What's new

Indian Muslim clerics to take on Taliban in conclave

EjazR

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
May 3, 2009
Messages
5,148
Reaction score
1
Muslim clerics to take on Taliban in conclave - Mumbai - City - The Times of India

MUMBAI: Taliban leader Hakimullah Mehsud's pronouncement that he will turn to India once "goals'' in Pakistan are achieved has outraged leading clerics and Muslim leaders in India. Jamiatul Ulema-e-Hind, a body of religious leaders, is convening a three-day conclave in Deoband in the first week of November where Taliban's ideology of sanctioning suicide bombing will be roundly denounced.

Disturbed at Mehsud's provocative statement, the Jamiatul Ulema-e-Hind is gearing up for an ideological fight with the so-called jihadis. "The Taliban, who sanction suicide bombings, are enemies of Islam. Committing suicide is haram (prohibited) in Islam and suicide bombers will go straight to jahanum (hell),'' said Maulana Hameed Noamani, Jamiatul Ulema's spokesperson.

A series of suicide bombings over the past few days have convulsed Pakistan. The Taliban have brainwashed a band of volunteers who are ready to blow themselves up. This growing tendency of killing themselves and others has distressed the Indian ulema too.

"This cannot be called a war in the name of Islam. Even during a legitimate jihad, which is fought not by a rag-tag army of some misguided men but by state against the identified aggressors, Islam has set certain principles-in jihad you cannot harm the old, the sick, women and children. You cannot attack places of worship. But the terrorists kill people indiscriminately. They are earning Allah's severest punishment,'' said senior cleric Maulana Abu Hassan Nadvi.

Maulana Mehmood Daryabadi of All India Ulema Council said imams in mosques would be asked to denounce suicide bombings in their Friday sermons. "Many imams already do it, but we will make fresh appeals to the imams to mention the dangerous mentality in their weekly sermons,'' said Maulana Daryabadi.

Burhanuddin Qasmi, who heads Markazul Maarif, a socio-cultural institution, said ,"The future is bright for Muslim youth in India. They should grab the opportunities and be assets to the country. God can't be pleased by those who organise mass murder.''

AIUDF meets guv over terror

Mumbai: "It is now the matter of India's security and sovereignty,'' said the president of All India United Democratic Front (AIUDF), Tarun Rathi, while condemning the acquittal of the alleged mastermind of 26/11 attacks, Hafiz Saeed, by a Pakistani court. The group, which submitted a three-page memorandum to governor S C Jamir, also discussed the threat India faces at present from countries like China and Pakistan, and demanded diplomatic pressure from our government against both countries.

"Terrorists use the Muslim community as a shield to hide their identity. We bear the brunt of hatred from the society then. It has come to a point where we have to prove our love for the country. And so we will,'' said one of the members on the panel.
 
Last edited:
.
Good to see 99% muslims stands agianst sucide bomber like taliban are using.

Remeber Pakistani soldiers blew them self under Indian tanks in 1965 war thats not haram.
 
. .
Good to see 99% muslims stands agianst sucide bomber like taliban are using.

Remeber Pakistani soldiers blew them self under Indian tanks in 1965 war thats not haram.

that was a declared war between two countries. wars were owned by states. and its not limited to Pakistan. pick up war histories and you can find numerous examples of suicide missions. but what taliban are doing is terrorism. there is difference between the two.
 
.
Can you provide some links about this... sounds interesting.

HMM link will try to find. As old Indians they will know.

That time Indians were first to get tanks. Pakistan did not had any or many tanks. Only way to stop Indians tanks was sucide mission by shahid jawans. It happend in Sialkot or Lahore.
 
.
Reading on wikipedia which isnt saying right. Pakistan did not had any or many tanks on that time. Atleast what i know. I will ask my mother and father :)
 
.
Reading on wikipedia. Pakistan did not had any or many tanks on that time. Atleast what i know. I will ask my mother and father :)

I am sorry to say what you are saying is not true. Pakistan always had lot of tanks. Infact, it was in 1965 war, when the world saw the largest tank battle after second world war.
 
.
The story of soldiers/locals strapping bombs and doing suicide missions is supposed to be a myth. It was only a morale booster story at that time. None of the official sources mention this and even retired PA officers who wrote books about it didn't mention it.

Suicide in any case is prohibited, even in wartime. You can't take your own life. Unfortunately some maulvis give opportunist fatwas in this favor to justify it but many clerics have always been against this even about this.

Pakistan had superior American aircraft and equipment and American trained officers that America provided to keep it as its ally against the Soviets. This was used to gain an advantage against India.
VIEW: Lessons of the 1965 war
 
.
Holding out to the death in war or to protect other parts of your unit or people is an old story in human history. What about Hussein at Karbala, for example? The Japanese kamikaze operation in WWII also comes to mind. Countless Iranian suicide waves were launched against the Iraqi forces in the 1980's war. Hezbollah used a suicide truck bomber to attack the American Marine peace keepers in Lebanon in 1985. However, the use of suicide bombers to attack purely civilian targets is new to my understanding. Of course, 14 Muslims committed suicide in order to kill civilians in New York and Pennsylvania in 2001, crossing a new threshold in depravity. (I'm not counting the 5 who committed suicide to attack the Pentagon, even though they killed about 45 civilians on the plane to do it.) The rest of that story is the history we are all now living.
 
