a Concerned Muslim to my "An Appeal to the Conscience of Muslims"

Response of a Concerned Muslim to My 

"An Appeal to the Conscience of  Muslims" 

I got a good, long and emotional response to my article “A challenge to the Conscience of Muslims” (copied hereunder). I would like to respond to him through this blog. 

Dear Hasan,

AoA and thanks for responding. I agree with you and your assessment given out with great passion. I have a little different take on it, however. The present state of Muslims is very heartbreaking. But our response to this, in my humble opinion is worst. Instead of a real and good soul searching, most of us are inlined to morn and groan about our surroundings. Instead of even trying to light a candle, we ceaselessly curse the darkness. Yes, the media have a very dirty agenda of their own. But like every where else, the media also have sincere people conducting good and correct reporting. In this case the broad facts are clear and very disturbing. It involves a boy of eighteen, trying to air his views and organize protests for them which is illegal in Saudi Arabia; he is arrested and detained in a Police State Style, no due process of law, no trial and condemned to death and crucification. This is horrible and un-Islamic. It affects you and me, Hasan because it is shaping up under the watch of Khadimain Harman Sharifain in a land which is so dear to all of us. As such, it casts Islam in a very ugly shape. I feel, the great injustices (as you have pointed out) that “others” are doing to us should not have any bearing on our assessment of this case. This is wrong, very wrong and we should stop it with our hands, if not declare it openly as wrong and finally if not then at least consider it as completely wrong in our hearts as is incumbent on every Muslim by the famous hadith of our beloved Prophet.  

A point or two about the current political climate around us which you have discussed very well and emotionally. The tyrannical and atrocious occupation of Palestine is a constant sore for more than three decades. One sided and totally biased and unprincipled American support of Israel  plays a major role in the continued torture and torment of the Palestinians.  Starting with Al Qaeda and Afghanistan spreading over to Iraq, Syria, Libya, appearance of ISIS on the scene, the attitude and interests of Western powers, the internecine, sectarian and ethnic fights of the local population (by the way 79 % of Iraqis - 62 % Shia and 17 % kurds - had approved and encouraged American intervention in Iraq for very obvious reasons) are collectively responsible for the inferno in the Middle East causing widespread death and destruction. You think they — the West —  are dong it; I would like to think the same. And both of us will agree that most of our 1.6 billion Muslim brothers and sisters feel the same. However every actor on the stage thinks that he is right and that the other is responsible. What is the solution? The combined might of the Arab countries could not last for more than six days in 1967. Cursing them and vilifying them --the West -- in our discussions will not help. We must acknowledge that they will do what they think right and they have the strength and power to do that; unfortunately they are able to decide what is right even for us!

As you have pointed out very correctly, the solution is to charge and surround our own political and religious leadership and our Ulema, scholars and intellectuals to come out with a ten year plan — as the Japanese and later Chinese have done in the past— to organize the Ummah on a constructive plan; paranoia about Western excesses must simple stop. Out of our hostility towards the West we tend to make heroes out of Osama Bin Laden, Saddam, Gaddafi, Bashar al-Assad, ISIS and the likes. This is simply wrong. We should not have any hesitation to discard them completely; no ifs and buts. instead of being romantic about Ummah, we should be practical and start with working on individual administrative units of Ummah i.e. each country and design a long term plan for its development — social, educational, inancial, political. Hopefully  these will grow and unite into a strong Ummah.

Copy of the letter from Hasan Chand:

Khalid Bhai, Salaam.

The World politics has gotten rotten & worst the past few decades, more rapidly in recent years.  The Powerful continue to Rule and dictate as they find greedy politicians everywhere, sadly more easily in Muslim countries, ready to bend over & comply.

Surely, the KSA Court decision, as reported in western media, is one of those that could be called "Do as the King says".  Islam (& all Abrahamic religions) values human life more than any other religion but look at what we all do!  The King must rescind the Court decision & if the man is truly guilty of Treason (does not appear provable) then a Life sentence may be the answer, but to kill & hang the body?  No, No & No.

The Wester Media & Politicians mostly look the other way when Israel's Gaza atrocities kill, maim & destroy Life, as Muslim States give it lesser lip-service than the western leadership; mentioning Israel's stockpile of nuclear arsenal is taboo as is mentioning the "holocaust".  Let Palestinians (&Muslims) die, sending more troops to Iraq (after the totally unjustified Iraq affair of GWBush & Tony Blair, which the is now -- after hundreds of thousands of Iraqi & other human beings having been killed, claiming to have been a "mistake but worth getting rid of Saddam!  BULL SHIT!  Was Saddam that Dangerous for the World, & that too after his instigated attack on Iran & Kuwait?  Today' news says Obama has reluctantly authorised sending less than 50 Special Operations troops and further say : "While the deployment was small in scale, it was large in importance for a president who had refused to commit American ground forces inside Syria beyond quick raids. White House officials said the troops would advise local forces fighting the Islamic State and not play a direct combat role, but they left open the possibility of sending more in the future."

