Sunday, January 29, 2012

"Soldier of God" - Directed by W.D. Hogan

"SOLDIER OF GOD" Directed by W. D. Hogan. "SOLDIER OF GOD," is an epic story set against the Crusades about a Knight Templar and Muslim assasin who travel across the desert looking to complete their missions. The film is a meditation on religion, death and the struggle for truth. It attended the respected SAN SEBASTIAN film festival before winning BEST PICTURE at the Stratford-Upon-Avon Film Festival and A.F.I. Dallas. The film was released theatrically in 2006 and is now on DVD. TRAILER: http://youtu.be/frEZFwWtOgA FULL MOVIE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9LVpIenQQTw&feature=results_video&playnext=1&list=PLA2D0372F9BE5171E

Sunday, January 22, 2012

P.W. Singer: Military Robots and The Future of War

P.W. Singer is my favorite author in regards to military technology and robotics, his insight is unmatched and very thought provoking. If there will ever be real Cylons, he would know! The most striking line is "Hardware made in China and Software made in india"...


Saturday, January 21, 2012

Jewish paper's column catches Secret Service eye

Atlanta, Georgia (CNN) -- The U.S. Secret Service is looking into a controversial column by an Atlanta Jewish newspaper publisher that mulled the assassination of an American president.
Andrew Adler, owner and publisher of the Atlanta Jewish Times, wrote a January 13 column about the threat of Iran to Israel. He posed three options for the Jewish state to counter the Iranian regime.
One of them called for a "hit on a president in order to preserve Israel's existence."
"Give the go-ahead for U.S. based Mossad agents to take out a president deemed unfriendly to Israel in order for the current vice president to take his place and forcefully dictate that the United States' policy includes its helping the Jewish state obliterate its enemies."
U.S. Secret Service spokesman George Ogilvie told CNN Saturday, "We are aware of it. We are taking the appropriate investigative steps."
Adler could not be reached for comment, but the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, a wire service for Jewish newspapers in North America, quoted Adler on Friday as saying "I very much regret it. I wish I hadn't made reference to it at all."
Adler -- who said he's gotten a lot of flak for the column -- said he would issue an apology in the next edition of the weekly newspaper, the JTA reported.
The column, entitled "What would you do?" doesn't mention President Barack Obama's name, but U.S. Jewish groups that strongly denounced the column read the words as a reference to Obama himself. The column also refers to the administration's "never ending 'Alice in Wonderland' belief that diplomacy is the answer," an apparent dig at the Obama White House's foreign policy efforts at dialogue with such countries as Iran.
"The suggestion by anyone, in this case a Jewish newspaper publisher, that Israel should consider assassinating President Obama is shocking beyond belief," said Dov Wilker, director of the American Jewish Committee in Atlanta.
"While we acknowledge Mr. Adler's apology, we are flabbergasted that he could ever say such a thing in the first place. How could he even conceive of such a twisted idea?" said Wilker. "Mr. Adler surely owes immediate apologies to President Obama, as well as to the State of Israel and his readership, the Atlanta Jewish community."
The White House declined to comment Saturday on the column.
Abraham H. Foxman, the national director of the Anti-Defamation League, said Adler's "lack of judgment as a publisher, editor and columnist raises serious questions as to whether he's fit to run a newspaper."
"There is absolutely no excuse, no justification, no rationalization for this kind of rhetoric. It doesn't even belong in fiction. These are irresponsible and extremist words. It is outrageous and beyond the pale. An apology cannot possibly repair the damage.
"Irresponsible rhetoric metastasizes into more dangerous rhetoric. The ideas expressed in Mr. Adler's column reflect some of the extremist rhetoric that unfortunately exists -- even in some segments of our community -- that maliciously labels President Obama as an 'enemy of the Jewish people,'" Foxman said.
Simon Wiesenthal Center associate dean Rabbi Abraham Cooper called the remarks "irresponsible and reprehensible" and said they "must be publicly condemned by Jewish leaders across the ideological and political spectrum."
"We take small comfort from the apology — what a shanda!" Cooper said, using the Yiddish word for something shameful or scandalous.
JTA also quoted Ophir Aviran, the Israeli consul-general in Atlanta as saying he was "appalled at this deranged and morally repugnant assertion."
The Atlanta Jewish Times, a weekly focused on the Atlanta Jewish community, was founded in 1925 as the Southern Israelite.