.
^^
This is only related to whether suicide bombing is permissible under Islam. Even though some people might justify it from a bravery and "no other way except this" point of view, it is still not permissible. Hussain did'nt by his own hand kill himself but was killed by who he was fighting. The Japanese example is different as they were not muslims.

These suicide attacks only started after an religious nationalist streak came out in the Palestine conflict in the 70s and still it was rare. Because of the asymmetrical nature, suicide bombing was justified by fringe Egyptian and other scholars, but many still opposed it.

Suicide bombings is where the perpetrator knowingly blows himself up and that is prohibted. However, commando style attacks in Lahore are not technically suicide for example because they are killed by enemy bullets and not by their own hand. Its another thing that some of them also had suicide vests and blew themselves though
 
. .
^^
This is only related to whether suicide bombing is permissible under Islam. Even though some people might justify it from a bravery and "no other way except this" point of view, it is still not permissible. Hussain did'nt by his own hand kill himself but was killed by who he was fighting. The Japanese example is different as they were not muslims.

These suicide attacks only started after an religious nationalist streak came out in the Palestine conflict in the 70s and still it was rare. Because of the asymmetrical nature, suicide bombing was justified by fringe Egyptian and other scholars, but many still opposed it.

Suicide bombings is where the perpetrator knowingly blows himself up and that is prohibted. However, commando style attacks in Lahore are not technically suicide for example because they are killed by enemy bullets and not by their own hand. Its another thing that some of them also had suicide vests and blew themselves though

First of all in war the sanctioned action is against enemy fighters and no civilians can be intentionally targeted...

If we say that a soldier must carry out a mission in which his death is certain, then yes it is allowed in Islam and has been the norm in many battles past, it is also form of suicide to jump into a situation where death is guaranteed...
However you interpret suicide as something when you kill yourself with your own hands only...which is a more strict and appropriate definition of suicide in War time...since war is always a high risk time...

However, there can also be a case in which the mission actually causes the soldier to take his own life due to some step...note that it is not to just kill another person...it is to protect something which is critical to the war...it cannot be a mindless thing.

For example if an army engineer has to take down a bridge before enemy troops capture it and due to some reason he can only trigger the explosives from the bridge...it shall not be haraam, despite the fact that he certainly dies from the explosion...

In crusades, during the siege of Acre a Muslim ship carrying supplies was surrounded by fleet of Richard within sight of the Muslim camp, when the captain was certain that he will not make it to Acre and the enemy will capture his ship and the precious supplies with it, he capsized his own ship so that the enemy could not gain any advantage...this was another suicide...since the sea was rough that day and there was no chance of surviving...
This is in the chronicles of the Qazi of Saladin's Army, a man named Beha ud Din who was a very learned Muslim scholar and he writes about this while praising the brave Muslim Captain who was martyred...so clearly he was not doing something Haraam as per the Muslims in those times...

However these are all specific to War and cannot be directed at civilians...only against enemy soldiers...against whom the state has declared war...to be carried out in a war zone...
 
Last edited:
.
All-Green

Again technically speaking the sailors actions were not suicide as in he didn't kill himself. He was killed in sea. You can say this was a high risk mission. Suicide mission has become a popular term but strictly speaking its not suicide.

Strapping a bomb around your waist or in your car and then pressing the trigger is completely different and that is haram. I have had discussions with Ulema on this and they did not approve of Palestinians suicide bombers who did this either, even though many Arabs get so emotional about it and don't follow the clear injunction in Quran not to kill yourself with your own hand; and would subsequently disagree .

It doesn't say that killing yourself by your own hand is not permitted except if you are killing an enemy or in Jihad it is alllowed. There is no justification for suicide period.

Life is precious and can't be wasted like this, that's why prophet Muhammed (SAW) agreed to the treaty of Hudeibeyah even though they had an upper hand and the treaty provisions were humiliating and patently unfair. But human life and blood was precious and all possible options were taken to avoid war.

Nowadays, Muslim life has become the cheapest and I would not be exaggerating that its the muslims as a single largest group who die violent deaths globally. Instead of following the example of the Prophet, some misguided groups are following tribal customs of honor and revenge and applying it to their own twisted versions of so-called Jihad .

It is high time this is corrected and categorically stated in unambiguous terms.

please read these for clear discussion directly with verses of the Quran
Suicide Bombing in Islam - Going to heaven or Hell?

Genesis of Suicide Terrorism
 
Last edited:
.
Suicide is taking your own life for the purpose of ending pain, despairing at the will of Allah or some worldly reason. I don't think anyone here is any postion to be saying such acts are haram unless they have scoured all the books of Sunnah & fatwa of the Classical Ulema etc to make a proper verdict.

Secondly, Allah has commanded the Muslims to fight Jihad against the disbelievers until Islam is supreme. Jihad is not just about self-defense.

It seems to me, they are only coming out with what they are, simply to appease the Indians. Which you can't probably blame them for because they're the ones who have to deal with any backlash of any terrorist acts.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom