Bhai maripat someone had directed me to this archive.org/details/AsbabOAamal
It would be good if you or someone can translate relevent portions.[/quote]
Ya akhi-al-aziz I am aware of Hazrat Aqdas Maulana Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA)'s stance on Means and Actions.
This issue was decided by Imam Ghazali (RA)'s himself and it is directly from the Noble Qur'an where Allah (SWT) tells beloved rasoolallah (SAW) that when you were throwing that fistfull of sand in Badr it was not you (the Prophet SAW) but Us (Allah SWT) who did it.
For us the issue is very clear, as clear as crystal.
As far as the translation goes personally I have reached a different stage. Since I am not a Scholar of Deen my contributions have to be in other departments only. As you are so aware by now that I am focussing upon worldly matters.
Quote:
Maripat bhai the argument of not utilising means is an absolute joke. Means have to be utilised as it is a sunnah but means are not be made the objective. Those who use the argument that we don't need means why do they use an aeroplane to go haj or modern ameneties. Should us Muslims not be ashamed that what we wear, what we eat, our phones and computers are all made by people who detest ALLAH and his messenger sallahualahiwasalam. Does a believer not have this ghairah that for him to go hajj etc he has to rely on corrupt governments for freedom of movement. My personal opinion is that our religious class uses this argument as a form of escapism. The sahabah did not just rely on dua alone. They had to go to the battlefield and the prophet sallahualhiwasalam was told to pray but also aquire might which was modern weaponary as stated by the classical mufasireen. [/quote]
Precisely.
Just a few days ago I got an honour in the form of an insult.
A pretty high official of the university aske a friend of mine, "Who is this Mullah Maripat?"
Why?
You know worldly people use that tone to deliver, not honour but, disgrace.
I keep a beard and hence I must be some sort of useless fellow.
After giving the matter due thought I was devastated to come to a very unpleasant conclusion - I can neither defend myself not the Mullahs. I can not defend myself because I chose to look like them, the Maulwis.
I can not defend the maulwis because they very consciously chosen to ignore the worldly issues.
(1) Maulana Wasi Sulaiman Nadvi, editor of Armughan of Phulat, wrote in an editorial a few years ago that Muslims need not worry about science because in Spain we were the flag bearers of science and it was of no use for us.
Can you argue with that?
(2) A few days ago a young Mufti from Dar-ul-Uloom explicitly told me over the telephone that this is a misconception that condition of Ummah will improve if we use worldly means like science and technology.
(3) Other examples of similar attitude of our Scholars that I mentioned in the earlier post.
I personally feel like a complete loser. Theological people have the attitude that I have mentioned above while the modern education people call me a Mullah and also tell me that the Mullahs are responsible for all the troubles of Ummah.
[quote]
In my local area the markaz was denied planning permission but then all of a sudden they started a campaign of lobbying the local government. People cannot stomach such double standards. One 1 hand you say we must not utilise means but when planning permission is blocked you utilise means such as legal etc.
True. Even today i do not know how to argue with our theological establishment about worldly matters.
And to worldly people about the importance of Islam in our life.
[quote]
Personally having looked at colonalism it seems that a good number of the religious class adopted the model of surah kahf. Ali mian even wrote a book on it. It was a model of isolation and withdrawl from society. This was done at a time of weakness and desperation but it should be seen as as a dispensation for such trying times but I don't think we have reached that stage yet. When we reach that stage like in communist central asia then yes the Surah kahf model seems the only option as it is very difficult to take on political power as history has shown.
