In England there was commons' land, and as the word common modifies the land it means land for the common people. Common people depended on this land for their livelihood and shelter. They were mostly people with no luxuries or even modest income levels, who're only surviving on what they could find in the forests, lakes, etc., for themselves and/or for their cattle. Similarly, it provided them housing and stuff. They were poor people but the land made life liveable and gave a sense of security against economic upheavals and complete bankruptcy of basic necessities.
The rich people had their eyes on it for long. In 1066, after the Normans Conquest, things changed drastically. Rich and powerful lords approached for 'privatization' of the land, in a sense. All the poor people were banished from the commons land, which became not so common by then. Their houses were destroyed and what not. Survival became difficult, if not impossible. Previously, they could graze their sheep and drink its milk or eat fresh fish from flowing lakes or rivers and survive, but now the conditions became worse.
The same situation took place back in the times of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Their was a commons land under his rule on which poor people used to graze their cattle. Rich and powerful people approached him (PBUH) to allow their cattle to enter it for grazing. Prophet (PBUH) forbade their entrance and instructed them to find some other pasture or land for their big flocks, lest they might overgraze the rightful share of poor people's pasture.
The judgement given by Prophet (PBUH) is totally opposite to the one given by the kuffar and shows the basis of Islamic economics to be welfare of the people and especially the poor.
The project teams introduces Tanzil.net as following:
"Tanzil is a Quranic project launched in early 2007 to produce a highly verified Unicode Quran text to be used in Quranic websites and applications." [Italics mine.]
The fact that it can be incorporated into other apps and sites is very useful. The developer of the project is Mr Hamid Zarrabi-Zadeh, who also teaches computer science in Iran, may Allah preserve him and his team.
It is one of the tragedies that have befallen this ummah of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) that after their encounter with West and its subsequent disintegration Muslims have started to invoke same old jahili (ignorant) slogans of their nationalism - being Iranian, Pharaohic Egyptian, Ottoman Turkish, etc - as sort of replacement with their everlasting Islamic identity. So this is a new phenomenon. Seyyed Hossein Nasr in this talk talks about this tension in Iran where some modernist Iranians, most of them miles away from Iran living in San Fransisco, etc., are maligning Islam and are making these false claims that Islam was thrust upon them. He argues that how can 50k Arab Nomads convert millions of Iranians, and rest of people from China to Iraq. In fact, it is a disgrace, a slap on the face of the ancestors in these countries who although took some time to integrate completely with Islam, so no clash with their multiple identities. Talking of identities, Amartya Sen argues in his Identity and Violence, that people have multiple identities. Conflict arises when a person has an irreducible identity.
This invoking of slogans of days of ignorance is accompanied by the belief that Qur'an has nothing to offer to Muslims and their problems (better to be called diseases in Islamic context); hence we'll look towards West and progress. I do not see any other source of impetus for these attitudes in many Muslim countries than Western thought paradigm, channeled through its educational systems. Modernist people try their best to rip off any Islamic sentiment or idea that may be encompassing, or partially part of, movements, institutions, in Muslim countries, of past or present, to prove absence of Islam in the lives of people or duality in Islam between worldly and heavenly. They think they're "unreasonable folks" who can think independently but they're perhaps worst slaves of every notion or theory issuing from West, because they're destroying one identity they can possibly belong to.
(To be continued....)
Such is the brutality of militant, fundamentalist nationalism: It can destroy careers and defame people for respecting its man-made rituals that make no sense to those who think. Rituals that truly divide people on basis of descent or merely subscribing to the notion of a nation that has no link with the heaven nor any greater purpose than recognition among diversity of other nations. In the absence of a link with the Creator and Sustainer of the world, artificial notions of belonging and binding forces are conjured up to divide people into factions. Americans do tawaf (circling) of some their historic monuments just like Muslims do tawaf of Ka'aaba, built by Hazrat Ibraheem (a.s.). To them their flag is sacred, and desecrating their national anthem or such symbols is greater a sin than desecrating God's Prophets or God himself.
Islam instructs us not to vilify gods of polytheists. Under no condition is a Muslim allowed to burn American flags or vilify its artificial sacred symbols. However, no Muslim can be forced either to surrender and pay respect to such man-made idols. When NBA star Mahmoud Abdul-Rauf, out of no sudden urge or outrage, but through inner reflection modeled himself not to stand up during the national anthem, whole American nation struck back as if its idols have been destroyed or desecrated. He was instantly fired from NBA some indefinite period, until he agreed to stand-up and that 'he would be permitted to do so with hands cupped together and held prominently in front of his face; he would pray during the song'. What surprised Abdul-Rauf was the attention he got; he said he didn't even think of media noticing it. Because to him it wasn't a matter of enraging American nation, but to do what's in his mind.
