You are really loosing it. Who is James Versluys? Why should I read his website? Does he write for the Toronto Sun? Has he traveled all over Central Asia, Pak and Afghanistan? Did this guy cover the Afghan-Soviet war? Did he travel with the mujahideen during battles? Does he have contacts with high up people in CIA, ISI etc?
Why should I listen to some clown journalist, when I can listen to someone of the caliebr of Margolis.
I rank Margolis more highly than any of the unknown people you keep bringing up.
Margolis has devoted his entire life fighting for freedom and truth. What have Tasbih and Versulys accomplished?
This Versluys guy has NOTHING on Margolis. In fact, most of his article is praising him, but in the end, he puts forward some illogical ranting that makes no sense.
Imdad, the domain of prejudice and ignorance will always be greater and larger than that of knowledge. The issue is not of making points and doing better. Since you know who and what you want to hear, you are most welcome to it.
Re: Whither radical Islam? by Borchgrave AND article by Lee Kuan Yew
really thats funny i always thought jihad was to remove the obstacle to islam be it verbally or physical including using military power.
You have to give to these secular extremists they trying there best but they always leave themselves too exposed people see right through there designs!
I doubt it very much if you belive that 99% of muslims think jihad means beating yourself up and meditating in a jungle somewhere then i think your not in touch with reality!
Just take a walk in your local musim community and ask better still look up what it means in quran and sunnah!
AK,
Did it ever dawn on you that religion is a spiritual endeavor, a path to become closer to God? Religion shouldn't be the catalyst or reasoning you use to force your beliefs on others or an excuse to make war. There are a lot of un-Godly paths to choose from if that is your goal.
ak47, what do you think Jihad means? What do you think it means in the Quran and Sunnah? I have read different interpretations on what that means. I did post saying by Mawdudi, and the ex-chief justice of Saudi Arabia a week ago in another thread on what they thought Jihad meant. Although I disagree with your views, I have never found you to lie or try to be duplicitous. You have always said what you think, and that is why I am asking you. I know I will get a straight answer.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by OldLahori: *
ak47, what do you think Jihad means?
[/QUOTE]
Old Lahori
Jihad in the islamic terminology Jihad is Qitaal i.e. Jihad is undertaking the physical fighting
When the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) was asked who is in the way of Allah i.e. who is a Mujahid, he explained, “Whosoever fights to make Allah’s word the highest, then he is in the way of Allah.” [Bukhari and Muslim].
Ayat of Qur’an we can see that Jihad is undertaken to convey Islam, and to remove the barriers from implementing and propagating Islam, this can be seen from the rules to do with Jihad as well. So we can define *Jihad as struggling to remove the material barriers to conveying the Islamic Da’wa, whether it is by the physical means, or by wealth or expressing an opinion concerning the same. *
I will not quote 119 of ayahs in quran describing the fighting because they are well known and will make my post look too long.
Instead i will expose the myth that Jihad is jihad an-naffs (I.e fighting oneself) the evidence used is “We have returned from the lesser Jihad to the greater Jihad, that is the struggle against the evil of oneself.” This is not a ahad hadith is is spurious and quoted from a man named named Ibrahim ibn Abi Yabla who was of later generation.
also this is contradicted by incident woman came to the Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) and asked “O Messenger of Allah! Is Jihad obliged upon the women?” To which he responded, “Yes, a Jihad without Qitaal (fighting), it is the Hajj and the Umrah!” narrated by Ibn Majah with a source in Bukhari
Instead i will expose the myth that Jihad is jihad an-naffs (I.e fighting oneself) the evidence used is “We have returned from the lesser Jihad to the greater Jihad, that is the struggle against the evil of oneself.” This is not a ahad hadith is is spurious and quoted from a man named named Ibrahim ibn Abi Yabla who was of later generation.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, but this disregards other authentic hadith on the subject.
The Companion 'Abdullah ibn 'Amr (r) was asked: "What is the best jihad?" He replied: "He who strives against his own self (nafs) for the sake of Allah." He was then asked: "Then who of those who migrates (hijrah) is the best?" He replied: "He who strives against his own self and his desires (hawa) for the sake of Allah." He was asked: "Is this something you have said O 'Abdullah ibn 'Amr or Allah's Messenger (s)?" He said: "Rather, Allah's Messenger (s) said it."
Ibn Nasr al-Marwazi recorded it in Ta'zim Qadr as-Salat (#639).
At-Tabarani's version in Mu'jam al-Kabir is:
"... the best of those who migrate are those who migrate away from what Allah has prohibited, and the best jihad is the one who strives against his own self for the sake of Allah, the Mighty and Majestic."
Al-Manawi (d.1031H) said the latter hadith is "hasan". (Fayd al-Qadir 2:48)
ak47, I completely agree with you. The article by the ex-chief justice of Saudi Arabia pretty much said what you have written in a lengthier way. I also agree that jihad-al-nafs is a myth, and I will go further to say that this myth is being propogated by those who want to be “politically correct” to the powers of west. It is a shame that many people find it “convenient” to speak in convoluted diplomatic language that borders on lying instead of speaking the truth boldly and straight forwardly.
Iqbal, I think if you read ak's post he mention 119 ayahs in quran describing the jihad as qital (fighting)
[/QUOTE]
Yes, i read his post. He said he was going to "expose the myth that Jihad is jihad an-naffs" but was perhaps unaware of authentic hadith on the subject other than the fabrication he quoted and refuted. So jihad al-nafs is not a myth, it is perfectly valid and practised. Of course, this doesn't negate other forms of jihad as well.
the jihad an-naffs is quoted by so many government scholars in order to distract muslims from main jihad which is spread of islam by dawa and also removing obstacle verbally or physically.
They will quote and say islam has no fighting and no military etc this is dangerous concept.
also what you say to the hadith i posted: asked “O Messenger of Allah! Is Jihad obliged upon the women?” To which he responded, “Yes, a Jihad without Qitaal (fighting), it is the Hajj and the Umrah!” narrated by Ibn Majah with a source in Bukhari
the jihad an-naffs is quoted by so many government scholars in order to distract muslims from main jihad which is spread of islam by dawa and also removing obstacle verbally or physically.
[/quote]
But it doesn't mean that jihad al-nafs is a myth, does it?
**
[quote]
They will quote and say islam has no fighting and no military etc this is dangerous concept.**
[/quote]
As is saying that jihad al-nafs is a myth.
**
[quote]
also what you say to the hadith i posted: asked “O Messenger of Allah! Is Jihad obliged upon the women?” To which he responded, “Yes, a Jihad without Qitaal (fighting), it is the Hajj and the Umrah!” narrated by Ibn Majah with a source in Bukhari **
[/QUOTE]
It doesn't negate jihad al-nafs. Jihad takes various forms, one of which is struggling against one's own self. And what did you think of the hadith i posted?
Imdad, the domain of prejudice and ignorance will always be greater and larger than that of knowledge. The issue is not of making points and doing better. Since you know who and what you want to hear, you are most welcome to it.
[/QUOTE]
Glad you accepted your mistake.
Your above post is typical of many of your posts that really mean nothing.
really thats funny i always thought jihad was to remove the obstacle to islam be it verbally or physical including using military power.
