Why Muslims should unite.

[ghulam muhammed]

Question:
When all the Muslim follow one and the same Qur’an then why are there so
many sects and different schools of thoughts among Muslims?

Answer:
1. MUSLIMS SHOULD BE UNITED.

It is a fact that Muslims today, are divided amongst themselves. The tragedy is that such divisions are not endorsed by Islam at all. Islam believes in fostering unity amongst its followers.

The Glorious Qur’an says: “And hold fast, all together, by the rope which Allah (stretches out for you), and be not divided among yourselves;” [Al-Qur’an 3:103]

Which is the rope of Allah that is being referred to in this verse? It is the Glorious Qur’an. The Glorious Qur’an is the rope of Allah which all Muslims should hold fast together. There is double emphasis in this verse. Besides saying ‘hold fast all together’ it also says, ‘be not divided’.

Qur’an further says,“Obey Allah, and obey the Messenger” [Al-Qur’an 4:59]

All the Muslim should follow the Qur’an and authentic ahadith and be not
divided among themselves.

2. IT IS PROHIBITED TO MAKE SECTS AND DIVISIONS IN ISLAM.

The Glorious Qur’an says: “As for those who divide Their religion and break up into sects, thou hast no part in them in the least: Their affair is with Allah: He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.” [Al-Qur’an 6:159]

In this verse Allah (swt) says that one should disassociate oneself from those who divide their religion and break it up into sects.

But when one asks a Muslim, “who are you?”, the common answer is either ‘I am a Sunni, or ‘I am Shia’. Some call themselves Hanafi, or Shafi or Maliki or Humbali. Some say ‘I am a Deobandi’, while some others say ‘I am a Barelvi’.

3. OUR PROPHET WAS A MUSLIM.

One may ask such Muslims, “Who was our beloved prophet (pbuh)? Was he a Hanafi or a Shafi, or a Humbali or a Maliki?” No! He was a Muslim, like all the other prophets and messengers of Allah before him.
It is mentioned in chapter 3 verse 52 of Al-Qur’an that Jesus (pbuh) was a Muslim.

Further, in chapter 3 verse 67, Al-Qur’an says that Ibrahim (pbuh) was not a Jew or a Christian but was a Muslim.

4. QUR'AN SAYS CALL YOURSELVES MUSLIMS.

a. If anyone poses a Muslim the question who are you, he should say “I am a MUSLIM, not a Hanafi or a Shafi”. Surah Fussilat chapter 41 verse 33 says “Who is better in speech than one who calls (men) to Allah, works righteousness, and says, ‘I am of those Who bow in Islam (Muslim)?’ ” [Al-Qur’an 41:33]

The Qur’an says “Say I am of those who bow in Islam”. In other words, say, “I am a Muslim”.

b. The Prophet (pbuh) dictated letters to non-Muslim kings and rulers inviting them to accept Islam. In these letters he mentioned the verse of the Qur’an from Surah Ali Imran chapter 3 verse 64: Say ye: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (bowing to Allah’s Will).” [Al-Qur’an 3:64]

5. RESPECT ALL THE GREAT SCHOLARS OF ISLAM.

We must respect all the great scholars of Islam, including the four Imaams,Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Shafi, Imam Humbal and Imam Malik (may Allah be pleased with them all). They were great scholars and may Allah reward them for their research and hardwork. One can have no objection if someone agrees with the views and research of Imam Abu Hanifa or Imam Shafi, etc. But when posed a question, ‘who are you?’, the reply should only be ‘I am a Muslim’.

Some may argue by quoting the hadith of our beloved Prophet from Sunan Abu Dawood Hadith No. 4579. In this hadith the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My community will be split up into seventy-three sects.”

This hadith reports that the prophet predicted the emergence of seventy-threesects. He did not say that Muslims should be active in dividing themselves into sects. The Glorious Qur’an commands us not to create sects. Those who follow the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith, and do not create sects are the people who are on the true path.

According to Tirmidhi Hadith No. 171, the prophet (pbuh) is reported to have said, “My Umma will be fragmented into seventy-three sects, and all of them will be in Hell fire except one sect.” The companions asked Allah’s messenger which group that would be. Where upon he replied, “It is the one to which I and my companions belong.”