"Abdul-Rauf tells me he isn't sure when or why he made the decision to join his team for the anthem, why he decided to come out of that tunnel early. He did not and does not, he says, see it as any special moment of defiance. He doesn't even mention the '93 Trade Center attack; in his mind's eye there's simply no connection. Nor does Abudul-Rauf view himself as a Cassius Clay, who changed his name to Muhammad Ali and lost his heavyweight title when he refused to enter the draft for the Vietnam War. Nor does he invoke the historic moment from the 1968 Olympics when Tommie Smith and John Carlos raised fists for black power. As far as Abdul-Rauf is concerned, he was just him being him, true to his faith."
"It was slap in the face. Do what everyone else is doing." "It's honor." The list of humiliation, condemnation, vilification, insults, etc., is endless... He has a white trash can in which he keeps the stock of hate-letters from all over the USA, it was little space for more. Nonetheless, in this public opinion, many did respect his convictions and freedom of speech (that's inspiring):
Is this ritual not like blind following? Is it not from the worst kind of mental slavery? Deification of something that has no deity? The fault of Abdul-Rauf lied in his reasoning, reflection and committment to the truth.
From the point of view of social structure, the teachings of the Shariah emphasize the role of the family as the unit of society - the family in the extended sense and not in its atomized, nuclear modem form. The greatest social achievement of the Prophet in Medina was precisely in breaking the existing tribal bonds and substituting religious ones which were connected on the one hand with the totality of the Muslim community and on the other hand with the family. The Muslim family is the miniature of the whole of Muslim society and its firm basis. In it, the man or father functions as the Imam in accordance with the patriarchal nature of Islam. The religious responsibility of the family rests upon his shoulders. In the family, the father upholds the tenets of the faith and his authority symbolizes that of God in the world. The man is in fact respected in the family precisely because of the sacerdotal function that he fulfils. The rebellion of Muslim women in certain quarters of Islamic society came when men themselves ceased to fulfil their religious function and lost their virile and patriarchal character. By becoming themselves effeminate, they caused the reaction of revolt among certain women who no longer felt the authority of religion upon themselves.
The traditional family is also the unit of stability of society and the four wives that a Muslim can marry, like the four-sided Ka’aba, symbolize this stability. Many have not understood why such a family structure is permitted in Islam and attack Islam for it as if polygamy belongs to Islam alone. Here and again Muslim modernism carries with it the prejudice of Christianity against polygamy to the extent that some have gone even so far as to call it immoral and prefer promiscuity to a social pattern which minimizes all illicit relations to the extent possible. The problem of the attitude of the Western observer is not as important as that segment of modernized Muslim society which itself cannot understand the teachings of the Shariah on this point simply because it uses as criteria categories borrowed from the modern West.
There is no doubt that in a small but significant segment of Muslim society today, there is a revolt of women against traditional Islamic society. In every civilisation a reaction always comes against an existing force or action. In Islam, the very patriarchal and masculine nature of the tradition makes the revolt of those women who have become aggressively modernised more violent and virulent than, let us say, in Hinduism, where the maternal element has always been strong. What many modernised Muslim women are doing in rebelling against the traditional Muslim family structure is to rebel against fourteen centuries of Islam itself although many may not be aware of the inner forces that drive them on. It is the patriarchal nature of Islam that makes the reaction of some modernised women today so vehement. Although very limited in number, they are, in fact, more than Muslim men, thirsting for all things Western. They seek to become modernised in their dress and habits with impetuosity, which would be difficult to understand unless one considers the deep psychological factors involved.
From the Islamic point of view, the question of the equality of men and women is meaningless. It is like discussing the equality of a rose and a jasmine. Each has its own perfume, colour, shape and beauty. Men and women are not the same. Each has particular features and characteristics. Women are not equal to men. But neither are men equal to women. Islam envisages their roles in society not as competing but as complimentary. Each has certain duties and functions in accordance with his or her nature and constitution.
Man possesses certain privileges such as social authority and mobility against which he has to perform many heavy duties. First of all, he bears all economic responsibility. It is his duty to support his family completely even if his wife is rich and despite the fact that she is economically independent. A woman in a traditional Islamic society does not have to worry about earning a living. There is always the larger family structure in which she can find a place and take refuge from social and economic pressures even if she has no husband or father. In the extended family system, a man often supports not only his wife and children but also his mother, sister, aunts, in-laws and sometimes even cousins and more distant relatives. Therefore in city life, the necessity of having to find a job at all costs and having to bear the economic pressure of life is lifted from the shoulders of women. As for the countryside, the family is itself the economic unit and the work is achieved by the larger family or tribal unit together.
Secondly, a woman does not have to find a husband for herself. Site does not have to display her charms and make the thousand and one plans through which she hopes to attract a future mate. The terrible anxiety of having to find a husband and of missing the opportunity if one does not try hard enough at the right moment is spared the Muslim woman. Being able to remain true to her nature, she can afford to sit at home and wait for her parents or guardian to choose a suitable match. This usually leads to a marriage which, being based on the sense of religious duty and enduring family and social bonds between the two sides, is more lasting arid ends much more rarely in divorce than the marriages which are based on the sentiments of the moment that often do not develop into more permanent relationships.
