Malik Sahaib
Salam
Thanks for your comments. We consider all Kalama
Reciter
Muslim till someone diverts from the basic principle of
Islam. As it is well known fact that Ahmadees school of
thought differs from all others Muslims sects on the concept
of “ Khatmey Nabuawt” but yet I or somebody
else or any govt. Institution don’t have this authority to
declare someone non Muslim. You referred Maj. Rizvi
repeatedly in your last two mail so let me clear that Maj.
Rizvi is not an Alem or Mujtahid and has no authority in
making decision about any issue of Islam so his comments are
just his personal thinking and nothing else.
“
Kaul Ghairey Mujtahid fideen Misley Buel Asst.”
So far I know our Mujtahedeen are silent about Ahmadees
point of view because they only give Fatwa about any issue
when the matter is forwarded to them with concerning
literature and after studying the concerning point of view
they give their decision and I think that no such issue is
forwarded to them for their decision.
Your point of view that Shia present miseries are the result
of law of nature as they turn a side on the killing of
Ahmadees in the past. Let me tell you that in Islam you are
asked to stop the hands of botchers if you have the power to
do so, if you don’t have sufficient power to stop the Boucher
then your responsibility is not to add to Boucher, and hate
their act of cruelty , and hate them from the core of your
heart. A movement against Ahmadees was forcibly launched by
Sunni majority and it was not possible for a Shia minority to
stop their hands. You can see that in the last few years
valance against Shia’t which resulted a heavy loss of Shia’t
but yet we could not stop this valance and we could not
retaliate in a way they do. Even we did not call them Kafir in
retaliation what to talk about armed retaliation because our
Ulma and specially the Tehreek-e-Jaferria did not allow and
encourage Shia people to do so. If any one individual or a
group retaliated they did so at their own and they were nether
supported not backed by Ulama.
Now if you deeply study the valances against Ahmadees in the
past you will not find Shia majority and their Ulama on the
roads and definitely they were not in position to stop the
movement so they kept a side
Shia’t calamities are not only of these past few years
which you consider the result of law of nature, but Shia’t
, their A’Emmia and Ulama have been facing such calamities
since the death of Holy Prophet (p.b.u.h.& h.p ) till to
the present age. There is very long history of Zulm and
Mazloomiat. We were cut, our houses were burnt, our A-Emma
were slaughtered or poisoned our Ulam were hanged the blood of
our youth and the children was shed by Ummedees, Abbasees,
Usmanees and Mughals etc. because we never bowed and accepted
the Tagoot as a successors of Holy Prophet and we did not give
the fate of Islam in their hands where the whole Ummah was
bowing to them and were accepting them the caliphs of Islam.
We only riley on the A’Emmia of Ahllal Bait of Holy Prophet
so the calamites rushed toward us to whom we accepted to face
, so our calamities are due to our principles which we
adopted and not due to the result of any law of nature, we
have been under the calamities when even the Ahmadiat was far
away from her birth.
You might be knowing that during the valance in 1974
majority adopted the social boycott of Ahmadees but all Shia
Ulama strongly opposed the social boycott and declared it an
un-Islamic act. They referred it like an act of Quraesh
against the Holy Prophet when the Holy Prophet with all Bani
Hashem was forced to live an isolated in Sheb-e-AbuTalib for
three years , so act of boycott was condemned by Shia Ulama.
You can estimate that when Shis Ulma condemned the act of
social boycott how can they support the killing of Ahmadees
but as I told you that our voice was week against the
majority slow gun.
History clearly tell us that always in the history the noble
people remained oppressed by the devils of the history. The
calamites of nobles were always due to their principles and
not at all due to any law of nature.
Shia Majority supported Mr. Bhutto politically only
because in the light of past history they knew that if the
fanatic and prejudice Sunni Muftees come in power the
calamities of Shia Millat will increase. Therefore a neutral
person like Bhutto was more acceptable to them then those
Muftees. You can see that during the dark time of Gen. Zia
the calamities of Shia’t increased only because there were
again Sunni Muftees on his back.
There is no drought that we being Shia do not accept the
Ahmediat point of view regarding the Khatmey Nabuawt
but yet we do not support any violence against anyone
and declaring any one Kafir is not the job of public or any
govt. institution but it could only be decided by
Mujtahideen who have authority to give Fatwa about any
issue concerning Islam
W/Salam
For
Alhujat.