The Glorious Qur’an mentions in several verses, “Obey Allah and obey His Messenger”. A true Muslim should only follow the Glorious Qur’an and the Sahih Hadith. He can agree with the views of any scholar as long as they conform to the teachings of the Qur’an and Sahih Hadith. If such views go against the Word of Allah, or the Sunnah of His Prophet, then they carry no weight, regardless of how learned the scholar might be.
If only all Muslims read the Qur’an with understanding and adhere to Sahih Hadith, Inshallah most of these differences would be solved and we could be one united Muslim Ummah.

[jawanmardan]

Question:
When all the Muslim follow one and the same Qur’an then why are there so
many sects and different schools of thoughts among Muslims?

Your question is really a red herring, we ought to bare in mind diversity cannot exist while the founder is still alive, and assuming full spiritual and religious authority on a daily basis.

Diversity emanates from varying approaches to filling the vacuum of authority in absence of the founder; and can involve varying approaches to questions of leadership, texts, and even methodology.

If your argument favours the adoption of a singular approach to all facets of our faith, a monolithic Islam if you will...Ask yourself:

Which one do we adopt? who decides? and what happens to those who beg to differ?

If one rejects the pluralistic aspect of Islamic civilization, do we then not create conflict and disunity?

The antithesis of what your stated goal.

[Humsafar]

I agree with you jawanmardan. This appeal to "muslim unity" and constant grievance about its lack is all very misplaced. "Muslim unity" is a hope, an emotional abstract and in my view quite parochial. Why just "muslim unity", why not "human unity"? Having a common Book, a Prophet and his message is not enough to guarantee unity. Shia, sunni and other sects are products and facts of history which, with so many entrenched vested interests on all sides, cannot be brushed under the carpet. Even if were to erase all the differences, two issues still need to be addressed. 1) "Muslim unity" to what end? Yes, Muslims will stop killing one another in the name of "true" Islam but, and here's the second issue, 2) they will always find another reason - country, politics, race, economy and what not - to kill one another. An Afghan Muslim soldier or a Pakistani Muslim soldier or an Indian Muslim soldier or any other Muslim soldier for that matter will not think twice about killing each other in a war. What good is "muslim unity" then?

The lack of unity among people is not specifically a "Muslim" issue. It is the human condition. History and evolution have shown us that we humans are condemned to disunity, and religions (especially the monotheistic types that claim exclusive monopoly over truth) do not actually help the cause of unity.

[Danish]

"Muslim unity" is a hope, an emotional abstract and in my view quite parochial. Why just "muslim unity", why not "human unity"?

The lack of unity among people is not specifically a "Muslim" issue. It is the human condition. History and evolution have shown us that we humans are condemned to disunity, and religions (especially the monotheistic types that claim exclusive monopoly over truth) do not actually help the cause of unity.

Kuddos (glory) be to your above statements!!!!

[salim]

they will always find another reason -

Very well said Humsafar.

If your argument favours the adoption of a singular approach to all facets of our faith, a monolithic Islam if you will...Ask yourself:

Which one do we adopt? who decides? and what happens to those who beg to differ?

Very good point jawanmardan.

I think, excepting the diversity and respecting others opinion is the way to go. As a Muslims we have more similarity than differences.

[Muslim First]

Salim Said;

As a Muslims we have more similarity than differences.

Having a Muslim name is not a proof of similarity. Some sects have abandoned Salah, Fast and Hujj, very essential and common elements of being Muslim.
Wasalaam

[Aarif]

This appeal to "muslim unity" and constant grievance about its lack is all very misplaced. "Muslim unity" is a hope, an emotional abstract and in my view quite parochial. Why just "muslim unity", why not "human unity"?

