you seem to bring that wherever you go eh. acha hae practice kar lo abhi se.
Ravage bhaijaan, it is a tongue in cheek comment…don;t tell me you are suffereing from downfall of humor too? 
It is a good thread, analyzing the reasons what let to the demise of a once great civilization. Just a question, this rejuvenaton or reinvention, will have the same political adn economic structure as the old one?
I am curious, because egyptians, greeks, romans, chinese, indians etc, don;t look at failed models as inspiration. Maybe that is why the future is brighter. what do you think?
Contrary to what some Muslims believe Muslim sects contributed enormously to the expansion of Islam.
I'd say sectarian problems have always increased in response to suppression. No attempt has been made to create even the simplest form of consensus or compromise between different groups. We prefer passing summary judgement on people.
Islam never had a preisthood previously the domination of the Mullahs and their monopoly over what is Islamic and what is not is a very recent phenomenon. When you surrender your religion to a preisthood monopoly, you better be ready for the consequences.
Also concepts like drinking and messing around with women don't destroy empires. The self righteous legacy of the Aurenzeibs and Zia ul Haqs do that...
oye what about my retort. i have been rolling about in laughter and tears of joy after that trophy zinger. soon i will be telling all my friends about it, and trust me, they will laugh too.
personally, rejuvenation/reinvention aint something I believing in, atleast not in this lifetime. Things are going to get much, much worse. Not least because there are those who seek to exploit Muslim misery for their own benefits.
Muslims suffer from lack of education, the lack of will to invest their talent and resources in education, the lack of vision to do anything about their circumstances, and the abuse of Islam as a consolation, almost like Soma to take refuge from their miserable depravity.
The same Muslim, once rich, once has it made, forgets about his religion and partys up. What happens to his religiousness then? Its a culture of evasiveness that has ingrained itself in us, of easy consolation that is directing most people towards religion these days.
Such flimsy reasons for seeking out God will not see you go anywhere besides the mosque, and that too when you’re despondent.
And we need rejuvenation. Rejuvenation of fervor, coupled with will. If those who send their kids to madrassas today, out of cash and motivated by their ill acquired religious zeal put a little thought into their actions, eked out a decent education for their children, like my grandparents did, they would do so much more service to their faith than having their child chant verses from Quran unintelligently.
But such thought, such foresight, could only be motivated by a genuine desire to help Islam, to aid their people.
‘failed’ models?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zakk: *
Also concepts like drinking and messing around with women don't destroy empires. The self righteous legacy of the Aurenzeibs and Zia ul Haqs do that...
[/QUOTE]
Right on bro. Sikandar conquered the world and built a huge empire while drinking and messing around with women and men.
Here is my take on this discussion, and these are all my personal opinions.
I think (emphasize on 'I' :)) that many are missing the point in their replies. Many amongst us blame others for our misfortunes. They say that "West" has created rifts amongst muslims and all that. None of that is untrue, but these are just excuses and unfortunately none of them is a good excuse either. Don't you think enemies have tried to create rifts amongst other super powers of their time? Everyone does, and its to be expected. How we deal with it, tells us how good or bad our leadership and our inner abilities are to deal with problems created by others. Muslims miserably failed that test. And consequently the glorious muslim empire came to a shattering collapse.
If you think about it, the main problem is that there are divergent groups within muslims (call them sects or whatever) and each of them take their strength from their strong belief that they and only they are on the right path as divined by God Almighty. Everyone else is on the wrong path. This thought process creates arrogance and an inability to accept mistakes, change and move forward in the path to progress. This inability also creates rigidity in action and uncompromising attitude that is fatal for any society to succeed. This is exactly what happened to us. We failed to motivate our people, refused to take diverse groups along and forcibly shut the opposition because, ofcourse, the ruler was guided by divine laws and couldn't be wrong.
How to turn the tide around?
Yea, so there is education and adherence to Islam and unity and progress in science and technology and commerce and military and other esoteric concepts that are basically not an end but a never-ending journey (all of them are good, ofcourse).
It all boils down to good leadersip, IMO.
But the bigger and probably insurmountable problem (at this point, atleast) is arrogance. If all of us are totally convinced that we and only we are on the right track (which we are, ofcourse) and others are not (I am not too sure on that) and hence what we believe is right and other is wrong, we close down our minds. When our rulers take their strength from divine guidance, they can't possibly be wrong and hence anyone who is opposing them is a heretic that should be killed.
