| Friends Saner people must ignore these fatherless bastards. None should response to such insane mails. Faruque Alamgir --- On Mon, 6/2/08, Salahuddin Ayubi <s_ayubi786@yahoo. From: Salahuddin Ayubi <s_ayubi786@yahoo. |
| Thanks to Mr. Subimal Chakrabarty to give a right picture about the great leader who always thought and worked for people.To undermine this great leader is another henious plot of AGACHA and the concubine Jibis under the tutelage of BAL, Faruque Alamgir --- On Sun, 6/1/08, Subimal Chakrabarty @yahoo.com <Subimal Chakrabarty @yahoo.com> wrote: From: Subimal Chakrabarty @yahoo.com <Subimal Chakrabarty @yahoo.com> |
Dear All,
I think that time has come what we were waiting for so long. Now is the time to elect him as USA President in November 2008. We as Bangladeshi community has a role to play in this election time and I urge everybody to be involved in this great aspiration of electing a President who will be open to hear and implement policies which are long over due. We want to see USA prosperous and he can deliver the promises that USA needs now.
God bless America and help elect Obama in November 2008.
Note: Please share this email with your friends and family, and Bangladeshi organizations in USA
Regards, M. M. Chowdhury (Mithu) From: M. M. Chowdhury (Mithu) <cgmpservices@ |
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. - Dr. Samuel Johnson made this famous pronouncement that patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel on the evening of April 7, 1775.
Mohammad Gani <mgani69@gmail.
03June2008Dear Moderator, Vinnomot: Please consider posting. Thanks and regards. MG (USA)********************* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* *** "If I give out food to the poor, they call me a saint, if I ask them why poor have no food, they call me a communist!!" (Unknown).
Patriotism: Love or Rhetoric?
Mohammad Gani (USA)
It is all about love, economics and equations of politics together! Yesterday, I went to watch an "Indian movie" with my charming wife (sorry but I must say that!!) of last 27 years. India is always in my heart and mind as our "good and friendly" neighbor as well as "a friend in need is a friend indeed" but honestly, I hate Indian movies (except all its beautiful ladies!) those have been destroying the "beauty" of our Bangladeshi movie business. I was sitting next to the isle seat, starring my eyes directly at the huge screen but was yawning deeply, rubbing my eyes and battling to stay awake. 15 minutes later, I fell into sleep. No, it was not any symptom like "love of diminishing returns", or ingenuous love, probably I am becoming tired of watching movie unlike during those spring seasons when I was "Young and Restless"! Now, what about my true love for Bangladesh? Almost 26+ years here in USA where I have been living, nourishing my mind and body, managing family, raising children, bought properties and plan to retire etc, are the facts of my life. How much love (Patriotism) should I have to have evenly or unevenly for both of these two lands of mine; my new homeland USA and my motherland Bangladesh, a land with millions of sweet memories of childhood, boyhood and youth?
Over a long period of time, due to various social circumstances like economical, racial and religious reasons our world and its people were divided into countries and call one of them of our own. It is nothing but a natural course that our human civilization has taken over time. But is there any moral (and legal) basis behind drawing such boundaries and then forcing people to love their territory to become patriots? No, I am not a libertine and it is not my occult intention to quarrel with the concepts of States and/or nations at this point rather only to look through the absolute "definition of Patriotism" at large. I wish I were a physician and a member of "Doctors without borders". One accidentally or coincidentally born in a country and thus is supposed to like, love and accept everything of it? I have never chosen to born in Bangladesh but am supposed to feel proud and great about it irrespective of it's past deeds, present stance or future intentions of all its elected Governments. Isn't patriotism invading our freedom of choice and rights?
Well, I could voluntarily choose to love my country and feel proud of it (and I surely do) but that doesn't make a person who chooses not to, is a traitor or a person of lower moral standing. Has a person any moral right to refuse recognizing the existence of a country, it's laws and it's citizens rights of ownership? It is indeed a debatable issue but one must have the strength and pluck to do so and could still survive in his world.