Humsafar,

Good point. However, if you closely observe unity has nothing to do with religion. It has more to do with the world division between have's and have nots'. No religion teaches to kill or hate human beings. However, this is a common phenomena everywhere... The christians have been hating and killing the jews for centuries in the name of religion. The jews in Israel are fighting against the muslims in Palestine for last 50 yrs. Is this strife created by religions??? Afcourse not... Israel was created on the existing Arab land by the Zionist supporters after world war, displacing the Arabs from their homes and rendering them homeless. Holocoust was the result of Nazi insecurity from the prosporous European jews. Today muslims are branded as terrorists so that it can be used as convenient excuse to attack Islamic oil rich countries and gain control over their oil resources. Actually religion is used as a convenient scape goat whenever the need arises. Even in a country like India, Advani went on a rath yatra to Ayodhya and ended up destroying Babri Masjid. He also, promised a Ram Mandir on the demolished Masjid site to his supporters. After BJP won the election they never bothered to construct the promised mandir. So the point is religion was again misused to achieve a selfish motive of winning the election by BJP. Same goes for shia-sunni wars. Saddam never attacked Iran untill his political interests were in jeopardy due to policies of Iran, even though Iran was always having a shia majority and Iraq a sunni majority. The US was a grt friend of Shah of Iran as long as oil was coming easily from Iran. When Ayatollah came to power his anti US policies made Iran a staunch enemy of US. Almost all the major unrests in the world are caused by some greedy elements of the society under the convenient veil of religion. Its just that common people are too stupid and pre-occupied to understand this basic fact of life...

[Danish]

Some sects have abandoned Salah, Fast and Hujj, very essential and common elements of being Muslim.

That is because thousands and perhaps millions have evolved and continue to realize the ancient pagan idolworshipping acts and rituals that are plainly useless, manipulated, exaggerated and corrupt. Muslims are gradually becoming progressives and liberals by common definition; not by title.

[jawanmardan]

The call for "unity", is so prevalent because of the perceived helplessness Muslim peoples feel at their situation; look at Gaza for an example. Rather than a genuine call for ecumenism; which is why it is doomed to failure.

Aarif;

Jews were persecuted in Europe precisely because they were perceived as murderers of the Christ, any secondary motivations like "greedy elements of the society" were just that; secondary. Religion was not the "veil", it was the instrument of their persecution which gave rise to the image of the Jew as the alien within, which is precisely why Hitler sought to exterminate them, that and having a convenient scape goat.

Muslims are branded terrorists because we have a problem with terrorism within our faith, of course oil, and geo-politics comes into play. Not to mention our over abundance of dictators, and religious fanatics and lack of secular democracies.

Saddam attacked Iran because he believed he could expand his empire, egged on by his masters in Washington whose experts wrongly all presumed Islamic revolutions would spread across the middle east because they could tell the difference between a shia and sunni, and why shia were more inclined to revolt, and financed by his allies in Kuwait and Saudi who feared that their oil rich shia dominated areas would excede with iranian support.

And for the record even if we accept Kurds as Sunni Iraq is still majority Shia, but was ruled by a minority of Sunni Arabs, and Arab Christians who were largely secular. These same allies would privately support his downfall.

So much for unity.

More than unity Muslims need democratic secular governance, with that they will gain prosperity, strength, and respect the world over. Who knows perhaps in time, even unity.

[Aarif]

Aarif;

Jews were persecuted in Europe precisely because they were perceived as murderers of the Christ, any secondary motivations like "greedy elements of the society" were just that secondary, religion was not the veil, it was the instrument of their persecution which gave rise to the Jew as alien within which is precisely why Hitler sought to exterminate them, that and having a convenient scape goat.

JM,

You need to do some more research before making precise statements. Jewish community was the most powerful community in Europe prior to World War II. Numerous documentory films with real evidence have been made on this subject. You can check out this film called "The Longest Hatred: The History of Anti-Semitism" on Christian and muslim hatred for the jews. And just so that you know Hitler gave a rat's arse for religion.. He is considered as one of the biggest and meanest opportunist in the history. E.g. he encouraged Japan to attack China. In Nanking(China) the Japanese killed and raped 200,000 people in 1937 with the support of their German Ally. And believe me there were no jews in China. There are many such examples of Nazi atrocities to gain power and supremacy over rest of the world. If you want more proof on this let me know and I will provide it to you.

Muslims are branded terrorists because we have a problem with terrorism within our faith, of course oil, and geo-politics comes into play. Not to mention our over abundance of dictators, and religious fanatics and lack of secular democracies.

