Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sheikh to Terrorists: Go to Hell

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sheikh to Terrorists: Go to Hell

    Meet the Pakistani Sheikh Who Declared War on the Terrorists - By Christian Caryl | Foreign Policy

    Sheikh to Terrorists: Go to Hell
    A Pakistani cleric declares jihad on suicide bombers. And the story is just beginning.

    BY CHRISTIAN CARYL | APRIL 14, 2010

    Pakistani newspapers recently picked up an intriguing story from the country's security establishment. Reporters learned that their government had intercepted a secret message circulating within Tehrik-e-Taliban, the most prominent of several militant groups trying to overthrow the government in Islamabad. The jihadists, it seemed, had just added a new target to one of their death lists. His name is Tahir ul-Qadri, and he's no government official. He's one of Pakistan's leading Islamic scholars, an authority on the Quran and Islamic religious law.

    It's no wonder the terrorists want to see Qadri dead. Last month he promulgated a 600-page legal ruling, a fatwa, that condemns terrorism as un-Islamic. A few Western media outlets gave the news a nod, but the coverage quickly petered out. And that's a pity, because the story of this fatwa is just beginning to get interesting. "I have declared a jihad against terrorism," says the 59-year-old Qadri in an interview. "I am trying to bring [the terrorists] back towards humanism. This is a jihad against brutality, to bring them back towards normality. This is an intellectual jihad." This isn't empty rhetoric. Last year militants killed one of Qadri's colleagues, a scholar named Sarfraz Ahmed Naeem, for expressing similar positions.

    This isn't the first time that a Muslim jurisprudent has denounced suicide bombings as contrary to the spirit of Islam. But Qadri's ruling represents an important precedent nonetheless -- one that could well contribute to the struggle between the suicide bombers (and those who support them) and a more moderate brand of Islamic politics. Many Muslim scholars before Qadri, of course, have denounced terrorism. What makes him significant is the uncompromising rigor of his vision, which deploys a vast array of classical Islamic sources to support the case that those who commit terrorist acts are absolutely beyond the pale. He's especially keen on targeting the coming generation, younger members of the global ummah (the community of believers) who -- he contends -- have lost their bearings in the roiled post-9/11 world.

    Qadri's fatwa aims to establish a bit of healthy clarity. His finding, which builds its argument around a meticulous reading of the Quran and the hadith (collections of oral statements attributed to the Prophet Mohammed), makes the case that terrorist acts run completely counter to Islamic teaching. While quite a few scholars before have condemned terrorism as haram (forbidden), the new fatwa categorically declares it to be no less than kufr (acts of disbelief). "There was a need," says Qadri, "to address this issue authentically, with full authority, with all relevant Quranic authority -- so that [the terrorists] realize that whatever they've been taught is absolutely wrong and that they're going to hellfire. They're not going to have paradise, and they're not going to have 72 virgins in heaven. They're totally on the wrong side."

    So it's not too hard to imagine why the Taliban aren't amused. "Qadri has been very bold in saying that these terrorists are awaited in hell," says Hassan Abbas, a Pakistani scholar at Harvard University's Belfer Center. "He is clearly provocative, in a positive sense, and this courageous act is also noteworthy." He notes that the fatwa includes a number of specific criticisms of the conservative Deoband movement, whose teachings underlie many of the militant Islamic groups in South Asia -- something that has angered many of the Deobandis. (Qadri himself is a prominent representative of the Barelvi school of Sunni Islam -- a Sufi-influenced group that, says Abbas, has historically outnumbered the Deobandis in Pakistan.) But few of the hard-core jihadis are likely to be swayed by Qadri's formidable scholarly credentials. It's a different constituency that Qadri has in mind -- namely the wavering middle.

    Abbas, who describes himself as a member of that Muslim mainstream, says that Qadri's decision to announce the fatwa's publication in London rather than back home in Pakistan might have diminished its initial impact a bit. "Interestingly, the fatwa has generated a debate in the blogosphere -- among young Muslims living in the West," he says. "I think that can potentially be the most important contribution of this work in the short and medium term. The fact that so many of his speeches and lectures are available online (including on YouTube) indicates that he is listened to globally and especially by educated Muslims." It also hasn't stopped the fatwa (originally written in Urdu) from gaining attention in publications ranging from the Middle East to the Philippines -- attention that is likely to build as the entire weighty work gradually finds its way into relevant languages. (The full English translation of the fatwa, for example, has only just been completed. Qadri's aides are still on the lookout for a proper publisher in the West.)