Patriotism makes "our world" divided into little territories, each one surrounded by an iron gate. Those who have had the fortune of being born on some particular territories consider themselves nobler, better, grander and more intelligent than those living other disadvantaged territories. Patriotism is our conviction that my country is superior to all others because I was born in it. It is, therefore, my duty to fight, kill and die in the attempt to maintain my superiority upon all the others. So, here we see conceit, arrogance and egotism as the actual elements of patriotism. In the name of patriotism, the people with the lessons learnt throughout an early childhood/boyhood mind bear deeply rooted superiority over the people of "other" territory. When the child has reached manhood, he is thoroughly saturated with those beliefs that he is chosen by the God Himself to defend his country against the attack or invasion of any foreigner. It is for that purpose, we are clamoring for the superior weapon systems in our powerful defense force to attack basic humanity all over our world in the name of protecting our land. Some philosophers say, patriotism is by most part rhetoric of ruling class in courting and securing their public power and/or dominance.
Patriotism has also connotations of self-sacrifice, implying that the individual should place the interests of the nation and common good of its political community above their personal and group interests. It is an unconditional loyalty to our country and we must support our country no matter what the espousing ideology could be, right or wrong!
Our intelligence and self-interest combine to make us a most unruly creature of nature. The prevalence of the lust for power, authority and prestige has led us to some speculation that we have instinct for it. These slow processes over thousands of years helped developing a special system of patriotism that also established inequality among the creation of God. These inequalities have been justified by creation of State, democracy and "freedom" over natural humanity. No Democracy has given a nation absolute freedom even in a non-State society. To make us patriotic citizens, Democracy or State forces us to obey its law against our will or freedom. In a sense, greed for power has given the concept of patriotism and humanity has always questioned the legitimacy and enforcement of these laws on its citizen.
Resort to religions is also found as common strut in many nations, even in a secular society. Using religion as a tool, brutal Pakistani dictators committed whole sale atrocities and killings in 1971 to continue occupation of our territory. Here in US. "In God we Trust" is emblazoned on our money and we even pledge allegiance to "One nation under God". Our patriotism is questionable if we do not obey these rules? Religions", patriotism and a "democracy" often could go hand to hand too. For example, God watches over us in a war and He helps us to victory. Does God take side in politics and or/war? Nevertheless, it is a part of contemporary "secular religion" in a secular/democratic State with no mention of humanity. In the modern world, patriotism is closely associated with nationalism and nationalism refers more to ideology and to political movements; and patriotism thus more to attitudes. Both of them may include negative attitudes to other people's territory.
The greatness in patriotism is that a patriot who dies in the belief that the whole country is glad he died for his country's cause but in fact nobody really is bothered by his death except his family members after a period of time. Do we have special obligations to some prolix ruling groups or representatives simply by virtue of common membership in a nation state? If so, how is this different from special obligations to some groups by virtue of a common race, or to a common religion? Does the unquestioned utility of shared national institutions require special sentiment "patriotism" to hold it all together? Would our institutions be more effective if we were more patriotic? Patriotism is surely useful for creating the solidarity needed to defend against an external enemy. But aren't our potential enemies patriotic too? If we need patriotism for defense against patriotism on the offense, what does it exactly mean to the human race and to the humanity at large?
There is nothing much noble about patriotism. However, it indeed helps countries to exist and survive. Existence of countries may help the world to exist in orderly fashion. But there is no "absolute morality" behind patriotism. "Patriotism is the last resort of scoundrels," said Dr. Samuel Johnson. Leo Tolstoy, the greatest anti-patriot of our time, defines "patriotism as the principle that will justify the training of wholesale murderers; a trade that requires better equipment in the exercise of man-killing than the making of such necessities as shoes, clothing and houses etc".
Hubris in loving or caring a country just because it is our territory doesn't seem very reasonable to modern political philosophy and civilization. We see too much of propaganda on patriotism in many countries where people are carried away thinking that it is a sign of good character or integrity to love one's own country unconditionally. Actually it is only a sign of weakness. There is nothing so great about patriotism, nothing great about nationalism; all these are divisive, hateful and furtive political teachings to create division and hatred among the best creation of God and against the common humanity to the entire mankind.