Since, when have you started hearing this word Terrorist as a synonym for muslims??? If you will scratch your brain cells you will realize that this is a pretty recent concept. Islam came into existence 1400 years ago. The battle of Karbala is considered as one of the most inspiring battle in human history against tyranny and evil. How come suddenly muslims are being branded as terrorists??? If you are getting your daily dose from CNN and its likes, it makes sense when you say what you are saying. But truth is not always what you hear and see... The West is extremely good at turning and twisting situations based on the need of hour... In US you can easily be considered a terrorist if you speak arabic and keep a beard... The soldiers fighting for US in Iraq have given first hand statements that 95 out of 100 people killed by them in Iraq, assuming that they were terrorists were actually innocent...

BTW: There are around 1.65 Billion total muslims in the world. Out of this even if 10 million are real hard core terrorists their size is negligible...

[Humsafar]

Arif,
Religion is one factor among many over which men have been slaughtering one another. Whether religion itself causes disunity is moot. I tend to believe that it does. Yes, all religions share universal values of peace and charity and love. But religions that tend to swear by one truth and one god are often intolerant of other truths and other gods. Given their ancient and medieval origins, the message and mould of these religions could not have been otherwise. To the extent believers take these truths literally and claim superiority over non-believers, religions must bear responsibility for the strife and disunity they cause.

Communism, Fascism (Hitler, Mussolini), and even democracy may seem overtly secular but they all had/have religious underpinning : man's endless search for salvation and utopia, the establishment of kingdom of god on earth. This was a leftover ideology that lingered even after Enlightenment "successfully" separated church form state. Hitler's quest for racial purity was a crude amalgam of science and religion. Jews were the most overt and obvious targets. Hitler also attacked gypsies and other "misfits".

True, Israel was created by Zionists but the whole movement was founded on the religious beliefs that they were the "chosen people" who had the divine right to the "promised land."

Marx saw history as an endless war between the haves and havenots. And he was right up to a point. But it would be unwise to blame class differences as the cause of all our ills.

I think the problem is with humans themselves. It is our genetic and evolutionary inheritance: cast in a world for no apparent purpose and then driven to find security and sustenance. Dogged by constant fear of death, our physiology and psychology have developed over millenia and geared us primarily for survival - leading to war and strife. On the positive side, human consciousness has developed from me to my family to my tribe to my religion to my country. The next stage is "my world". This new consciousness is slowly emerging but has a long struggle ahead.

[jawanmardan]

Aarif,

Read my post again you seem to have missed my point; anti-semeticism stems from religion i.e Jews being thought of as Christ killers, if your documentary didn't mention that tit bit it probably was not worth watching .

Jews were never the "most powerful community" in Europe, they were, and remain a largely middle class community, ascribing any legitimacy to the "protocols of the elders of zion" is tawdry at best.

No Hitler didn't care about religion, I never stated he did. His personal conviction that Jews were a menace from the day they killed Christ did provide old Adolfo with convenient, historical-time honored and deep rooted scape goat for Germany's loss and ills post WWI. Every previous "solution" to the "Jewish" problem was religiously motivated, heard of the inquisition? the deportation from Britain, Portugal, France, pogroms in Russia? which is why he dubbed his "the final solution".

If your stating religion has either a minor; or no bearing whatsoever on anti-semiticism; I have nothing more to say.Look too at the systematic persecution of Parsi; because they were simply thought of as "fire worshippers".

As for terrorism I would ask you not to make assumptions on my sources of journalism, nor presume I am some sort of American jingoist lackey, simply because you haven't grasped my point. If religious fanatics themselves use the religion as a motivator for terrorism; no matter how worthy the political cause, or grievance there will be a natural inclination to link it to the religion; it may not be fair; we all may not like it, but thats life.

My take would be to first admit we have a problem; to the surprise of many who are reluctant to do so, let me first say that admission does does not equate with collective guilt, on the contrary failure to do so very well may.

Out of this even if 10 million are real hard core terrorists their size is negligible...

Only 10 million hey? well thats reassured me...

[Aarif]

JM,

Now we are getting in a shitty endless debate. Anti-semitism is just an excuse. I think you should see that film. You have missed my point as well. Jews are considered as Christ killers. But this is just an excuse. Or let me put it this way. Since, jews have killed Christ you can kill them at will. This is what the christians have been using as trump card to eliminate jews. It is not love for Christ but an good excuse to kill people in the name of religion to meet their selfish motives. This is what this film shows. And when I say religion has nothing to do with it, means that because jews killed Christ you can kill them is not mentioned anywhere in Christanity. In fact before dying Christ asked God to forgive his own murderers. Hence, killing jews is against Chritanity but christians still kill jews. And this is the only point I was trying to make in my post. It is not the religion that teaches hatred or killing and neither people do it for the sake of it.