    Could it be that some onlookers are making too much of the whole thing? Ahmed Quraishi, a conservative Pakistani commentator based in Islamabad, disputes Qadri's influence, political or otherwise. Other scholars before Qadri have condemned suicide bombings, he insists. "Suicide is outlawed in Islam through clear injunctions in the Quran," says Quraishi. "But fighting and dying in self-defense is not. In fact, it is encouraged. So when a Muslim scholar comes out and says, 'suicide attacks are haram,' you need to see the finer print. It is outlawed if it means killing the innocent. But it is not if it means attacking invaders or occupiers."

    That, indeed, is what many have argued before. Yet one of the things that makes Qadri's fatwa so compelling is precisely that it sweeps aside such logic. The claim that terror is a legitimate or excusable response to oppression is, according to Qadri's finding, an "awful syllogism" because "evil cannot become good under any circumstances." (To be sure, he also denounces occupation and acts of aggression against Islam -- but insists that they must be resisted peaceably wherever possible and strictly according to the laws of war where not.) What's more, as noted earlier, Qadri goes well beyond declaring terrorist acts to be merely "forbidden." In his view they're a manifestation of disbelief, not just a profound sin but a veritable denial of Islam.

    This is, in a word, pretty strong stuff -- additional evidence, if any were needed, that the so-called "war on terror" pales beside the war within Islam itself, the continuing, subtle, and utterly vital struggle for the soul of the faith. So it will be worth keeping an eye on the impact these 600 pages will have on Islam's restless minds in the years to come. "The real contribution of the fatwa cannot be evident in a matter of a few weeks," argues Abbas. "The message will go out slowly." But go out it will. Stay tuned.
    There is a cult of ignorance in the United States, and there has always been. The strain of anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that "My ignorance is just as good as your knowledge."- Isaac Asimov

  • #2
    This entire article is clearly some left wing invention. After all, 'everybody' knows that Muslims have not & do not denounce terrorism.
    sigpic

    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

    Comment


    • #3
      I'll believe it when such moves will be A. widespread and B effective(meaning that the proportion of islamic terrorism relative to worldwide terrorism will be lower).Until then,such individual actions are to be encouraged,even if they're worthless.
      Those who know don't speak
      He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

      Comment


      • #4
        Hes a Sufi. I think the biggest flaw is that everything is termed as "Muslim" or "Islamic"; but most people forget that the greatest "clash of ideologies" is happening in the Islamic world itself. The base of radical Islam is Wahhabi Islam. This fatwa by Tahir ul-Qadri should not surprise anyone, humanity has almost always been the base for Sufi Islam. Lets learn to differentiate between the two, rather than put everything under one roof, and than fall under the false impression that some great feat has been achieved by a fatwa like this. Sufi Islam has always been this moderate, and Wahhabi Islam has always been this radical. Sufi fatwas are not progress against Wahhabi terrorism. Nothing has changed.
        Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
        -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

        Comment


        • #5
          You say that because he is Sufi his logic is somehow limited. It seems to me illogical to reject an argument based on who advances it. The case should be judged on its merits alone.

          If his case is strong, it will liberate many young Muslims from the guilt they feel for not strapping on an explosive belt and taking out a market in Allah's name.
          To be Truly ignorant, Man requires an Education - Plato

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
            You say that because he is Sufi his logic is somehow limited. It seems to me illogical to reject an argument based on who advances it. The case should be judged on its merits alone.

            If his case is strong, it will liberate many young Muslims from the guilt they feel for not strapping on an explosive belt and taking out a market in Allah's name.
            Its more like an Orthodox priest denouncing Catholics for the troubles in Northern Ireland. Do the Orthodox Christians denounce terrorism? YES. Do the Catholics give a rats arse what the Orthodox think? NO.

            And yes its an example and i do realise the schools of Islam are not like branches of Christianity but im just trying to make the point.
            The best part of repentance is the sin

            Comment


            • #7
              Sufism sort of allows liberal(limited) reasoning. Hence extremists do not like sufism and vice versa.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by JAD_333 View Post
                You say that because he is Sufi his logic is somehow limited. It seems to me illogical to reject an argument based on who advances it. The case should be judged on its merits alone.