Thirdly the Muslim woman is spared direct military and political responsibility although in rare cases there have been women warriors. This point may appear as a deprivation to some but in the light of the real needs of feminine nature, it is easy to see that for most women, such duties weigh heavily upon them. Even in modern societies, which through the equalitarian process have tried to equate men and women as if there were no difference in the two sexes, Women are usually spared the military draft except in extreme circumstances.
In return for these privileges which the woman receives, she has also certain responsibilities of which the most important is to provide a home for her family and to bring up her children properly. In the home the woman rules as queen and a Muslim man is in a sense the guest of his wife at home. The home and the larger family structure in which she lives are for the Muslim woman her world. To be cut off from it would be like being cut off from the world or like dying. She finds the meaning of her existence in this extended family structure which is constructed so as to give her the maximum possibility of realizing her basic needs and fulfilling herself.
The Shariah therefore envisages the role of men and women according to their nature, which is complimentary. It gives the man the privilege of social and political authority and movement for which he has to pay by bearing heavy responsibilities, by protecting his family from all the forces and pressures of society, economic and otherwise. Although a master in the world at large and the head of his own family, the man acts in his home as one who recognize the rule of his wife, in this domain and respects it. Through mutual understanding and the realization of the responsibilities that God has placed on each other’s shoulders, the Muslim man and woman are able to fulfill their personalities and create a firm family unit which is the basic structure of Muslim society.Reference: Ideals and Realities of Islam, George AIIen &; Unwin, London, 1966, pp. 110-113.
Found the piece at: http://www.islam101.com/women/jameelah.htm
I too failed at understanding electrical physics and calculus in 2nd year of my high school (or FSc). And i decided not to go for a science degree, but i've always wanted a romance with it. And, now i've the same resource available to him that helped enter and succeed in (at least the 1st year of) EE, i'm interested in industrial, communications, avionics and computer science. I must give it a shot...
* You can be poor and still be happy, authentic and lead a life full of dignity - unless of course one judges oneself from the eyes of a materialistic world.
* We're either worldly or heavenly. Only the latter state offers true inclusion and integration of the worldly and what has to come next.
* Money is our servant, neither our master nor our end objective.
* I will try to finish everything I start.
* Our mind can never focus on two things at a time.
i've been on holidays for a while and been cut off from distant friends after deactivating my Facebook account during ramadan. Some of my closest friends complained where had i been for so long?! Why am i leading a gumnaam (anonymous or secluded) life? May be i wanted them to say so, thanks to the whisperings of my carnal soul. I confess i had not been on a spiritual quest seeking the company of Allah that i've confined myself to the home, but such a lifestyle is very enjoyable to say the least... i've not really practised khalwa (seclusion) at all - i've spent lot of time on internet, watching videos and playing an online strategy game while ending up spending negligible time on reading books...
Nonetheless, like all others i want to have a certain way of life when i start earning inshaAllah. i wish to be economically independent. i like to be like one of my neighbors, a reporter - (about whose house i'd talk about in the next post inshaAllah) - who's living a seemingly comfortable yet a simple life with beautiful and intelligent kids... A life dedicated to travelling to gain knowledge for the sake of Allah and to quench the thirst of curiosity, may it never die. A life of seclusion with least mixing with people. A life of least activity and most reflection, study, chores, and routine cyclical daily activities that keep adding more and more spiritual light to my home and its dwellers in a mosque-like environment... A life not dedicated to competition with people in riches but in knowledge; not dedicated to piling gold and worldly things, but spreading excessive wealth to those in need... A life of labour and hardship yet peace and serenity in close proximity with natural things, like mud. A life of least acceleration yet tiresome...
- Hilary Clinton
How vile... Jon Stewart makes a fine point about US establishment that they're not really imperial colonists but imperial puppeteers: they don't like to rule people, but rule them through people who are like them. That's exactly what Britishers left as intermediaries or brown colonists amidst their independent colonies who carried forward their agenda to this day.
Now according to psychologists, fantasies that can't just happen are notthe same as positive high expectations. The latter fuel success; former failure.
But they don't know or don't mention that this is a symptom of spiritual illness. What's my cure?
Fortuyn’s error was to impose a Christian squint on Islam. As a practising Catholic, he imported assumptions about the nature of religious authority that ignore the multi-centred reality of Islam. On doctrine, we try to be united - but he is not interested in our doctrine. On fiqh, we are substantially diverse. Even in the medieval period, one of the great moral and methodological triumphs of the Muslim mind was the confidence that a variety of madhhabs could conflict formally, but could all be acceptable to God. In fact, we could propose as the key distinction between a great religion and a sect the ability of the former to accommodate and respect substantial diversity. Fortuyn, and other European politicians, seek to build a new Iron Curtain between Islam and Christendom, on the assumption that Islam is an ideology functionally akin to communism, or to the traditional churches of Europe.