No Hitler didn't care about religion, I never stated he did. His personal conviction that Jews were a menace from the day they killed Christ did provide old Adolfo with convenient, historical-time honored and deep rooted scape goat for Germany's loss and ills post WWI.

Exactly, so religion is just an excuse. And that's what I am saying. And if you and I know this I am sure the rest of the world is not that stupid either to miss out this basic fact.

Also, when you will compare the number of jews with other European races and their influence and power you will realize that they were more powerful than any other community. In fact today in US they are one of the most powerful and richest communities. It's the prosparity and success of jews in science, trade, medicine etc. that created more enemies than friends for them in the past.

If religious fanatics themselves use the religion as a motivator for terrorism; no matter how worthy the political cause, or grievance their will be a natural inclination to link it to the religion; it may not be fair; we all may not like it, but thats life.

Which religious fanatics you are talking about??? Let's have some concrete numbers and facts about them and than we will talk. In fact I would very much like to know the source of your information. I would like to know what percentage of muslims can be really grouped as terrorists out of 1.65 billion.

Only 10 million hey? well thats reassured me...

Well I don't care about your reassurance as I am not interested in assuring anything. But if you have some facts than come up with it. Just beating around the bush makes no sense.

[ghulam muhammed]

11th century Europe was ruled by the church which held a firm grip on the hearts and minds of the people. This power enabled Pope Erwin II to wage war on the Muslim Caliphate and crusade in what he called a War of the Cross to recapture the land of Jerusalem. It had been under Muslim rule since the year 637 but in 1099 this rule was brought to a bloody and sudden end. In the name of the Cross women were raped and murdered, children were put to the sword and it is said that the blood ran in the streets knee high to the horses. Out of this land of bloodshed and terror a group of men arose which would stop at nothing to get what they wanted no matter what the cost. Twenty years after Jerusalem was taken the Dome of the Rock was seized by a group of warrior monks calling themselves The Knights of the Temple of Solomon or most simply the Knights Templers.

In Jerusalem the Templers began to deviate further and further away from the practices of Christianity. They learned the secret arts of the Kabala and ancient form of Jewish magic along with its dark rights and rituals. The Jews have learned the arts from the pagans of ancient Egypt during the times of enslavement to the Pharaoh and develop them into Babylon for the time of Navakanazar. In 1307 King Philip of France arrested them for charges of denial of Christ, homosexuality and idol worship as well as magic. In 1314 Pope Claymont V declared all Templates heretics to Christianity ordering all their properties to be seized. Their leader Chekthemolay was captured and burnt. The Templace was cornered and just when it seemed they were finished forever a glimmer of hope arose from a seemingly certain end they were to find a safe haven as well as an ally but not in France in fact in a country in a desperate struggle for independence against the English. The country of Scotland. The Scotland's hope of independence had died with the death of William Wallace. However to the King of Scotland Robert the Bruce the arrival of the Templace gave him a new secret weapon. Their experience gained over two hundred years of fighting against the mighty armies of Islam had made them expert in combat and warfare and more than a match for any army brought before them. In 1314 the Templers allied with Robert the Bruce and his army took to the field of Ballack Burn in the long awaited showdown with the English. Robert the Bruce's foresight paid off the 25,000 strong English army suffered a humiliatingly defeat at the hands of only six and a half thousand men. The dream of an independent Scotland had finally been achieved. The Templers had brought themselves back from the brink of destruction and never again will they allow themselves to be destroyed. This time they will control the country by controlling its Kings and in order to preserve their secret order the Templers would have to die or more precisely the name would have to die. The Templers who had escaped Europe were finally laid to rest in Rovelin Chapel Scotland which stands to this day as sign of their presence in Britain. Their descendants became the true power of Scotland. In 1603 the death of Queen Elizabeth I left England without an heir to the throne by virtue of decent King James V of Scotland became King of England in doing so Scotland and England joined to form a new kingdom and the power that the Templers held over Scotland spread to give them a firm grip on the whole of Great Britain. For over a hundred years the Templers concealed their activities fading into the background until they were little known and little remembered. However they did not seize to keep a firm grip on Britain. All the time they were planning, regrouping and infiltrating positions of power in all corners of the kingdom. In 1717 the Templers made their reappearance in Europe they had grown in both number and strength and were now ready to coin a new identity free from their reputation of the past and given credibility by none other than the monarchy and aristocracy of England and the name they chose for themselves was a name that would be known by many but understood by a few [I slightly disagree with the name "freemasons" It comes from French "frerés masons" i.e. masonic brothers. Silly English people shortened & translated it to Freemasons]