FREEDOM OF RELIGION: Palestinian Shia Muslims Persecuted by Saudi Wahabi Influence

(AP)  GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip — Masked Hamas police beat and detained members of the Gaza Strip's tiny Shiite community during a religious commemoration last week, a follower and local rights groups said Tuesday, accusing their Islamist rulers of religious intolerance.

It was the first claim of harassment by a group of Shiite worshippers against the territory's mainstream rulers, who are Sunni Muslims. Hamas officials, who have close ties with Shiite Iran, denied the allegations.

A man who described himself as a Shiite said police burst into a house where followers were marking Arbaeen, commemorating the end of 40 days of mourning following the anniversary of the death of Imam Hussein, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad. The man said about 15 worshippers were beaten and detained.



He declined to be identified, fearing further harassment. But some of the men filed complaints to the Gaza-based Palestinian Center for Human Rights and the rights group Mezan, which both sharply condemned Hamas over the attack.

Mezan said in a statement that during Saturday evening's incident in the town of Beit Lahia, police smashed up the apartment, broke the bones of seven of the men, detained some of them at a police station and beat them again before sending them to a military hospital for treatment.

"The attack is a violation of the freedom ... to practice one's faith," said Mezan official Samir Zakout.

Interior Ministry spokesman Ihab Ghussein said Tuesday that police stormed the apartment of a group of "outlaws" who were planning "criminal acts." He said he was unaware of the presence of any Shiites in Gaza. He said his offices would look into right groups' allegations that the men were beaten.

There are no official statistics on the number of Gaza's Shiites. They are believed to number several dozen — a minuscule minority among a population of 1.6 million people who are overwhelmingly Sunni Muslim, including the territory's Islamist militant Hamas rulers.

In many parts of the Middle East, Shiites and Sunnis have had strained relations due to deep theological differences that date back centuries. These differences have boiled over into violence over the years in places like Iraq and Pakistan.

Despite such strains, the attack in Gaza seemed surprising, given Hamas' traditionally warm ties with Iran. The fundamentalist Shiite government in Iran has given hundreds of millions of dollars, as well as military training and other backing, to Hamas.

In a separate incident, Mezan said Tuesday that a prominent rights activist who has criticized Palestinian leaders and militants was stabbed and slightly wounded by unknown assailants.

The attack on Mahmoud Abu Rahma last Friday came after he published an essay that criticized Palestinian leaders and militant groups for threatening, silencing and even harming critics.

"It is safe to assume that neither the government nor the resistance is willing to step in to protect people who dare to criticize them," he wrote.

Zakout said soon after the essay was published, Abu Rahma received threats by e-mail and text message. Hamas police condemned the attack and said they were searching for the assailants.

___

Additional reporting by Diaa Hadid in Jerusalem. Follow Diaa Hadid on www.twitter.com/diaahadid

On the Net: Abu Rahma's essay can be seen at www.maannews.net/eng



Shia Group 'Attacked by Police' in Gaza

A group of Shiite worshipers say masked police violently raided a religious service in the northern Gaza Strip on Saturday, prompting furious denials by the Hamas-dominated government in the territory.