Alhujat --- A call to Human conscience ! ! !
>From: "Malik M. A. Majoka"
>To: alhujat tripod
Subject: Re: Kafir Hai Jo Mussalman ko kehta hai Kafir
>Date: Sat, 30 Mar 2002 21:15:28 +0400
Dear Sirs,
AoA.
>Thanks for further clarifying your position on the matter of
"Takfeer". In fact this is the only practical solution and basis
to any civilised co-existence between the communities with
divergent views. So, I presume now from your writing that you
consider all "Kalema-Reciters" as muslims, and that includes
Ahmadees. I also presume that that is the version accepted by
the mujtahideen of Shiee community, as well.
>
>CLARIFICATION: You have mis-understood from my communication
that the unfortunate killings of Shiee notables and common
people was done or could have been done by Ahmadees. Not at all.
To the contrary, it is a part of Ahmadee creed not to retaliate
with violence to any provocation. Firstly, because it is the
party which feels weak in logic that resorts to violence.
Secondly, because we have a 'living faith' in an 'Alive God'.
So, our cases are in His court and to Him we appeal at the time
of misery and repression. Hence, a lot of un-reported killing of
Ahmadees was done, mostly in Gen. Zia's time. One Advocate Gen.
of Punjab, Gillani by name, openly declared (reported in news!)
that no permission was needed to kill Ahmadees and nothing was
to be feared in this matter. As a result,most cases went
un-registered or un-detected as if it was slaughter of animals
and not the slaughter of citizens of a country. It started with
killing of a doctor in Nawab Shah, followed by buthcery of
another Eye-specialist in Hyder Abad and then a great number of
such killings. The details are available with Amnesty Int'l and
other organisations. However, soon the tirade of killings and
violence turned to sectarian and ethnic feuds. It was a logical
result of targeting Ahmadees. One, because there is a natural
justice that goes on and two, because once the Ginnie of
violence and intolerance is out of the bottle, it is not
possible to return it there! If you turn your face away when an
innocent child is being slaughtered in your street, because he
belongs to another sect, it is only a matter of time that your
child will face the same situation. There is no escape from this
law of nature. This is what I was referring to when I said that
a lot of unfortunate killings of Shiees took place in the last
many years. It was a direct result of letting the ginnie out of
bottle! The quotation of Major (later brig. and now probably
living in Sharjah) Rizvi showed a total ignorance of the laws of
nature (and religion!) and a very short-sighted attitude. So was
it a surprise that the crop of intolerance had to be reaped in
time?
>As for Shiees not supporting 1974 resolution against
Ahmadees, frankly I don't remember a single dissenting voice in
those days. In fact a lot of re-joicing was done by all over
this 'unanimous decision'. Also, there was a lot of talk of 72
sects getting together on one issue, at least. But your
assertion that Shiee Mujtahideen did not approve of this
resolution is appreciable.
>If the aim of persecution of Shiees in Pakistan really was 'weekening
the Islamic Revolution in Iran', Idon't know. What is certain is
that it weekened Pakistan to such an alarming degree that it
came to near-annihilation. It is only a miracle that a
leadership was given to it by God and conditions were created
which just managed to pull it back from the brink. And thank God
for that. And there again, all enlightened people will agree
that the the 'point of rescue' has been ridding the country of
violence and intolerance of different sects. This un-fortunate
phenomenon had all but destruyed our beloved homeland.
>
>All the well-wishers of Pakistan must understand that the
only way to strengthen this country is to create atmosphere of
tolerance and mutual respect. Why go to the extent of hurting
other's sentiment? That is neither civilised behaviour nor the
teaching of any religion / sect. nor a course to progress and
prosperity.
>
>So, should we say that the banner in your site : " Kafir hai
jo Mussalman ko kehta hai kafir" is universal, for everybody and
from every body, or it has some exceptions? If it is universal,
it can form a very good basis of a civilized society in any
Muslim country, if not, it will weaken the Muslims more and
more.
>Thanks for opportunity to have a dialogue with you and best
regards.