Pitrus Bukhari, an Urdu writer and MA English, makes a point about this assertion that barking dogs don't bite: how do you know when they stop barking and start biting?
13. Would you, perchance, fail to fight against people who have broken their solemn pledges, and have done all that they could to drive the Apostle away, and have been first to attack you? Do you hold them in awe? Nay, it is God alone of whom you ought to stand in awe, if you are [truly] believers!
But, for a Muslim, he has to purify his intentions even when it comes to recreation. We do not recreate for no good, but are conscious that its a useful activity for human life and can even uplift our eemaan if we follow the morals of Prophets, such as not cheating, not loosing one's control over his emotions, as we often witness huge conflicts resulting from games.
I'm insipred by Prophet Muhammad, s.a.w, hence i take honor in serving my mother and other women with tea or stuff like that. Muslim men have a very hard time understanding that women should be treated well if one wants to be a good, in fact, best Muslim. Its all in Prophetic sunnah and teachings. But, at the same time, in this age we see this tendency that men become slaves of their wives and supersede the instructions of their wives to that of their mother or father. It's happening all around us. It's a dark age we're living in. May Allah protect us from these evils... wa ma taufiqi illa billah
[Forgive v poor sentence structures & grammar.]
Like Imam Ghazzali (r.a.) i've immutable belief on 3 things:
- In the Existence of Allah (swt) - is there any doubt about Allah?
- The Day of Judgement
- Truth of the institution of Prophethood
With these beliefs, one may presume that there is no room for skepticism, not that kind which doubts one's own existence. But, that is not the case- one can still have doubts about one's religion with these beliefs. When we're born we become Muslims, Christians, Atheists, etc., if we were born in that particular family. But, its only with the dawn of consciousness, if you might call it, that we're sometimes forced to reexamine our acquired belief, perhaps due to external stimuli or even due to one's own disposition to question things. In this age, former is more true than the later. Nonetheless. Having watched videos/stories of so many converts to Islam - be them atheists, Christians, etc. - it was either of the two, while predominantly external stimuli played a greater role, thanks to 9/11, terrible news about Muslims, new Biblical scholarship that proves almost all the stances of Islam on Christianity such as tehreef or human interference in Bible, etc.
Muslims rarely venture into uncomfortable waters of examination and use of intellect, especially those who're not well trained in traditional Islam, because the students of Qur'an and Sunnah know the proofs, evidences, and narrations of the truth of Islam. Nonetheless, overall atmosphere is that of fear when it comes to talking to people of other belief and to those having no faith at all, except, perhaps, in the desires of their nafs. (I'm not proposing that their kufr is due to following their desires of soul, merely, but perhaps a historical process that led to 'the eclipse of soul and intellect', namely modernity or renaissance, which has very well defined features, that really closed their eyes to Divine Realities.)
This is not how our great scholars of the past behaved. Imam Abu Hanifa used to debate (in most beautiful manner) with atheists in the masjid saying to the effect, "Let's see what you've got." Imam Ghazzali wrote in his autobiography that he had (so deeply) analyzed the skeptics and atheists that they could not hide their real reasons for disbelief. This is very interesting.
It is high time we see/question things logically - because logic can even give us life through Islam or kill us with disbelief. It is only those confused people who're afraid of not talking to other. We've to start from understanding the hidden assumptions of this deen and that of disbelief. Our assumption is that there is an Unseen, and we believe in it, we believe in the ghaib. Why we believe in it and we humanity cannot risk not believing in it - this is the point from where the discussion may start. And, everything that is Islamic worldview is very logical and is very clear. Most of the rational people in US or West who came to Islam came to it because they could not bring an argument against islam that Qur'an or Muslims could not refute or at least provide an equally logical perspective on that.
In the end, i'd like to say that because of our heedlessness in acquiring both Islamic worldview and modern sciences, our own brothers and sisters are becoming mental victim of a Dajjalic civilization that is based on the idea and force of deception and deceiving people from seeing things the way they actually are. Biggest enemies of Islam are living within us, and they just like us, but it's logical fallacies they're really a victim of; a lack of clear understanding of world, matter and soul.
wa ma taufiqi illa billah
Looking forward to your cool ideas in the comments section.
Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said: "Umer is like Musa (P) & Abu Bakr [Siddique] is like Ibraheem."
Western Ailment & Islamic Medicine: Part 3.
(You may have to wait for that comparison to start which will last till end.)
Moreover, when i wondered on how i got the answer, i forced to praise Allah for how he guides people and their curiosity gets fulfilled from unexpected places. This is not the first time this has happened with me....
In this close-up shot of suspected dossiers, you can see what they're up to.
Due to the noise of camera shot the bogeys fled away taking a defensive position on the top hill for heavy artillery fire at ground troops.
Dr Martin Lings said that our homes should be like mosques. If you've any concrete ideas how we can do that, please post, although it doesn't need great intellect to know that...
i've 1 month of holidays left before college starts again... Here's my attempt to sturcture my timetable so that i don't act like cattle and keep doing whatever comes up in mind or as a whim of my nafs. I pray to Allah that he never leaves me and all of us for one instance to our nafs e Ammara. Aameen...