Shia Group
(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) - Around 20 followers of the Shia Islam were performing a ceremony for Arbaeen, the commemoration of the Martyrdom of Prophet Muhammad's grandson Imam Hussein (a.s), when masked police stormed the private home in Beit Lahiya, they told Palestinian human rights groups.
Security officers beat the worshipers with clubs, and took them for interrogation at a police station where they were further assaulted, they told the Gaza-headquartered Palestinian Center for Human Rights.
Several sustained fractures and bruises from the beating and were taken to Balsam and Kamal Odwan hospitals, PCHR said.
The Gaza-based Al Mezan Center for Human Rights said that upon leaving hospital, they were handed notifications to go to the interior security headquarters in northern Gaza.
A Shiite man, who asked to be referred to as M. M., told Ma'an on Sunday "to be assaulted by security forces is outrageous because we are not against the law, we respect it."
"These rites concern freedom of religion ... we are Muslims like all the people in Gaza."
The Shia will continue exercising their religious rites, which they are proud of, he said.
Another Shiite man, using the name Abu Zeinab, said security forces dispersed the religious ceremony after alleging it did not have the proper license, but denied the group were assaulted.
On Monday, the Gaza interior ministry published a press statement denying the account relayed by human rights groups.
"Police tracked an illegal group with corrupted views that were planning to commit crimes," the ministry said in its version of the Saturday night raid.
The ministry also said Palestine is a Sunni country where Shiism does not exist.
"We respect all the doctrines around the world, especially the Shiite school, and we don’t intervene in what they believe and we don’t want them to intervene in our beliefs as well," the statement said.
While vowing to study allegations of human rights abuse, the interior ministry warned human rights groups to consult official sources and not believe just any account of events.
The ministry also called on the media to work for positive national goals.
PCHR urged the Gaza government to open an investigation into "the use of excessive force by the security officers ... and to bring the perpetrators to justice."
The raid broke Palestinian laws on freedom of belief and expression, and a prohibition on raiding private homes without a judicial order, Al Mezan said.
Meanwhile, M. M. told Ma'an that Shiites would "complain about Hamas to Iran, which supports the movement in Gaza."
While vowing to study allegations of human rights abuse, the interior ministry warned human rights groups to consult official sources and not believe just any account of events.
The ministry also called on the media to work for positive national goals.
PCHR urged the Gaza government to open an investigation into "the use of excessive force by the security officers ... and to bring the perpetrators to justice."
The raid broke Palestinian laws on freedom of belief and expression, and a prohibition on raiding private homes without a judicial order, Al Mezan said.
Meanwhile, M. M. told Ma'an that Shiites would "complain about Hamas to Iran, which supports the movement in Gaza."
Abu Zeinab complained that Iran did not offer sufficient support for Shiites in Gaza. While the Shia are harassed by Hamas, they faced worse suppression under Fatah-dominated Palestinian Authority rule prior to the 2007 split between the governments, he added.
Hamas premier in Gaza Ismail Haniyeh is due to visit Iran in early February. The Sunni group is believed to receive considerable support from the Shia power.
/106

A Tale of Two Diasporas: Iraqi exiles were gung-ho to overthrow Saddam. So why are Iranian-Americans so keen on dialogue with the mullahs who rule Iran?


Iraqi exiles were gung-ho to overthrow Saddam. So why are Iranian-Americans so keen on dialogue with the mullahs who rule Iran?