Mohammad Gani
Cambridge, Massachusetts, USA.********************* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ********* ******
|
I heard that the Prophet (S) said that if one keeps the fasts of Ramadan with emaan and in order to get reward from Allah, Allah will forgive all his or her past sins. Does this also include the sins one may have knowingly committed against the rights of other Muslim brothers and sisters which he or she now deeply regrets doing but cannot admit his or her guilt to the victims as this may create even more problems?.
Praise be to Allaah.
There are many things which expiate for sin, including repentance, seeking forgiveness, doing acts of worship, carrying out hadd punishments on those who have done acts for which such punishments are due, and so on.
But righteous deeds such as prayer, fasting, Hajj etc only expiate for minor sins, according to the majority of scholars, and they only expiate for transgressions against the rights of Allaah.
With regard to sins that have to do with the rights of other people, they can only be expiated by repenting from them. One of the conditions of repenting from them is restoring the rights of those who have been wronged.
Muslim (1886) narrated from 'Abd-Allaah ibn 'Amr ibn al-'Aas (may Allaah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: "The martyr will be forgiven for all his sins except debt."
Al-Nawawi said in Sharh Muslim:
The words of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) "except debt" draw attention to all rights owed to other people. Jihad, martyrdom and other righteous deeds do not expiate for transgressions against the rights of other people, rather they only expiate for transgressions against the rights of Allaah. End quote.
Ibn Muflih said in al-Furoo' (6/193):
Martyrdom expiates for everything except debt. Our Shaykh (i.e., Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah, may Allaah have mercy on him) said: and except sins against other people such as murder and oppression. End quote.
It says in al-Mawsoo'ah al-Fiqhiyyah (14/129):
Repentance in the sense of regretting what one has done and resolving not to do it again is not sufficient to waive the rights that are owed to other people. Whoever has stolen another person's wealth, or seized it by force, or has wronged him in any other way, will not have finished with the matter by simply regretting it, giving up the sin and resolving not to do it again. Rather he has to restore those rights. This is a principle on which the fuqaha' are unanimously agreed. End quote.
This has to do with material possessions, such as wealth that has been taken be force or by deceit. With regard to intangible rights such as in cases of slander and backbiting, if the person who has been wronged knows about it, then it is essential to apologize to him and ask for his forgiveness. If he did not know, then he should not be told; rather the one who wronged him should pray for him and pray for forgiveness for him, because telling him may upset him and create enmity and hatred between the two.
Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:
According to the saheeh hadeeth: "Whoever has wronged his brother with regard to his blood, his wealth or his honour, let him come and set matters straight before there comes a Day on which there will be no dirhams and no dinars, only good deeds and bad deeds, and if he has good deeds (they will be taken and given to the one whom he wronged), otherwise some of the bad deeds of the one whom he wronged will be taken and added to his burden, then he will be thrown into the Fire." This has to do with cases where the one who was wronged was aware of it; but if he was gossiped about or slandered and he does not know, then it was said that one of the conditions of repentance is telling him, or it was said that this is not essential, which is the view of the majority; both views were narrated from Ahmad, but his view on such matters is that one should do good deeds for the one who was wronged, such as praying for him, praying for forgiveness for him and doing good deeds to be given to him, to take the place of that backbiting and slander. Al-Hasan al-Basri said: The expiation for gossip is to pray for forgiveness for the person about whom you gossiped. End quote.
Majmoo' al-Fataawa, 18/189
The scholars of the Standing Committee said, concerning a man who stole money from a slave:
If he knows the slave or he knows someone who knows him, he can tell him to look for him and give him the money in silver or the equivalent, or whatever he agrees upon with him. If he does not know who he is and he thinks that he will never find him, he should give it or the equivalent in cash money in charity on behalf of its owner. If he finds him after that, he should tell him what he did; if he accepts that, all well and good, but if he objects and demands his money, then he should give it to him, and the money he gave in charity becomes an act of charity on his own behalf. He also has to ask Allaah for forgiveness and repent to Him, and pray for the other person.
Fataawa Islamiyyah, 4/165
And Allaah knows best.
Islam Q&A