>Sincerely,
>Malik
>-- Original Message -----
> From: alhujat tripod
> To: altaham1@emirates.net.ae
> Cc: zashah2@hotmail.com
> Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2002 7:51 PM
> Subject: Re: Kafir Hai Jo Mussalman ko kehta hai Kafir
>
>
> Dear Malik Sahib
>
> Salam
>
> Thanks for your kind response. Your analysis is quite
valuable but I would like to clear our Shi'ee point of view.
>
> We Shia as whole and particularly our responsible Ulama are
always against this concept that to call any sect of Islam Kafir.
To say anyone kafir who is saying " La Ellaha Ellalla " is
totally wrong and against the teaching of Holy Prophet. So being
a lot of differences with Ismailees and Bohras on a shia base we
never called them Kafir and our Ulama never in the history have
lunched any protest against them. You may be astonished to know
that even to Yazeed being the worst enemy of whole prophet and
his progeny we never called him Kafir as well.
>
> Now if you recall the history you may remember that in a
protest against Ahmadees in 1973 or in 1953 and even before the
responsible Ulma-e-Shi'ee specially the Mujtahedeen who are the
actual authority of Fatwa never took part in such movements. But
on the other hand the Ulma-e-Ahle Sunnah have the habit to
declare quickly his opponents Kafir and to launch the movement
against them. I tell you ( you may not be knowing ) the
Ulma-e-Ahle Sunnah don't have the authority to issue Fatwa
because there exist no Mujtahed among them . As per Sunni school
of thought after their four A-Emma they closed the door of
Ejtahad and declared Ejtahad haram for Ummah, after that,
principally no Mutahid could be produced in Ahle-Sunnah so as
the Mujtahid is the only authority for Fatwa so no one has the
authority to issue Fatwa if someone do so he is doing against
his religious basic principle but in spite of this admitted fact
they are very fast in issuing fatwa against their opponents. In
shia scho
>
> Now commenting on the step of Bhutto; In the time of Bhutto
the parliament declared the Ahmedees as Kafir as early I told
that Fatwa authority is only with Mujtahid and no one , may be
president or prime Minster or parliament has authority to
declare anyone as Kafir.( Totally against Islam ) so due to this
un-Islamic practice Ulama-e-Shia never took part in this
movement and remained silent. Openly they did not oppose this
movement for the reason that the huge and illiterate majority
may have turned against them and may have declared them the
supporter of Ahmadees. Bhutto himself was not in a favor of
declaring them Kafir he was having no concern of it. But he was
forced to do so by Sunni majority who was on the roads with
their Ulma.
>
> Now coming to your third point that due to Ahmadees Shia
met the misery I think it is not true although the Ahmadees are
not our friends nor we are their supporter but still there is an
other factor responsible for our miseries. If you look back on
the protest against Ahmadees as I have also explained the Sunni
majority and their Ulma were more on front then Shia so if
Ahmadees are to take the revenge they are supposed to take
revenge from Sunni Ulma but the situation is quite different. In
compare to Sunni Ulma and public the Shia Ulma and the people
were made more target of this misery . We see a lot of Shia Ulma
, Schalars, Doctors students and many other are killed by
declared Wahabi Tanzeem Sepah-e-Sahaba. They themselves have
admitted on many occasions officially and publicly that they are
killing Shia's to earn the Jannah. ( Recently the president
himself in his speech to the nation on TV. said that one Imam-e-Masjid
of this Tanzeem is caught who killed 40 people ( all Shia ) and
he is
>
> Kafir Kafir Sunni Kafir are any one among the Shia Public
would have written on the wall this slow gun where every where
Shis Kafir was written on the walls.
>
> We are killed. our property and houses were burnt we were
openly called Kafir but yet we did not called them Kafir. So
this Tenzeem was not based by Ahmadees but was planted by some
external power with the help of Gen. Zia in his black era. and
ISI of that time was on their back and the aim was to weakened
and crush the Shia't in Pakistan. The aim was altimetry to
weaken the Islamic Revolution of Iran ( as I cannot go much
details of it now )
>
> With the falling of power in the hands of Taleban with the
full support of ISI much more strengthen the hands of
Sepah-e-Sahaba. Trained Commandoes were provided to them from
Afghanistan about it once Nawaz Shareef during his time openly
said on TV. So one can see that in a very short time our Ulma,
Doctors Scholars, Students and many prominent people were wiped
off and their target was to crush the shia't as a whole in
Pakistan. But Allah helped the Mazloomeen and the situation
changed all of sudden. On the basis of this Dua
>
> " Allahhuma Radul Asrar Bil Asrar " they were declared
terrorist by an other terrorist power and were crushed with
their masters.