BY REZA MARASHI | JANUARY 19, 2012

An eerily familiar drumbeat of war is intensifying across Washington, just as the United States ends its decade-long adventure in Iraq. The ghosts of America's neoconservative past have dusted off their Iraq playbook to make the case for war with Iran. Their formula is simple but effective: Portray the Iranian government and its nuclear program as existential threats, insist that a chain of catastrophic events will result from inaction, and minimize the costs and risks of war.
If one looks back, however, neoconservative officials in the U.S. government weren't alone in their push for war with Iraq. A crucial aspect of selling the war to the U.S. public was support within the Iraqi-American community. Iraqi dissidents living abroad, such as Ahmed Chalabi and Kanan Makiya, as well as supposed whistle-blowers turned known fabricators like the infamous "Curveball," led a contingent of vocal Iraqis who pushed for steadily more aggressive actions to topple Saddam Hussein's regime. Their promise that the invasion would be a cakewalk and that U.S. soldiers would be greeted with flowers and candy didn't quite pan out. Now, the fruits of their labor are clear for all to see -- a broken country, devastated by war and sectarian strife, with no discernible end in sight.
Iranian-Americans, in stark contrast with the Iraqi diaspora, have largely opposed a rush to war. This is a fact that I have observed up close, while working in the State Department's Office of Iranian Affairs and now at the National Iranian American Council, where I maintain close and continuing contact with Iranian-Americans to ensure we accurately represent their views. Together, these two vantage points have crystallized one key takeaway: Iranian-Americans deeply resent the Iranian regime, but prefer U.S. policies that emphasize engagement and de-escalation.
Why have Iraqis and Iranians living abroad reached such drastically different conclusions? For more than three decades, the Iranian-American community has grappled with the paradox of wanting to make Iran a better place -- but fearing success as much as defeat. Some worry that contributing to positive changes inside Iran will only strengthen a draconian system, extending its lease on life.
For many Iranian-Americans, this dilemma was resolved by their disastrous historical experience with revolutionary upheaval. Rather than laying the groundwork for democracy, Iran's 1979 revolution simply replaced one dictatorship with another. As a result, Iranian-Americans strongly prefer to use the rule of law to alter not only the Iranian government's behavior, but also the thinking of Iranians inside Iran.



Friday, January 20, 2012

"Islam and the Question of Violence" by Seyyed Hossein Nasr


Despite the presence of violence in many regions of the world ranging from Ireland to Lebanon to the Pacific Basin and involving many religions from Christianity to Hinduism, the Western world associates Islam more than any other religion with violence. The Muslim conquest of Spain, the Crusades - which were not begun by Muslims -, and the Ottoman domination of eastern Europe have provided a historical memory of Islam as being related to force and power. Moreover, the upheavals of the past few decades in the Middle East and especially movements using the name of Islam and seeking to solve problems of the Muslim world created by conditions and causes beyond the control of Muslims have only reinforced the idea prevalent in the West that in some special way Islam is related to violence.

To understand the nature of Islam and the truth about the assertion often made of Islam's espousal of violence. it is important to analyze this question clearly remembering that the word islam itself means peace and that the history of Islam has certainly not been witness to any more violence than one finds in other civilizations, particularly that of the West. In what follows. however, it is the Islamic religion in its principles and ideals with which we are especially concerned and not particular events or facts relating to the domain of historical contingency belonging to the unfolding of Islam in the plane of human history

First of all, it is necessary to define what we mean by violence. There are several dictionary definitions that can be taken into account such as 'swift and intense force', 'rough or injurious physical force or action', 'unjust or unwarranted exertion of force especially against the rights of others', rough or immediate vehemence' and finally 'injury resulting from the distortion of meaning or fact'. If these definitions are accepted for violence, then the question can be asked as to how Islam is related to these definitions. As far as 'force' is concerned, Islam is not completely opposed to its use but rather seeks to control it in the light of the divine Law (al-shari'a). This world is one in which force is to be found everywhere, in nature as well as in human society, among men as well as within the human soul. The goal of Islam is to establish equilibrium amidst this field of tension of various forces. The Islamic concept of justice itself is related to equilibrium, the word for justice (al-'adl) in Arabic being related in its etymology to the word for equilibrium (ta'adul). All force used under the guidance of the divine Law with the aim of re-establishing an equilibrium that is destroyed is accepted and in fact necessary, for it means to carry out and establish justice. Moreover, not to use force in such a way is to fall prey to other forces which cannot but increase disequilibrium and disorder and result in greater injustice. Whether the use of force in this manner is swift and intense or gentle and mild depends upon the circumstances, but in all cases force can only be used with the aim of establishing equilibrium and harmony and not for personal or sectarian reasons identified with the interests of a person or a particular group and not the whole.

