Following ia an eye-opener.
The very popular “aalim” of the evil regime. He is the other person besides aamir Liaquat the mqm’s jaaahil online that the “enlightened moderate” people promote.
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
First of all, the tone of this article is extremely mean spirited, immature and insulting.
Second, why compare Ghamdi with Rushdie by inventing a similarity between them when there is none? In fact, the claim that Rushdie's command of English language is weak is absurd. Rushdi's novels are written in English and are enjoyed by the British and Americans. One may not like his one particular book but he has written many which are well acclaimed (like Midnight Children).
Third, the criticism of Sir Syed Ahmed Khan is also irrelevant and exposes the narrow mindedness of the author.
The repeated conspiracy thoery that there is a conspiracy theory of Islam hating Chritian and Jewish forces to promote confusion of Islamic injunction can best be described as extreme paranoia. These conspiracy thoeries are brought up to dicredit any thing and any one the Mulla don't agree with.
I am no expert in Arabic to Urdu translation. But Quran is written in old Arabic language which when translating to a different language can be translated in slightly different ways. This will happen whenever a text is translated from one language to another. The claim that there is universal agreement on translation of Quran is also false. If the author thought that some of the translations by Mr Ghamdi were wrong, he could have pointed them out and explain why he thinks those particular translations are wrong without launching a personal attack.
Fact is the purpose of the article is to discredit the "moderation" approach of Mr. Ghamdi. The details of translation of Ayats are only a means to an end. Eye opening indeed!
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
** Fact is the purpose of the article is to discredit the "moderation" approach of Mr. Ghamdi. **The details of translation of Ayats are only a means to an end. Eye opening indeed!
Ghamidi's "moderation" approach or his master Mush's approach?
Where did this word come up from? Maybe carved somewhere in the West, to deal with Islamic renaissance.
Nobody needs to tell Muslims to be moderate. Our deen already teaches us the middle path. But that middle path is based on Islamic fundamentals of Quran and Sunnah - not some Westernization cum behayai campaign.
Why don't we all raise a voice for the Western governments to be just and act in moderation by not invading Muslim lands.
Re: Ghamidi’s Attack on Islam
I was thinking of getting a soft copy of this article by mufti sahib.
Is there any online version of Dharb i Mumin?
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
JazakAllah Brother Laeeq Khan.....This is very well written and easily understandable scholarly book. I would like to read this book too inshaAllah.
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
May Allah SWT guide this person. I had heard about him but have slowly seen how he is being publicized more and how his work is misleading.
Another fitna in the time of Fitn.
Allah SWT protect the muslims and Islam! (aameen)
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
Ghamidi's "moderation" approach or his master Mush's approach?
Where did this word come up from? Maybe carved somewhere in the West, to deal with Islamic renaissance.
Nobody needs to tell Muslims to be moderate. Our deen already teaches us the middle path. But that middle path is based on Islamic fundamentals of Quran and Sunnah - not some Westernization cum behayai campaign.
Why don't we all raise a voice for the Western governments to be just and act in moderation by not invading Muslim lands.
It is not the word but the approach and philosphy that matters. The author and his ilk have a problem with Sir Syed Ahmed Khan too. So it is not any thing new and invented or a Western campaign. We need to stop bringing up the Western bogeyman with every thing. Is it a Western conspiracy or Bahai or Qadiani or Shia or ...? How about telling the truth and state your intentions clearly instead of lying and making up excuses? Isn't lying a big sin?
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
It is not the word but the approach and philosphy that matters. The author and his ilk have a problem with Sir Syed Ahmed Khan too.
It doesn't mean the auther is lying. I don't know if you know this or not but Sir Syed according to his own written books don't believe in the second coming of Jesus(AS).
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
It doesn't mean the auther is lying. I don't know if you know this or not but Sir Syed according to his own written books don't believe in the second coming of Jesus(AS).
Sir Syed also didnt believe in angels/jinns etc.
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
Sir Syed also didnt believe in angels/jinns etc.
and something about Jihad......abrogating Jihad bil Qital with jihad of pen?
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
and something about Jihad......abrogating Jihad bil Qital with jihad of pen?
They are all mulhids/zindeeqs.
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
Yeah, isn't it odd that most of these so-called holier-than-thou muslims running around the world causing problems are mean-spirited?
Some of you guys are always looking for a fight - always using the worst methods to put down people just so you can feel better about yourself - and you disguise all this by saying you're defending Islam. All you're doing is defending the mistakes of your like-narrow-minded ancestors, refusing to live in the world of today.
Re: Ghamidi’s Attack on Islam
I Love you Sister PyariCgudia 
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
You see, I think lying is a very bad trait for a muslim. Hareem, you should know that.
2 Likes
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
It doesn't mean the auther is lying. I don't know if you know this or not but Sir Syed according to his own written books don't believe in the second coming of Jesus(AS).
The author is making a false accusation against Mr. Ghamdi and Sir Syed Ahmed Khan of them being a part of Christian and Jewish consipiracy. The author is also lying about Salman Rushdi's command of English language.
As far as whether Sir Syed's beliefs regarding second coming of Jesus is concerned, it is again irrelavant to the accusation of Mr. Ghamdi being a puppet of Christian and Jewish conspiracy. Sir Syed got branded a Kafir by many Mullahs in his time and I guess it has not stopped. It does not matter to the Mullahs whether history has shown Sir Syed to be a great muslim leader and reformer of his time. Without his Aligarh University, muslims of India would have been in a very poor state.
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
The author is also lying about Salman Rushdi's command of English language.
Does using the word 'F, U, C, K' and 'Benc**d' in each sentence shows the command in english then he has command in english for sure
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
ghamidi to munker hadith he .wese zarb momen main ye mufti abu lubaba buhut acha likhte hen.weekly magzine main .is weak bhi buhut accha column he
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
ghamidi to munker hadith he .wese zarb momen main ye mufti abu lubaba buhut acha likhte hen.weekly magzine main .is weak bhi buhut accha column he
I like his articles on history.
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
Does using the word 'F, U, C, K' and 'Benc**d' in each sentence shows the command in english then he has command in english for sure
Command of English has nothing to do with the use of curse words nor anything to do with this topic. Thanks and come again.
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan elevated the status of Muslims and for that we owe him a lot of gratitude. I know mullahs don't believe in education so thay hate him.
Re: Ghamidi's Attack on Islam
Command of English has nothing to do with the use of curse words nor anything to do with this topic. Thanks and come again.
Sir Syed Ahmed Khan elevated the status of Muslims and for that we owe him a lot of gratitude. I know mullahs don't believe in education so thay hate him.
Yes its true, Sir Syed Ahmed Khan directly or indirectly promoted the cause of Muslims. Yes his contributions in education Muslims is great! No doubt. However, nobody is perfect. Yes he did make mistakes also and his biggest being, going a little extreme by not believing in Jinns and angels.
So on one hand, he did have a good intention and helped Muslims, we do owe it to him, but on the other, he was maybe a little too impressed with the West. I don't blame him much for that, maybe i would have fallen in the same trap at that time. Think about the condition of Muslims at that time, how down trodden we were and also under colonial rule.
So guys, one should have the guts to accept the truth also. We as a nation have this big problem, we just get carried away when we make someone a hero. This is what extremism is. Although we admire him for his work, but we do also know as educated Muslims that he did commit mistakes also which we cannot condone.