>
> Insha Allah we all hope for good change in Pakistan We pray
that Allah may help this present government to establish peace
in Pakistan and let not these terrorist may get the power again.
>
> w/salam
>
> For Alhujat.
>
>
>
>
> Alhujat --- A call to Human conscience ! ! !
>
> >From: "Malik M. A. Majoka"
> >To: alhujat tripod
> >Subject: Re: Kafir Hai Jo Mussalman ko kehta hai Kafir
> >Date: Wed, 27 Mar 2002 18:55:12 +0400
> >
> >Dear Sirs,
> >AoA.
> >Thanks for your prompt and frank reply. I understand your
point of view better now. My question was not asked with an idea
of Sheiis supporting Ahmadya school of thought. (Hasbonallah wa
naemul wakeel) Looking at the 'banner' flashing in your site, I
misunderstood. As this statement derives its strength from the
Hadeeth : Whoever calls his muslim brother a non-muslim, the
kufr returns back on him, I thought you have a broader approach
in this matter. Now I understand that what you mean is only:
Sheiis are the only muslims and whosoever calls them non-muslims,
becomes a kafir himself. Am I right, Sir?
> >The other reason for my asking the question was a series
of thought spread over more than a quarter century. I remember
in July/August 1974, a colleague of mine, Major (later Brig. )
Rizvi, very forcefully advocating that Ahmadis be declared
'minority'. I asked him what he meant by 'minority' ? Non-muslims?
He did not say so but he meant it. So I told him that no
National Assembly on earth had a right to decide upon the faith
of a person or community. Because if this principal was
accepted, then next, all sunnies who are in majority in Pakistan
would like to declare Sheiis as non-muslim and so on. The Sheiis,
unfortunately, did not understand this point that they were
making a fatal mistake by supporting Bhutto's un-ethical move in
the 1974, against Ahmadis. The result? After Ahmadis, the tirade
of the public turned against Sheiis and 26 years later I find
that as a community,they are a major victim of religious
intolerance. I find a large number of Sheii notable friends
(doctors and advocate
> >My opinion is that Islam is a large pale which can and
does accomodate difference of opinion -- from Ismailies to
Zikries. We should cooperate in the matters of righteousness and
the matters concerning the whole Ummah and leave the matter of
belief to Allah.To try to throw someone out of this pale is
weakening Islam, politically. We should not do that. Also it
means spreading intolerance. So whoever will be in majority at a
given place and time, shall be justified to throw all others out
of this pale. That is obviously wrong. The fact that Allah
Himself has tolerated all these schools of thought since so
long, shows that we need to tolerate the difference of opinion
as well. On the day of Judgement, in which we all believe, the
truth of belief shall be quite clear. Till then we should avoid
branding others as non-muslims, so that we do not come under the
warning of the saying of Holy Prophet that the Kufr returns back
upon the initiator.
> >Wassalam. with kind regards,
> >Malik
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: alhujat tripod
> > To: altaham1@emirates.net.ae
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2002 9:51 PM
> > Subject: Re: Kafir Hai Jo Mussalman ko kehta hai Kafir
> >
> >
> > Dear Malik Sahib
> >
> > Salam
> >
> > Sir kindly you deeply visit alhujat does it support
Ahmedees school of thought ????????
> >
> > not at all.
> >
> > W/Salam
> >
> > For alhujat.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Alhujat --- A call to Human conscience ! ! !
> > >From: "Malik M. A. Majoka"
> > >To: alhujat@hotmail.com
> > >Subject: Kafir Hai Jo Mussalman ko kehta hai Kafir
> > >Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2002 11:10:32 +0400
> > >
> > >Dear Sirs,
> > >The large banner displayed in your site in Urdu with the
above caption, makes me ask you if you also subscribe to the
'majority' declaring Ahmadis as non-muslim?
> > >Best regards,
> > >Malik.
> > >Malik Mubashir Ahmad Majoka
>