By embracing the 'world' and not shunning the 'kingdom of Caesar', Islam took upon itself responsibility for the world in which force is present. But by virtue of the same fact it limited the use of force and despite all the wars, invasions, and attacks which it experienced. it was able to create an ambiance of peace and tranquillity which can still be felt whenever something of the traditional Islamic world survives. The peace that dominates the courtyard of a mosque or a garden whether it be in Marrakesh or Lahore is not accidental but the result of the control of force with the aim of establishing that harmony which results from equilibrium of forces, whether those forces be natural, social or psychological.

As for the meaning of violence as 'rough or injurious physical force or action', Islamic Law opposes all uses of force in this sense except in the case of war or for punishment of criminals in accordance with the shari'a. Even in war, however, the inflicting of any injury to women and children is forbidden as is the use of force against civilians. Only fighters in the field of battle must be confronted with force and it is only against them that injurious physical force can be used. Inflicting injuries outside of this context or in the punishment of criminals according to the dictum of the shari'a and the view of a judge is completely forbidden by Islamic Law.

As far as violence in the sense of the use of unjust force against the rights of others and laws is concerned, Islam stands totally opposed to it. Rights of human beings are defined by Islamic Law and are protected by this Law which embraces not only Muslims but also followers of other religions who are considered as 'People of the Book (ahl al-kitab)'. If there is nevertheless violation in Islamic society, it is due not to the teachings of Islam but the imperfection of the human recipients of the Divine Message. Man 15 man wherever he might be and no religion can neutralize completely the imperfections inherent in the nature of fallen man. What is remarkable, however, is not that some violence in this sense of the word does exist in Muslim societies, but that despite so many negative social and economic factors aggravated by the advent of colonialism, overpopulation, industrialization, modernization resulting in cultural dislocation, and so many other elements, there is less violence as unjust exertion of force against others in most Islamic countries than in the industrialized West.

If one understands by violence 'rough or immoderate vehemence'. then Islam is totally opposed to it. The perspective of Islam is based upon moderation and its morality is grounded upon the principle of avoiding extremes and keeping to the golden mean. Nothing is more alien to the Islamic perspective than vehemence, not to say immoderate vehemence. Even if force is to be used, it must be on the basis of moderation.

Finally, if by violence is meant 'distortion of meaning or fact resulting in injury to others', Islam is completely opposed to it. Islam is based on the Truth which saves and which finds its supreme expression in the testimony of the faith, la ilaha illa 'Llah (there is no divinity but the Divine). Any distortion of truth is against the basic teachings of the religion even if no one were to be affected by it. How much more would distortion resulting in injury be against the teachings of the Qur'an and the tradition of the Prophet!

In conclusion it must be emphasized that since Islam embraces the whole of life and does not distinguish between the sacred and the secular, it concerns itself with force and power which characterize this world as such. But Islam, in controlling the use of force in the direction of creating equilibrium and harmony, limits it and opposes violence as aggression to the rights of both God and His creatures as defined by the divine Law. The goal of Islam is the attainment of peace but this peace can only be experienced through that exertion (jihad) and the use of force which begins with the disciplining of ourselves and leads to living in the world in accordance with the dicta of the shar'ia. Islam seeks to enable man to live according to his theomorphic nature and not to violate that nature. Islam condones the use of force only to the extent of opposing that centripetal tendency which turns man against what he is in his inner reality. The use of force can only be condoned in the sense of undoing the violation of our own nature and the chaos which has resulted from the loss of equilibrium. But such a use of force is not in reality violence as usually understood. It is the exertion of human will and effort in the direction of conforming to the Will of God and in surrendering the human will to the divine Will. From this surrender (taslim) comes peace (salam), hence islam, and only through this islam can the violence inbred within the nature of fallen man be controlled and the beast within subdued so that man lives at peace with himself and the world because he lives at peace with God.

SOURCE: http://www.al-islam.org/al-serat/default.asp?url=IslamAndViolence.htm

Friday, January 13, 2012

David Madland: Federal Contracting With Private Corporations Owned by The GOP

David Madland explains the problems with federal contracting and how high road would give taxpayers and the government better value.