The new identity in the grand jury of its members afforded the Masons with respect and dignity. The first World member of the Free Masons was Fredrick, Prince of Wales. The latest members include Prince Philip the Duke of Edinborough and consort to the current Queen of England Elizabeth II who herself is a grand patron to the Masons. However behind closed doors the Free Masons were free to indulge in the secret rights and rituals handed down to them by their ancestors and these became the basis of their levels of membership called Degree. The Free Masons were not content with power in Britain alone their ambitions were far greater. In the years to come the World and America being pledged by wars and revolutions each more devastating than the other. However these were not the as commonly believed the spontaneous effects of the downtrodden people but in fact schemes created by the exclusive few driven by hunger for absolute power. All this would take place from the very country from which they had fled centuries earlier and will come to the base for the Global domination.

[jawanmardan]

Aarif, if your point is that human nature is somehow prone to persecution be it for religion, class, race than I would agree. You have to accept too that religion can and has been a method to inspire hatred and persecution, it's not somehow immune.

Which religious fanatics you are talking about???

I don't know where to start on that one, the examples are far too numerous to mention.

Let's have some concrete numbers and facts about them and than we will talk.

How about 1/4, thats 25% of British born and bread Muslims under the age of 25 believing that the 7/7 suicide bombings on the London transport system was justified. See Messers Dr. Tariq Modood, Sociology at Bristol University; "what Muslims want" paper.

That does not mean they are all terrorists, but it means going from believing terror attacks on your own country are justified to actually carrying out an attack yourself is a pretty small leap.

This is not a persecuted minority we're talking about; but people who live in a country whose government and opposition party includes Muslims, who funds Muslim Schools, funds Islamic cultural centers, who gives interest free loans for university, free health care, free housing.

You don't think that Muslim leaders and parents should be alarmed by all of this? and think gosh thats worrying number, we have a problem, how do be tackle this?

[Al Zulfiqar]

to tackle the concept of muslim unity would entail first understanding what are the factors which disunite. now that would be a subject for a PhD treatise.

from the very moment of the passing of the prophet, all the issues which were simmering below the surface but were under check due to the presence of the prophet, exploded and reared their ugly heads. ego issues, jealousy, greed, avarice, family politics etc, all now came bubbling up and the ugly side of the players was revealed.

all these traits or evils are common to all human beings. did islam or the fact that all the protagonists were muslims in any way stop these politics which polarised the islamic nation? its is sad that the mere removal of one man, the prophet, brought about all these divisions so soon. so much for human nature and so much for our excessive dependence on religion or personalities to bring about good. if the essence of the message was not observed by even those closest to the prophet, what can u say about muslims 1400 years later?

clan rivalries, perceived superiorities based on race, age, gender, wealth, color, intimacy with the prophet, power struggles, the different interpretations based on practice of 'rituals', slavish adherence only to certain personalities, personal viewpoints and splits based on the deliberate twisting of ideology to suit vested interests, all came to the fore. over the years these have got further cemented and hardened to a point where old slights cannot be forgotten. none of the dividing factors have lessened or mitigated, on the contrary, the divides have grown, the gaps increased.

so the whole idea of unity is ephemeral, as humsafar says it is but an ideal, which exists as a fond hope in the minds of muslims. those who dream of it, hope and plan for the day when our collective might would make the world tremble. do any of you think even for an instant that the muslim powers or religious leaders are desirous of making this happen? that is a pipe dream!