Planning to Succeed: An flexible timetable
- i's supposed to do a project with sir of transcribing certain audio recordings [totally classified], home-based. The equation goes as:
Daily workout = Full time project work (that means after i subtract all other variables) + prayers + domestic home work + 1 hour cricket game (i love bowl and lead team) + 6 hours sleep = 100% preoccupation.
Unfortunately, the project hasn't started yet because of a delay - not from my side.
- If that occurs: post-Fajr best because everybody asleep, and no domestic work
Plan B - :D
Let's suppose I never get to work on the project, Allah na karay. Then, the problem arises and proposed solution goes as following:
- Post Fajr: 6 - 8
Khanacadmy.org mathematics lectures [anytime i get liesure time]
Islamic lectures online (limited time offer - i listen too much, act upon too less)
- Domestic work till Zuhar
- Qailoola / domestic work
- Game, game, game
- Take deep breaths and restore hydration
- Domestic work help
- Earning gold in the night from 9-12 after Isha
- Deep sleep inshaAllah
I admit i'm more at home with social sciences which are very important. Its all about ideas these days. Pakistan has the one of the strongest armies in the world, and one of weakest social science base that is authentically rooted in its own Tradition, i.e., Islamic world view. It has been able to re-engineer its F-16s for up-gradation; build local aircrafts and tanks, but its universities have failed to free themselves from the idols of Western ideologies which reappear with different names, yet having the soul of secular fundamentalism in it.
There are other plans that can save the day: joining civil service not for power or social glory. It's something that i dislike doing. Yet, i've been called to the task of performing jihad by an elder brother, a doctor, a civil servant and a mentor ('these' are 1 person). But, if you go into this hell with no technical background people will manipulate you. In that case, you're either CS or you're nothing, and they will exploit you. Perhaps that's why don't allow a doctor to be CS anymore - Allah knows best.
If that plan fails, and there are no parental obligations, i'll pursue the limitless fields of engineering which will form the power base for social science knowledge. Remember knowledge these days is tied with Power.
Think about it... Every time you leave a meeting for prayer, or do not listen to certain sounds, or do not do various unIslamic or unnatural things - hypocrites and disbelievers are going to frown. You're mocking them, they think. Well, they should realize that hubris and arrogance.
Unfortunately this is an age of one-eyed vision. People always take one thing and forget the other part. The statement above - i hate making disclaimers - in no way means we've to hide ourselves in a closet, or become rude to non-Muslims, because that's against sunnah or way of Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. Arab non-Muslims were rude to him; but he never returned their rudeness with rudeness. He used to give back something good and better to eliminate evil. That's our Tradition.
We're saying, "You follow your way; we follow ours." This doesn't mean you have to necessarily frown at us and be divided amongst ourselves. Our tradition teach us that are all people are children (in purely metaphorical sense) of Allah, and we've to be kind to them. We'd always praise and enjoin if a disbeliever or whoever does a good deed. This is how we operate. Is this way of life not worth living?
- Prophet Muhammad forbade the killing of women, children, elderly, farmers, monks, destruction of environment in war
- Homicide and suicide are two greatest sins in Islam
- Taking a life without Right (clearly defined rules which i will compile soon) is equal to killing whole of humanity - that's in Qur'an as well
- Prophet of Islam forbade use of fire to punish a human - Allah has the right to do that
- Prophet said that never desire to encounter your enemy; but you do so be steadfast and patient (or something to that effect)
- Everyone knows the level of benevolence and protection that has been shown to all kinds of minorities including Jews, who're the greatest enemies of Prophet of Islam, through centuries - would journalists ever mention that? When Pakistan came into being there were only few thousands Christians, now they're in millions (whether its good or bad that's another matter)
Now let's glance over the war ethics of great, humanistic Western world police and war mongers:
- Who invent word collateral damage and accepted it as a natural outcome of war between good (West) and evil (Non-West, these days Muslims)?
- Who use fire bombs in Afghanistan and Iraq?
- Who kill millions of Iraqis only by food sanctions?
- Who kill around 5 lac innocent civilians recently in Iraq - that's from Wikileaks?
- Who kill women and children in AFG and then in a press conference apologize over the 'loss of precious lives' and not even punish their soldiers?
- Who want to impose a mono-culture of secular fundamentalism on whole world - destroying not only natural habitat but local and primitive cultures?
The list will go on and on. Suffice to say if you really wanna know who is causing mischief on Earth and claiming that they're only doing good (Quran) read Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Its factual authenticity is far beyond doubt. IN fact on its official website, they've given parallel documented proofs confirming the statements of the author who had spent his life exploiting developing nations.