Yes, we all need to make ISIS non-existent, if they cannot be trained to follow the Real Islam of the Quraan & Sunnah.  However, look at the 4 year "WAR" raging in the area, the number of people killed, multiple thousands made homeless & Refugees many of whom, rather than be provided shelter in Muslim countries, are going thru dangerous means to reach Europe.  Is there no real danger when they settle in non-Muslim European lands where there is already some resistance from locals and, besides, the possibilities of forced or unforced conversions?

Sorry, Khalid Bhai, I feel very disturbed sometime, more at our Muslim Leadership --- political, religious as well as "Educated" intellectuals. In Pakistan, I see more of a status quo to ensure a 2 class society where the Rich live in (un-earned) luxury not cognisant of their DUTY, & the poor class lost in making their daily needs come to fruition, willingly or un-willingly acquiescing to reality of poverty, to which they have been pushed in various ways like lack of proper education, health facilities, infrastructure etc.  

This has become too long & I know nothing will come of it at the circles where it could at least get some attention.

Regards.

Hasan Chand

A Challenge to the Conscience of Every Muslim

A Challenge to the Conscience of Every Muslim

Why every Muslim? Because it is happening in the land of the Khademain Harmain Shareefain. A land every Muslim has an intense desire to visit, not once but again and again.

Nicholas Kristof has published an essay today, October 29, 2015 "Sentenced to be Crucified" in the opinion pages of The New York Times.

Let me quote the relevant parts of the article to save some time for you:

"Any day now, our Saudi Arabian allies may behead and crucify a young man named Ali al-Nimr.........Nimr’s offense? He was arrested at age 17 for participating in anti-government protests...... the only known evidence is a confession apparently extracted under torture that left him a bloody mess.......Nimr was recently moved to solitary confinement in preparation for execution..... In Britain, where the sentence has received attention, the foreign secretary says he does “not expect” it to be carried out. But Nimr’s family fears execution could come any day.......It’s time for a frank discussion about our ally Saudi Arabia and its role legitimizing fundamentalism and intolerance in the Islamic world. Western governments have tended to bite their tongues because they see Saudi Arabia as a pillar of stability in a turbulent region — but I’m not sure that’s right......... Sadly, Saudi Arabia is a gift to Islamophobes; it does far more damage to the reputation of Islam than any blaspheming cartoonists........Granted, many Saudis are pushing for reform. One bright young writer, Raif Badawi, 31, called eloquently for women’s rights, education reform and freedom of thought, and Saudi Arabia has sentenced him to 10 years in prison, a $267,000 fine and a flogging of 1,000 lashes (50 at a time, with one session administered so far). His wife, Ensaf Haidar, tells me that his flogging is to resume soon after a long suspension, and that she fears he will not survive the entire lashing........The United States government has largely averted its eyes from all this, at least in public, merely expressing deep concern about the crucifixion sentence even as it provides weaponry to enable the Saudi assault on Yemen."

The article gives a link if you want to add your signature for a petition in defense of Ali Al-Nimr. You will also see the innocent faces of Ali and his wife.

REPRIEVE, US has given more details about this case. 

Some quotes from there: "He was accused of participation in an illegal demonstration and a large number of other offenses. These include “explaining how to give first aid to protestors” and using his blackberry to invite others to join him at the protest…….Ali was tortured and forced to sign a false confession. This was the only evidence brought against him. He was sentenced to ‘death by crucifixion,’ which in Saudi Arabia involves beheading and public display of the body……Ali’s final appeal was held in secret, without his knowledge. This was the last remaining legal obstacle to his execution, and now Ali can be crucified at any time……Ali was arrested without a warrant. He was held in pre-trial detention for two years, and at no point was he allowed to contact his lawyer. Ali was tortured and forced to sign false confession. Throughout his trial, Ali was denied access to the evidence against him. He was not even informed of the charges until half way through the proceedings. His forced confession was the only evidence brought against him. He was sentenced to ‘death by crucifixion’…….Ali’s final appeal was held in secret, without his knowledge. This was the last remaining legal obstacle to his execution, and now Ali can be crucified at any time. The authorities may not even give prior notification of his family. His execution would be illegal under international law."