Sidi Muhammad: Sufi "Khalwa" Prayer Retreat From Home on January 14th




KHALWA PRAYER RETREAT WITH SIDI’S BLESSINGS from your home SATURDAY, JAN. 14!


As salamu alaykum. Bismillah ir Rahman ir Rahim.


Join beloveds from around the world SATURDAY NIGHT JANUARY 14, 6:30pm for a night of prayer with Sidi’s blessings and prayers for us all.
  •  Register by email with Aisha Sherie at aishasherie@gmail.com (or at 253-759-1672)
  •  Please send your sacrifice to SSC, PO Box 100, Pope Valley CA 94567 (note that it is for Sidi’s account (khalwa) plse) or call Bill Mansfield at 707-965-0700 x 21 with your credit or debit card.
  •  Kickoff calls will insha’allah be approximately 6:30pm eastern, 6:30pm central, 6:30pm mountain times and 6:30ish in pacific (this last may be a bit late as we have a local group in WA and timing is a little more fluid). Sidi insha’allah will be praying deeply for us but is not expected at this time to do another video as yet. Be sure to register though so you can receive any updates on the process if there are any.


Call in number is 1-218-486-1616 code 548726#
May the Subtle Tender Mercy of our Beloved Allah rain down upon us all by His Generosity and Love for us.

Peace to you,
Aisha Sherie and the Tacoma WA community.   


Shadhiliyya Sufi Communities
2950 Pope Canyon Rd.
PO Box 100
Pope Valley California 94567
USA

"Insourcing": Republicans Upset That President Obama Wants To Bring Jobs Back To America

Republicans are upset that President Obama wants to "Insource" or bring jobs back to the USA, because it would cut into their profits from using cheap labor in China and India.  This is one of the reasons why American Conservatives and "Muslim Conservatives" aka Salafis (Saudi Wahabist Sympathizers) love the GOP, because it sends jobs out of the USA for their businesses like Enron, Halliburton, Blackwater, etc.

Ahlul Bayt TV "Women's View": Spouse Selection (Marriage)





Rising Tension Between USA & Iran: Iran Blames Israeli Mossad For Assassination of Civilian Scientist


The killing of civilian scientists by terrorists is a foreign tactic and un-American. Also, by killing civilian scientists, now you have made any scientist in any country including the USA targets for terrorists.





Sunday, January 1, 2012

The First Incident that Led to Dividing the Muslim Ummah into Shias and Sunnis



The First Incident that Led to Dividing the Muslim Ummah into Shias and Sunnis 


It is the stunningly sad stand taken by Umar ibn al-Khattab and a number of other sahaba against an order by the Messenger of Allah to bring him something to record a testament for them. He promised that this would prevent their backsliding into error.[11] 


This Thursday Calamity is, indeed, a most tragic one. It is narrated by all authors of sahihs and sunan and is documented by all traditionists and historians. In a section dealing with the statement of the ailing Messenger (pbuh): "Get away from me," al-Bukhari records it in his Sahih,[12] relying on the authority of `Ubaydullah ibn Abdullah ibn `Utbah ibn Mas`ud. Abdullah quotes Ibn `Abbas saying that when death approached the Messenger of Allah, his house became full of men including Umar ibn al-Khattab. The Messenger of Allah said: "Let me write you something that will forever protect you against straying after me." Umar said: "The Prophet is in a state of delirium, and you have with you the Qur'an; so, the Book of Allah suffices us." Those who were present there argued among themselves, and their argument developed into a dispute. Some of them said: "Come close to the Prophet so that he may write you something that will safeguard you against straying after him," while others repeated what Umar had said. When the argument and dispute intensified in the presence of the Prophet, the Messenger of Allah said to them: "Get away from me." Ibn Abbas used to say: "The calamity, the real calamity, is what discouraged the Messenger of Allah from writing what he wished to write on account of their argument and dispute."