"To be honest with you, I don't think myself to be capable of framing a scholarly response. So if you find any scholarly response, please feel free to share it with me too! But nevertheless, I do have a personal perspective on things which I will share with you. Fortunately, none of the claims made in the video are erudite enough to require detailed citations from classic text. Here it goes:
1) The genius who made this video and perhaps the researcher himself (based on how he is presented) is unaware of the fact that the books written on Uloom ul Quran by Muslim scholars already mention that the first generation of manuscripts used to be written without any dots, a'rabs and punctuations. The only thing startling here, if it must be put that way, is that his discovery (pun intended) corroborates the consistent account of Muslim historians about the development of Quranic print throughout.
2) Then he is concerned that it leads to 5 possible identities of the words. What he conveniently forgets here is the oral tradition of Quran which spread at a far greater scale in parallel with the written manuscript simply because it was an era preceding the invention of press. He seems to be under the delusion that just like our times when we simply lend over a book to someone to read, back in those days Quran also used to be handed over to people to read and figure. The fact, however, is that from the very beginning to-date there always has existed this very strong culture of having full-fledged schools and study circles for teaching Quran organized by scholars who had learned it directly from their previous generation until companions of the prophet. It is not without any reason why the second caliph Umar had sent one of his very close aides and foremost scholars of Quran Abdullah bin Masood to Kufah for institutionalizing the teaching of Quran there. Written text in the beginning could only mean to correct any lapses appearing in the memorized part and not to be used as the sole source of information on Quran. In fact, this trend has lasted even today in the sense that people rather than understanding Quran completely on their own prefer to study it at least with the help of a brief Tafseer (now that there is no more ambiguity in the rules of writing) if not directly from a teacher. This process of learning from people who learned it in their turn most likely from the close companions of the prophets ensured that the imagined possibility of five different words in one place never materialized at least to a sustainable level. Those guys who wrote the script knew about its shortcomings as well as us now and it is quite arrogant to completely ignore the aforesaid method of teaching the book and insinuate that their was no mechanism in place to guard against its weaknesses.
But for the sake of argument, let us assume that teaching Quran by the scholars in parallel with distributing the transcript was inadequate and the early generations were indeed confused into having five separate readings of Quranic verses on average (yes, not five different versions of the whole text!). As a consequence, there must have been diverse narrations of Quran at least found in geographically dislocate regions much larger in numbers than the diversity found in the narration of a particular incidence in Ahadeeth (although it is due to different reasons altogether.) And this diversity should have then remained in the versions of Quran compiled by the later generations as well. What we see here, however, is an astounding unanimity over the identity of the text accepted by Islamic scholarship as well as masses from Arabian peninsula itself to far eastern countries in the Africa to Spain in the west. Mind you, I am not denying mistakes made by lay people and possibly by individual experts which are not uncommon in our times too despite the availability of Quran in black and white. But do the community at large begin to take an individual's or even publisher's mistake for the confusion in the correct version of Quran? Or all these isolated aberrations die out in the process of mass-transmission from one generation to another?
If that is not enough, then consider two further scenarios. Just like there are various sects and schools of thoughts based on disagreements over the interpretation of Quran as well as the acceptance of different traditions of hadeeth, there must have been far major differences over the acceptance of various identities of the words in Quranic text itself. It should not take a genius to figure that a disagreement of this kind over the reading of Quran would lead to fissures in various strains of Islamic scholarship far greater in magnitude than what could ever arise due to differences in the interpretation of the text or Hadeeth literature. But where is it? If not, what does this imply? The next curious point is to remember that Quran used to serve as the fundamental basis of Islamic law from the very beginning of Islamic state in Medina until the pre-colonial era. Since we are asked to believe that in the early days there was a great deal of ambiguity in the reading of Quran, we should understand as a natural corollary an extreme chaos in the functioning of the legal system of Islamic state. To imagine what I mean, just think of Pakistan's penal code used in our courts with the same level of uncertainty in the identity of the words in addition to the interpretation which is quite natural. It is trivial to visualize the utter dysfunctional-ization of any legal infrastructure this will necessarily lead to. And so if it did happen to the practice of Islamic law, how did everything converge to just one word instead of five or even more? Again, why weren't there any disagreements? How did muslim historians manage to mention the lack of punctuations, dots and a'rabs in the early manuscripts which amusingly he is discovering in the twentieth century but wrote off the consequences? Again, why did it not lead to differences in juristic schools? Why? Why?!
As this guy is challenging a well established historical narrative, it is his responsibility to explain away existing realities by filling up all the gaping holes which appear as natural corollaries of his narrative as I pointed above. For starter, he should explain when five different identities of wrods were possible, how come only one survived? What made a society as huge as that to agree on one reading? How can an event as massive as the convergence to a single word fail to find seat in histories written by any sect in Islam whatsoever?
And nobody here can counter it by citing disagreements about the completeness of Quranic text as it is purportedly claimed by minor/major groups in shiite tradition. For one, even shia theologians both past and present almost completely, if not absolutely, abandoned this position. For another, it was about certain portions of Quran failing to find their place in the widely accepted manuscript. It was never a dispute about choosing one of the five possible words written in the text.