take our own community and our syedna. he revels in asserting our superiority and in default his own, over each and every muslim sect. only we are the chosen ones, the others are all going to hell. hobnobbing with other muslims is a strict taboo, we only do it outwardly to survive in this world. similarly the saudis and other gulf arabs consider themselves the true blue blooded muslims, the rest, esp. from asian countries and africa are somehow lesser and weird, exotic muslims who are to be tolerated only. white muslims lord it over black ones, muslims from pakistan think that somehow muslims from india are tainted because of their adopting or incorporating indian customs (anything indian is considred "hindu"), arabic speakers think of non-arabic races as ignorant of islam. the persians hate the arabs and vice versa.

for anyone to expect that the love for islam will one day become so powerful that all muslims will unite as a nuclear force of earth shattering power, they need to re-think and reflect on the fact that those who survived the prophet, those who were considered stalwarts of islam, themselves displayed their ugly characters and descended to base levels and islam or the prophet didnt matter to them. where was their love at that moment? only one man stood steadfast to his principles, love of islam and the prophet's mission. that was ali ibne abutalib. look what happened to him and his family.

all religions are condemned to the same fate. is it the fault of the message, the religion or human nature? let us first learn to live with each other with respect, love and tolerance as a first step and then even begin to think of the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. because thats how illusory this whole thing is.

[Aarif]

How about 1/4, thats 25% of British born and bread Muslims under the age of 25 believing that the 7/7 suicide bombings on the London transport system was justified. See Messers Dr. Tariq Modood, Sociology at Bristol University; "what Muslims want" paper.

JM,

I would not go by these kind of generic statements. In fact these are precisely the kind of statements that people are looking for to defame muslims world wide. Also, in India there are roughly 140 million muslims. The largest population of muslims in a single country. Can you tell me what % of these muslims will constitute terrorists??? In fact muslims in India are terrorized by Hindu majority all the time... On the other hand I definitely agree that some bad apples are bringing a bad name to the whole Ummah. But their percentage is really low. In fact a common man in general whether a Hindu, Muslim or Christian, wants job and a peaceful life. No one wants to become a terrorist by choice.

[jawanmardan]

How about 1/4, thats 25% of British born and bread Muslims under the age of 25 believing that the 7/7 suicide bombings on the London transport system was justified. See Messers Dr. Tariq Modood, Sociology at Bristol University; "what Muslims want" paper.

JM,

I would not go by these kind of generic statements. In fact these are precisely the kind of statements that people are looking for to defame muslims world wide.

Its not a generic statement; it formed part of the largest poll amongst British Muslims; and was conducted by leading professors of sociology.

Also, in India there are roughly 140 million muslims. The largest population of muslims in a single country. Can you tell me what % of these muslims will constitute terrorists???

No I can't, but I have already given you a factual figure for Britain a country where Muslims face no oppression. One that points to the high risk of potential radicalization of Muslim youth, we can either face up to tackling the problem or stick our head in the sand, and say its "only a few bad apples".

It only takes one bad apple in a basket to spread the rot, and guess what its spreading.

[Aarif]

Its not a generic statement; it formed part of the largest poll amongst British Muslims; and was conducted by leading professors of sociology.

JM,

It is a common phenomena that when people are meted out with injustice everywhere in the world they would retaliate in some way. Well the poll if really was conducted on 25% muslims of UK and is 100% authentic only mentions that people justify the terrorist act committed by their fellow muslims. It does not mean that they would readily become terrorists if someone asks them to. Also, I really don't know how you reached to the conclusion that muslims are treated fairly in UK. After 9/11 we very well know how the muslims are treated in America. UK is one of the biggest chamchaas of USA. And following the footsteps of USA it has changed its attitude as well. So honestly I would not buy that muslims in UK recieve same treatment as others. Here is one example of how muslims are treated in USA. Its an eye opener for people like you.

http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id ... _article=1

Also, out of curiosity I want to know what was the size of this surveyed population in terms of number and not %. Because I don't think UK is a very prominent representative of Islamic population as compared to other countries like India and that is why I gave the example of India.

[Al Zulfiqar]

sorry if this is funny, but arif and jwm's bickering over the authenticity of a poll in uk, in itself is a telling example of why muslims shud unite, but cannot.

by this i do not mean that healthy debates are to be discouraged, but this is a small peep into the larger malaise which affects the entire muslim nation. do you still think that the muslims can unite?

[jawanmardan]

Al Zulfiqar,
Muslims aren't likely to agree on every single point, does any community? In any case I addmit I am off topic, and that it doesn't seem to be getting anywhere.