The authenticity of this hadith is not questioned, nor is the occasion whereupon it came to be. Al-Bukhari quotes it in his treatise on knowledge on page 22, Vol. 1, of his Sahih, and it is recorded in many other books. He quotes it in several places of his Sahih. Muslim, too, quotes it at the conclusion of the Prophet's will in his Sahih on page 14, Vol. 2. Ahmad narrates Ibn Abbas's hadith on p. 325, Vol. 1, of his Musnad. It is narrated by all authors of traditions and books of history, each writer editing it yet retaining its gist, reiterating the fact that the Prophet was described as "hallucinating," or "delirious." But they also mentioned that Umar had said: "The Prophet has been delirious" just to sanitize the statement and undermine the sentiments of those who found it abominable. Supporting this fact is what Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Abdul-Aziz al-Jawhari has said in his book Al-Saqifa where he relies on the authority of Ibn Abbas. 
Ibn Abbas has said, 


When death approached the Messenger of Allah, there were many men present at his house. One of them was Umar ibn al-Khattab. The Messenger of Allah said: "Bring me ink and a tablet so that I may write you something that will safeguard you against straying after me." Those present at his house disputed among themselves. Some of them said, "Come close and watch the Prophet write you something," while others repeated what Umar had said. When the argument and dispute intensified, the Messenger of Allah, became crossed and said: "Get away from me."[13]This proves that the traditionists who did not wish to state the name of the person who went against the Prophet's wish had nontheless quoted his statement verbatim. In a chapter on rewarding the envoys, in his book Al-Jihad wal Siyar, page 118, Vol. 2, al-Bukhari states: Qabsah narrated a tradition to us from Ibn Ayeenah, Salman al-Ahwal, and Saeed ibn Jubayr. They consecutively quote Ibn Abbas saying: "On a Thursday__what a day that Thursday was...." He burst sobbing then went on to say, "...the pain of the Messenger of Allah intensified; so, he ordered us to bring him some writing material so that he might write us something whereby we would be protected against straying after him, but people disputed, knowing that nobody should dispute in the presence of any Prophe. They said: `The Messenger of Allah is delirious.' He, therefore, said: `Leave me alone, for the pain I am suffering is more tolerable than what you are attributing to me.' He left in his will three orders: to get the polytheists out of the Arab land, to reward the envoys the same way whereby he used to reward them,' and I forgot the third one."The same hadith is narrated by Muslim at the conclusion of a chapter dealing with the will in his Sahih, and by Ahmad in Ibn Abbas's ahadith on page 222, Vol. 1, of his work, and by all other traditionists. It is obvious from this incident that Umar ibn al-Khattab was of the view that he was not bound by the Prophet's Sunnah. This explains the edicts which he issued when he became the caliph and in which he employed his own view even when it contradicted the Prophet's statements. Actually, he followed his own personal views when he contradicted clear divine texts. He thus prohibited what Allah had permitted, andvice versa
It is only natural to see that all his supporters among the sahabaharbor the same attitude with regard to the Prophet's Sunnah. The next chapters will prove to the reader that those sahabahhad in fact, and to the great misfortune of the Islamic Ummah, forsaken the Sunnah of the Prophet and adopted the Sunnah of Umar ibn al-Khattab instead.  


[11] It is the famous "Thursday Calamity" recorded in both al-Bukhari's and Muslim's Sahih books. 
[12] Al-Bukhari, Sahih, Vol. 4, p. 4. 
[13] Ibn Abul-Hadid, Sharh Nahjul Balagha, Vol. 2, p. 20.

SOURCE: WWW.AL-ISLAM.ORG

EXCERPT: http://www.al-islam.org/real/

BabakDarvish.Com Wishes you a Happy New Year 2012



Pageviews today
304
Pageviews yesterday
405
Pageviews last month
8,935
Pageviews all time history
99,978
Don't track your own pageviews
PostsMore »
Apr 14, 2010
1,603 Pageviews
Sep 19, 2010
1,579 Pageviews
Dec 3, 2009
1,368 Pageviews