Before leaving, I should point out here the issue of seven "qira'at" of Quran which is a well discussed topic in the Islamic scholarship. Since he is claiming something unknown here, I believe his work does not relate to that either and hence we don't need to talk about it.
3) It yet again makes a disappointing case for a ground-breaking discovery that the newly-found text of Quran was overwritten on something else. Why is it so surprising? Why cannot the same parchment, leaves, bones or whatever form of paper in vogue at that time be reused for something else? Please, why is it so significantly surprising at all? As it can very well be a personal copy of a student, instructor or any common man for that matter, why can't it even include some personal notes scribbled in between? Why can't we get real for a while?
4) This last point takes the cream. The guy who made this video could not have been more ignorant of his own ignorance. He presumes that the differences in translations are somehow explainable by this so-called discovery. It is amusing how he digs out from oblivion an unknown researcher in Germany (?) but didn't bother to check out with someone familiar with Quran's translations to inquire about the apparent diversity. Ignoring all the general liguistic issues in translating a literary work from one language to another, Arabic language itself allows for multiple meanings (not identities) of the words placed in one sentence. On occasions, some of these meanings are all plausible simulataneously while at others only one or two can be valid given the overall context of the discourse. This leads to differences in understanding which sometimes find its way into the translations too. It has got nothing to do with any ambiguity about the identity of words themselves."
At a personal level, I saw my fellow students attitudes towards others to be selfish andexploitative, instead of caring and compassionate. Having absorbed the implicit message that professional accomplishment was the goal of life, I was shocked to learn of the really pathetic personal lives of many of the professionals I had thought to emulate. The general philosophy that individual goals are valued above social ones leads to betrayal of wives and families, violation of commitments of all types, and pursuit of personal and career goals even at expense of society. The purely technical education offered by the West does not teach us anything about the crucial parameters which govern how meaningful our lives are. In several crucial dimensions, the lessons of Tableegh were diametrically opposed to those which I had absorbed in the course of my Western education. These lessons showed me that the teachings of Islam are as fresh and as revolutionary today as they were fourteen centuries ago; they do not stand in need of updates for modern times. It is impossible to convey these experience-based lessons in writing, so I will just describe one of them.
The role of parents is not to come in their way, assuming the passion is not unIslamic or unethical. The role of school is to aid that passion by giving them opportunity to play such roles. It may be in form of an activity where the student can live that character. For instance, if a girl wants to be a teacher, she be given apron, a class and students to teach to. A student given all authorities of a principle, and is trained what to do on working day, and then given the task to run the school.
This way of learning is most effective. Its hands-on knowledge. When they grow up and actually come to perform these roles, they'd have confidence to do it inshaAllah.
Secondly. We should ask our children to solve our daily problems. If the gate cannot be locked from inside, ask them for a solution. Encourage them. Even if you know solution, make them to think, so that they can become problem solvers.
(These were some of the thoughts I gained from the company of my mentor Dr. Agha, who's trained in psychiatry from Royal College of Psychiatry, UK.)
Well i tasted this thing on the first day of a small start-up - namely a juice cafe - in college. I brought a labor guy with me, trusting his experience working in homes as chef, etc. He after seeing how costly our drink was, as it used 4-6 different kinds of fruits and/or fruit juices (packaged/unpackaged) concluded on day # 1 that this business won't make a nickel. Hence, he started to use some water in it to dilute it, to reduce costs. This juice was never meant to use water. Nonetheless, i made a big mistake and let him do that, thinking what difference can this little amount of water can make.
During the day & afterward, the most crucial negative customer feedback we got was that there was too much water in it - perhaps he mistook water for fruits & juices! Some asking to add something else apart from water.
How disastrous! From next day onwards we didn't add single droplet of water apart from what was coming through fruit juice; except in 1 juice which has to have water in it.
I forgot a fundamental business lesson: all investments are not covered on day 1! Moreover, you saw how low commitment to quality resulted in loss of goodwill & defects. Its important to note that the excess of water is "critical-to-quality" (CTQ) in juices for customers. It wasn't something customer didn't care about.
Marketing researchers have used models of consumer demand to forecast future sales; to describe and test theories of consumer behavior; and to measure the response to marketing interventions. The basic framework typically starts from microfoundations of expected utility theory to obtain a statistical system that describes consumers’ choices over available options, and to thus characterize product demand. The basic model has been augmented significantly to account for quantity choice decisions; to accommodate purchases of several products on a single purchase occasion (multiple discreteness and multi-category purchases); and to allow for asymmetric switching between brands across different price tiers. These extensions have enabled researchers to bring the analysis to bear on several related marketing phenomena of interest.