What we are seeing in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan now is basically just a beginning. We are seeing a clash amongst the belief systems within Islam. You have rulers who are corrupted by power and the religiously-guided who are taking on each other in a fierce winner-takes-all fight. All this talk about Al-Qaieda and terrorism is just an eye-wash. I fear that this clash will grow up to be extremely costly in terms of human life. It will be bloodier than the crusades and the battles amongst christian sects several hundred years ago. The landscape of the middle east will dramatically change within the next 5-10 years. It will not be because of America or Israel or anyone else. It will be because different groups within Muslims will rise against other groups and drunk in their arrogance that only they are divinely guided will be killing the others mercilessly and for a prize of paradise.
Look at it right now. Here we have the House of Saud who is convinced that they are divinely guided to be the rulers of two holy places. We have Osama Bin Laden who is divinely guided to take on the governments of the middle east and the west. We have sunni militant groups in Pakistan who are divinely guided to kill shias and shia groups who are guided to kill sunnis. And there are hundreds if not thousands of other such groups whose life aim is to kill others and secure a place in paradise. All of them are 100% convinced that they are on the right path and have God's own assurance of paradise if they kill members of the other group.
Hopefully, after all the bloodshed, muslims will reconvene and finally get the point that this arrogance has no place in civil life. That the rulers have to be fair and the belief-system needs to be put on a different pedestal. Our rulers are accountable and can not take refuge behind divine texts by saying they are always right. The hundreds of different interpretations of each relgious ruling will make it almost a forgone conclusion that each of us has to adhere to our faith based on what we feel is right in our personal life, instead of shoving our faith into others and expecting them to change. That violence will have to give way to sanity and a desire to lead a successful life in this world and the next.
For the most part, I agree with you.
It is not the sects that are the problem. Its the sectarianism. It is the thought process that somehow leads one to conclude that for the furtherance of Islam, one must convince (and if that doesnt work..) kill, maim, mutilate anyone else on a different interpretation of religion than their own.
At the same time, I dont argue for the complete elimination of organized religion, shifting towards the western model of completely personalised religion. The advantage of having sects I guess, is that it maintains channels within the religion, channels that ensure bounds of divergence. In comparison to other faiths, Islam remains the most cohesive major religion, in terms of thought, in terms of practice. That is surely a positive, for it reflects an aspect we pride ourselves on, that Islam is a religion for the ages.
In my opinion, it is not too much to expect the sects to remain, but the practice of blowing up oneself in another sect's mosque to go away.
We, when talking about Islam, and Muslims, always assume that we're all the same. We're the same group. It wouldnt be surprising if others see us as a group too. A potentially powerful group, with 70 percent of what the world runs on in their names, with a quarter of the world's population, and with a very strong sense of identification with each other, atleast when we're not bickering. And inspite of everything, we're growing. We are an important group, and as a group we can weild IMMENSE power.
Immense power the prospect of which could mortify those who might justifiably be subjected to it. Those who displace a part of us might fear that the whole might unite.
And thus the attempts to control us, to play off our differences and our shocking lack of vision and work towards their ends.
And so, I believe that Al Qaeda, terrorism, Iraq, the new strategy for securing the realm, everything is of relevance to us. The longer we remain in our state of moral, intellectual stasis, the longer our rulers are self absorbed, self serving crackpots, the easier their clean breaks will become for them.
Faisal bhai,
Accha kiya ke yeh aap kah rah ho. Agar hamne kaha hota to PD aur laeqeekhan galiyan dete hote.
There is no Prophet after Muhammad :saw: and yes there are new religion invented in the name of Islam lately which oppose the prophet of God. Hence, your point acknowledged.
It’s because of bhangra that muslims have failed. :bhangra:
Ok after reading few replies, I see people blaming “RULERS” for our current condition.
Very well, have we forgotten the famous hadith when Rasoolulah :saw: said:
People will be made rulers on you based on your actions.
Needless to further elaborate it.
Also whoever thinks i was blaming sects, make no mistakes when I was refering to any group I never considered them as sects. Sects are considered groups within Islam and those groups which I was refering to by all means are never part of it.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sher: *
C'mon guys,,,, today Islamic countries are the most backward countries in the world. If it was not for the oil they would also be the poorest countries.
[/quote]
Just because a country claims to be an islamic country doesnt mean that it acutally is.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Sher: *
But the Muslims keep recalling the great scientific luminaries of the so-called “golden age” of Islam. They name great minds like Zakaria Razi, Abu Ali Sina, Ibn Rushd, etc who have contributed so much to the science and human understanding and pose the questions that have become cliché, “If Islam was wrong, could these great men not have noticed it?” “Isn’t it enough proof of the truth of Islam that so many great minds have been Muslims?”
However, the truth is that these men, though born within Islam, were not Muslims.
[/quote]
Who disclosed this truth to you?
”Zakariya ar Razi (865-925) for example was perhaps the greatest freethinker in the whole of Islamic world. He was one of the great physicians of all times. He wrote over two hundred books on a wide variety of subjects. He is the author of the monumental encyclopedia al Hawi, on which he worked for fifteen years. Ar Razi was an empiricist, who instead of following the standard procedures dogmatically carefully recorded the progress of his patients, and the effects of the treatment on them. He wrote one of the earliest treatises on infectious diseases—smallpox and measles.
Almost all of Ar Razi’s philosophical books are destroyed. His views on religion in general and Islam in particular earned him public condemnation for blasphemy. Only bits and pieces of his refutation of revealed religion are left in a refutation of his book by an Ismaili author. From this, it is clear that the greatest mind of the Islamic golden age was not sympathetic towards Islam at all. Here are his audacious thoughts on religion:
“All men are by nature equal and equally endowed with the faculty of reason that must not be disparaged in favour of blind faith; reason further enables men to perceive scientific truths in an immediate way. The prophets—these billy goats with long beards, as Ar Razi disdainfully describes them—cannot claim any intellectual or spiritual superiority. These billy goats pretend to come with a message from God, all the while exhausting themselves in spouting their lies, and imposing on the masses blind obedience to the "words of the master." The miracles of the prophets are impostures, based on trickery, or the stories regarding them are lies. The falseness of what all the prophets say is evident in the fact that they contradict one another: one affirms what the other denies, and yet each claims to be the sole depository of the truth; thus the New Testament contradicts the Torah, the Koran the New Testament. As for the Koran, it is but an assorted mixture of ‘absurd and inconsistent fables,’ which has ridiculously been judged inimitable, when, in fact, its language, style, and its much-vaunted ‘eloquence’ are far from being faultless. Custom, tradition, and intellectual laziness lead men to follow their religious leaders blindly. Religions have been the sole cause of the bloody wars that have ravaged mankind. Religions have also been resolutely hostile to philosophical speculation and to scientific research. The so-called holy scriptures are worthless and have done more harm than good, whereas the writings of the ancients like Plato, Aristotle, Euclid, and Hippocrates have rendered much greater service to humanity.”
“The people who gather round the religious leaders are either feeble-minded, or they are women and adolescents. Religion stifles truth and fosters enmity. If a book in itself constitutes a demonstration that it is true revelation, the treatises of geometry, astronomy, medicine and logic can justify such a claim much better than the Quran”
The next great luminary of the Islamic world is Abu Ali Sina, known as Avicenna in the West, his “major contribution to medical science was his famous book al-Qanun, known as the "Canon" in the West. The Qanun fi al-Tibb is an immense encyclopedia of medicine extending over a million words. It surveyed the entire medical knowledge available from ancient and Muslim sources. Due to its systematic approach, formal perfection as well as its intrinsic value, the Qanun superseded Razi's Hawi, Ali Ibn Abbas's Maliki, and even the works of Galen, and remained supreme for six centuries" (1) This book was taught as the textbook to the students of Medicine in the University of Bologna until the 17th Century.
“Avicenna's philosophy was based on a combination of Aristotelianism and Neoplatonism. Contrary to orthodox Islamic thought, Avicenna denied personal immortality, God's interest in individuals, and the creation of the world in time. Because of his views, Avicenna became the main target of an attack on such philosophy by the Islamic philosopher al-Ghazali and was even called apostate.”( 2 )
Next is Al-Ma'arri, (973-1057) the greatest Syrian poet. He referred to religion as "noxious weeds" and called it a "fable invented by the ancients”, worthless except for those who exploit the credulous masses. Ma’arri’s contempt of all religions including Islam is clear from the following verses.
"Do not suppose the statements of the prophets to be true. Men lived comfortably till they came and spoiled life. The "sacred books" are only such a set of idle tales as any age could have and indeed did actually produce."
-- Al-Ma'arri, poet, 973-1057
[/QUOTE]
Good research. Can you quote pieces from the named people which will show what you have just claimed above?
‘chanda’ incase you didnt know when the system was properly implemented it did succed. Do google better next time.
: ) let have a GO then.
Islams downfall was that is was not implemented entirely simple as that.
The doors of ijtihad where closed once that happened when new problems arose the state could not solve those new problems.
If a new problem arise you need to do the ijtihad.
Also arabic was no longer the state language, since that was the case you cannot even think of doing ijtihad in another language than arabic.
The uthmani khilafah was superb in fighting the crusader armies and defeating them, it spread islam to the doors of vienna. Unfortuantly it did not consolodate what it had achived and this led to downfall.
Inshallah when islamic state rises up again we will learn from the mistakes made previously learn from them and not repeat them.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Anwaar Qureshi: *
that's because in past, we never had so many people like Munkireen-e-hadeeth, Ahmadies, Parvaizees, Ahl-e-Quran etc etc. It's the wrong teaching of such people who took away the real Islam from the soul of the Ummah. Islam, as collectively, has almost vanished; the leftover are individuals. As long as we continue to declare such people in the fold of Islam, we won't ever be able to make history rather we will become history :-)
[/QUOTE]
I totally disagree with Mr. Anwaar Qureshi. Trying to finger point certain groups of muslims mentioned above and saying that its their wrong teachings that have caused the downfall of Islam. The downfall of Islam has NOTHING to do with the above mentioned. The downfall of Islam is due to lack of education and people misinterpreting basic teachings of Islam. Muslims as a majority have blinded their eyes to the basic teachings of hadith and sunnat and farz. They sit their finger pointing other sects, when they themselves don't know what is right and wrong. Mullahs are creating havoc and we sit there and say "they are doing it for Islam." Our mullahs, our madrassas and our lack of understanding of Islam itself is what causes the downfall and not Shias, Ahmadis, Parvaizees etc. So please point your fingers elsewhere and educate yourself before saying things without any rational.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Zakk: *
Contrary to what some Muslims believe Muslim sects contributed enormously to the expansion of Islam.
I'd say sectarian problems have always increased in response to suppression. No attempt has been made to create even the simplest form of consensus or compromise between different groups. We prefer passing summary judgement on people.
Islam never had a preisthood previously the domination of the Mullahs and their monopoly over what is Islamic and what is not is a very recent phenomenon. When you surrender your religion to a preisthood monopoly, you better be ready for the consequences.
Also concepts like drinking and messing around with women don't destroy empires. The self righteous legacy of the Aurenzeibs and Zia ul Haqs do that...
[/QUOTE]
ZAKK :- Thanks for your great observation. Point well taken !
Diva 4 u.......ahle-quran, pervaizis, rashid kahlifah's followers (submitters)......and ahmedis.......r rather GROUPS based on certain ideaologies..but they r NOT MUSLIMS....hope u get this SIMPLE point
I dont understand the debate here, or even the need for one. The reasons for downfall are the same as for each and every other nation which recieved guidance- the disregard towards Islam itself. Shirk in the name of Islam. Disregard for the laws of Allah.
Any other reasons are plain opinions. Rulers are not the reasons as anwar pointed out, cuz rulers stay there becuz of the ppl, and in a vast number of muslim nations, are chosen right out of the ppl, so in a way they represent what the ppl are upon anyway.
As Allah (swt) says that He will not change the conditions of a ppl unless we change what is in ourselves, then the blame falls simply on ourselves and our inability to follow Islam, rather than on rulers, the west, whatever..
:k: ^^ WELL SAID “MAHIWAL” WELL SAID…
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Mahiwal: *
I dont understand the debate here, **or even the need for one* .
[/QUOTE]
Yup agreed wholeheartedly, this is the main reason. No ability to think outside the box or book.