                If his case is strong, it will liberate many young Muslims from the guilt they feel for not strapping on an explosive belt and taking out a market in Allah's name.
                Its not me who calls him illogical, its the extremists. Sufis have been preaching this same message for centuries; and, they have actually been loosing ground to the extremist ideology! As I said, nothing has changed.
                Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                Comment


                • #9
                  i am a Muslim & i denounce terrorism!

                  secondly the ones who are STILL supporting wahabbis for their oil, are the ones who are guilty because of its sins.
                  Love all, trust a few, do wrong to none; be able for thine enemy rather in power than use; and keep thy friend under thine own life's key; be checked for silence, but never taxed for speech.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Jethmalani had said this that made the saudi arabian ambassador fasal hassan walk out of the international conference.
                    He alleged that the Wahabi terrorism instilled rubbish in the minds of young people to carry out terrorist attacks. When he said “India had friendly relations with a country that supported Wahabi terrorism,” Saudi Arabia’s Ambassador Faisal-al-Trad was seen walking out of the conference held at Vigyan Bhavan.
                    Mentioning the obvious crossed the threshold?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Poor Fellow.

                      RIP in Advance.
                      For Gallifrey! For Victory! For the end of time itself!!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Big K View Post
                        i am a Muslim & i denounce terrorism!

                        secondly the ones who are STILL supporting wahabbis for their oil, are the ones who are guilty because of its sins.
                        I was born muslim too and nowadays I'm an infidel and proud of it.

                        You and I or 1000s of muslims denouncing the savagery of jihadist terrorists is not going to cut the cake.

                        It is the deafening silence of their religious leaders which put more fuel to the fire. Why are they so zip lipped?

                        Neither I've nor I'll ever blame any nationality or a certain religious group for the actions of a few. Having said that I don't believe all muslims are terrorist, but looking at past 30 years of global terrorism 99.5% of terrorist regrettably were Muslims.

                        So the dreading question still stands, why don't those muftis, mullahs or what ever they call their leaders come out of their cozy marble covered villas and publicly denounce the mayhem their followers are casting on humanity?

                        I personally believe their silence is a tacit way of encouragement, heck many of them don't even care about being tacit, they come out in public and encourage their followers to slaughter infidels and by doing so enter the vast world of martyrdom. What a sweet way of leaving the material world.

                        Geeeez!! I feel like I can make a career teaching in madrasas.:))

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Aryajet

                          IMO, the moderate Mullahs can never match the state owned Mullahs, when it comes to preaching a certain ideology. The state owned Mullahs have their own agendas respective of their nation state. The billions from the Saudis keep this whole show alive; my guess, it gives them a more elevated role in wold affairs. The Pakistanis, the less said the better; they don't even attempt to hide the fact that terrorism is their state policy. Its a game, sparked off during the Cold War; where the right wing fundamentalists were supported against the, at the time, growing socialist left wing in the middle east. Now the same right wing has taken hold and is giving the world a kick in the bullocks.
                          Cow is the only animal that not only inhales oxygen, but also exhales it.
                          -Rekha Arya, Former Minister of Animal Husbandry

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Like they say...There can not be a bigger criminal than the Police itself if need be so.
                            Similarly, in absence of state sponsered support, no terrorist outfit can survive for long.

                            The state is the real power centre. If it wants, it can cut through any Jihadist arse.
                            sigpicAnd on the sixth day, God created the Field Artillery...

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Aryajet View Post
                              Neither I've nor I'll ever blame any nationality or a certain religious group for the actions of a few. Having said that I don't believe all muslims are terrorist, but looking at past 30 years of global terrorism 99.5% of terrorist regrettably were Muslims.
                              Only if you create a definition of 'terrorism' so abstract that it is meaningless (if this hangs on something like 'Global' then you end up referring to a pretty small number of people). It would be more accurate to say that 99% of the 'terrorists' who get on the news in the West are Muslim. Africa, Asia, Europe, Nth America & Latin America all have 'terrorists' who are not remotely connected to Islam.
                              sigpic

                              Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X