This paper has three main objectives. The first objective is to articulate the main goals of demand analysis - forecasting, measurement and testing - and to highlight the desiderata associated with these goals. Our second objective is describe the main building blocks of individual-level demand models. We discuss approaches built on direct and indirect utility specifications of demand systems, and review extensions that have appeared in the marketing literature. The third objective is to explore interesting emerging directions in demand analysis including considering demand-side dynamics; combining purchase data with primary information; and using semiparametric and nonparametric approaches. We hope researchers new to this literature will take away a broader perspective on these models and see potential for new directions in future research."
Pradeep K. Chintagunta
University of Chicago
Stanford University - Graduate School of Business
First, because you're not fooling anyone but yourself. Over years, the habit may persist, and in real world wrong information mean loss of competitive advantage and loss. Second, its certainly a short-cut of which we as nation are fond of. Third, lack of rigor won't do any good to personal development, as Iqbal once remarked that philosophy not written with hardship and khoon-e-jigar (blood of liver, literal meaning :D) would always remain imperfect and wide off mark.
Education ministry was supposed to give all roll # slips electronically; 17,000 roll # slips given manually. Maybe because they didn't do the ground work; without involving someone who understands every aspect of the business and understands what would be the benefits of the technology to the business.
People get over-excited by benefits of technology, but often fail to understand change management issues, both technical and behavioral. For instance, i worked on the pre-feasibility of online tuition center. Where you can lecture 40 students in a classroom, you can now teach thousands online through Skype for free. You can now have a computerized adaptive testing system in which computer adapts to the ability of students and give simpler questions to a struggling students, or more difficult to an expert one - helping each master at their own pace. We can create earning opportunity for so many talented teachers through 1-to-1, 1-to-many online tuition, textbook solutions, homework help - btw, this is not novel, its being done via Grockit.com & Cramster.com. Problem with these sites is that they don't offer local language education and require credit card payment. Fortunately students in Pakistan can now pay their bills via easyPaisa.
But there are many technical & behavioral challenges to it. 1st technical issue which can wipe out this business model on day 1 - load-shedding! 2nd, internet connections may not be very fast & reliable.
When you come to behavioral issues - these are really subtle. Some go to academies just for friends, some due of fear of teachers who force them, some may not adopt eTuition just because its not done in physical world, some would only go to an academy because their parents want them to. All of these have their own solution, fortunately! For instance, by creating a game-like, socially competitive learning environment - learning experience online can be very addictive when you can compete with students in quiz, practice session. Ever saw those badges on Khanacademy.org? It serves the purpose.
1st mess. I worked on my business idea's - eTuition.com - consistently, although less, for more than a month. And, thanks for being not reading long and tedious manuals of Micrsoft's Publisher software, it didn't work on another computer. Actually, when you make a thing as a web file, you've to set it as 'global' or something, for the html to work on other computers... Instructor informed us about it; means he was sympathetic, i hope =)
2nd mess. i'm becoming more and more convinced that i'm a victim of Small and Medium scale memory loss problem... How could i forget to bring the Key Performance Indicators report ! However, just before the talk i realized what i've done with the group, i managed to download a month old version, which had no entries of data ! Even instructor did not seem about it... It also generated bursts of laughter... Bit embarrassing though :P Who cares though... The real thing is doing the thing in real world...
Working in teams suppose in a business should be have clear "rules of engagement". What i mean is that although we're not enemies, but since we're often excited about the venture, we forget to deal with each other like strangers. Hence, when i and my 3 friends launched a small venture of juice cafe in our school, we made it very clear what our values were, although there used to disagreements, because not everything could be foreseen, especially when making critical decisions about business, like pricing, budget spending, etc. i want to emphasize on corporate structures of even a small firm. What happens in over family business is that things are not worked out, nobody decides how time would one person work, and what would be his job description. That can leave space for lots of commissions and conflicts for future...
Time for us to assert. Perhaps last year, I saw a short video clip of Israeli F-16s approaching to attack Iraq’s nuclear reactors. I don’t appreciate nukes, but certainly respect Iraq’s right to have it. My heart rends still now when I imagine those lethal birds flying so fearlessly over Muslim lands killing its masses, and now plundering its resources in the name of democracy.
This thought has to be linked with the history of contemporary Muslims, which we often tend to ignore. Muslims do not blame others for their short-coming. Not far ago, when Muslims were still free from the fetters of slavery, they became very arrogant. Shaykh Hamza Yusuf mentions those filthy letters sent by Muslim rulers to Westerners, degrading them as humans, not just non-Muslims. They showed arrogance. Allah does not like this. The situation is reversed. It’s the medicine for us – this slavery on whole Muslim world.
Nonetheless, with recent killing of Osama – I am indifferent to him – and the consequent in-camera briefing to parliament of Pakistan by top echelon of Army, especially its top intelligence agency’s chief, Gen. Shuja Pasha’s confessions, its all clear that even Army is fed up of US and admits of how wrong the relationships are. I do not have any hopes from this corporate army – but I’ve this children dream that one day our F-16s won’t fear facing deadly F-22 Raptors, and manageable F-18 Hornets and won’t pretend to be absent from the show. I just wish…