However I think growing number of violent views of Muslim youth, and the unwillingness of the establishment and many Muslims to acknowledge theres a problem is worth discussing, perhaps not necessarily here, but there it is. Its not about bickering but about what I believe to an important subject matter that is severely neglected.

[Al Zulfiqar]

jwm, u are not off topic. i'm sorry if i came across that way. u do have a point, even if we stop bickering about numbers here.

[salim]

Al Zulfiqar,
However I think growing number of violent views of Muslim youth, and the unwillingness of the establishment and many Muslims to acknowledge theres a problem is worth discussing, perhaps not necessarily here, but there it is. Its not about bickering but about what I believe to an important subject matter that is severely neglected.

Jawanmardan you should watch this super hit movie "Khuda Ke Liye" it's a pakistani movie with a top Indian actor in it. It is about Muslim Unite and Indo-pak Muslim psychology. The movie is in Urdu/hindi, so get it with a English title. This is one of the best movies I have ever watched. This is also to very good source of learning

http://indianmuslims.in/khuda-ke-liye/

This will also give you a pick into Indo-pak culture (specially Muslim culture)

[Danish]

http://indianmuslims.in/khuda-ke-liye/

Certain dialogues from that link above, the following must be reserved specifically for the Bohra demigod Burhan (and all other similar religious leaders):

‘deen me dadhi hai, dadhi me deen nahi‘,
‘haraam ki kamai jeb me rakhkar halal ghosht ki dukaan dhoondhte hain‘,
‘Kaheen aisa to nahi ki ham Abu Jahal bane rahe hain. Kyonki dadhi to Abu Jahal ke bhi thi or holiya bhi wohi tha‘

[Danish]

With such dialogues (in a Muslim oriented Pakistani/Indian Film), it is no wonder that the Muslim ummah have Clash of the Religious Sectarian Titans.

[jawanmardan]

Al-Zulfikar, fair points all round.

Salim thanks for sharing, I trust their are no song and dance sequences, involving ak47s? I actually haven't watched a south asian film for quite some this one seems really intriguing from what i've read I'll definitely have to rent it and tell you what I think.

[salim]

Having a Muslim name is not a proof of similarity. Some sects have abandoned Salah, Fast and Hujj, very essential and common elements of being Muslim.
Wasalaam

Let Allah decide who does what?

I personally go to Sunni masajid (and say sunni namaz) more than I go to ismaili jamat khana and say ismaili Salah. Because Sunni Masjid is walkable distance away from my home. I don't miss a single day fasting (physical fasting) in ramadan. I have never been to Hujj, but I will go one day inshallah.

So don't judge. Also remembering Allah is more important than the way you remember it. When I go to sunni masjid, it does not make me any lesser ismaili. For us remembrance of Allah is more important than the way you remember him.

Let Allah Decide, because he know the best.

[ghulam muhammed]

For us remembrance of Allah is more important than the way you remember him.

Very well said because He is the All knowing and nothing is hidden from Him. Its remembrance with selfless love which brings one closer to Him.

[ghulam muhammed]

There have been varied views and a healthy debate on this very important subject but my only contention is that when all Muslims believe in One Allah, One Prophet (s.a.w.), One Qur'an, One Kalima and One Kaaba then atleast to that extent why cant we unite and come together on one platform ? Personal beliefs and interpretation on other issues may differ and everyone has a right to his/her beliefs but that can be kept aside when the need for unity is the need of the hour because the divide amongst muslims becomes an opportunity for enemies to suppress the weaker ones like we see in Gaza. Its a very old saying "United we stand, divided we fall". Why cant we identify the ones amongst us who create a divide and for which the whole ummah has to pay a heavy prize. I know that the question of unity in muslims is a wishful thinking but then too why not give it a try in our very own small way. The abdes have shown their colour during gujarat genocide by distancing themselves from the rest of ummah when they said "We are bohras, we are not muslims so please spare us".

[salim]

Very True Ghulam muhammed, very well said.

Some shia object me going to sunni mosque. They think that, why to go and pray in a hall of those who went against Muhammad and his family. But you can get the same argument from Sunni's side.

I personally think that there is no way for one to go back in the history confirm the fact. Currently both the sides have their proofs, both of them shows their proofs from Quran.

I think we all should respect diversity and pluralism.