Indian rebels into business in Maungdaw Town

An Indian insurgent group from Manipur State (one of the seven sister states in northeast India ) has set up an office in Maungdaw Town and are doing business in a big way, said a source on condition of anonymity.

The rebel group of Kathee community of India established an office at Myoma Ka Nyin Tan (Sidar Para) village in Maungdaw Township last year. They have mobile phones and computers in the office. They communicate with the world through the internet. Four to five people are staying in the office and they speak broken Bengali language to communicate with local people and speak in the Manipuri language with each other. The also speak in English with local officers.

The rebels have bought buses, Dina cars and jeeps and hired it to other people to ply the vehicles on the Maungdaw-Buthidaing high way.

Since 2002, the Indian insurgent group has been living in Nasaka ( Burma 's border security force) area No. 2 in Maungdaw's northern side near the Bangladesh border. The State Peace and Development Council, or SPDC authorities have built houses for them by forcing villagers into labor. The Nasaka provides them full security wherever they go.

Sometimes, some of the Indian rebels go to the local markets and even to Maungd Daw town for marketing. They speak Urdu with shopkeepers while marketing and buy good things. The have adequate money. Their living standard is high, a shopkeeper in Maungdaw said.

According to villagers of Waladaung village of Maungdaw Township, the rebel group grows heroin and other narcotic drugs in the jungle where the local people are prohibited from going.

Local villagers and other intellectuals of Maungdaw Township said that the ruling military junta is supporting them in every way with a purpose.

Interestingly, however, The SPDC and the Indian government have a good relation and earlier the Burmese military attacked some Indian rebel groups who were sheltered in Burma on the Indian government's say so. India also provided military equipment to Burma to push back the Indian insurgent groups. The question therefore remains why the Burmese government is providing shelter to the Manipuri rebels, the intellectuals wondered.

The $3 trillion war in Iraq

Only two winners have emerged from the conflict: oil companies and defence contractors

Mar 12, 2008 04:30 AM
Joseph Stiglitz


With March 20 marking the fifth anniversary of the United States-led invasion of Iraq, it's time to take stock of what has happened.

In our new book The Three Trillion Dollar War, Harvard's Linda Bilmes and I conservatively estimate the economic cost of the war to the U.S. to be $3 trillion, and the costs to the rest of the world to be another $3 trillion – far higher than the Bush administration's estimates before the war.

The Bush team not only misled the world about the war's possible costs, but has also sought to obscure the costs as the war has gone on.

This is not surprising. After all, the Bush administration lied about everything else, from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction to his supposed link with Al Qaeda. Indeed, only after the U.S.-led invasion did Iraq become a breeding ground for terrorists.

The Bush administration said the war would cost $50 billion. The U.S. now spends that amount in Iraq every three months.

To put that number in context: For one-sixth of the cost of the war, the U.S. could put its social security system on a sound footing for more than a half-century, without cutting benefits or raising contributions.

Moreover, the Bush administration cut taxes for the rich as it went to war, despite running a budget deficit. As a result, it has had to use deficit spending – much of it financed from abroad – to pay for the war.

This is the first war in American history that has not demanded some sacrifice from citizens through higher taxes; instead, the entire cost is being passed onto future generations.

Unless things change, the U.S. national debt – which was $5.7 trillion when Bush became president – will be $2 trillion higher because of the war (in addition to the $800 billion increase under Bush before the war).

Was this incompetence or dishonesty?

Almost surely both.

Cash accounting meant that the Bush administration focused on today's costs, not future costs, including disability and health care for returning veterans.

Only years after the war began did the administration order the specially armoured vehicles that would have saved the lives of many killed by roadside bombs.

Not wanting to reintroduce a draft, and finding it difficult to recruit for an unpopular war, troops have been forced into two, three or four stress-filled deployments.

The administration has tried to keep the war's costs from the American public. Veterans groups have used the Freedom of Information Act to discover the total number of injured – 15 times the number of fatalities.

Already, 52,000 returning veterans have been diagnosed with post-traumatic stress disorder. The U.S. government will need to provide disability compensation to an estimated 40 per cent of the 1.65 million troops that have already been deployed.

And, of course, the bleeding will continue as long as the war continues, with the health-care and disability bill amounting to more than $600 billion (in present-value terms).

Ideology and profiteering have also played a role in driving up the war's costs. America has relied on private contractors, which have not come cheap.

A Blackwater Security guard can cost more than $1,000 per day, not including disability and life insurance, which is paid for by the government.

When unemployment rates in Iraq soared to 60 per cent, hiring Iraqis would have made sense; but the contractors preferred to import cheap labour from Nepal, the Philippines and other countries.

The war has had only two winners: oil companies and defence contractors. The stock price of Halliburton, Vice-President Dick Cheney's old company, has soared. But even as the government turned increasingly to contractors, it reduced its oversight.

The largest cost of this mismanaged war has been borne by Iraq. Half of Iraq's doctors have been killed or have left the country, unemployment stands at 25 per cent and, five years after the war's start, Baghdad still has less than eight hours of electricity a day.

Out of Iraq's total population of around 28 million, 4 million are displaced and 2 million have fled the country.

The thousands of violent deaths have inured most Westerners to what is going on: A bomb blast that kills 25 hardly seems newsworthy anymore.

But statistical studies of death rates before and after the invasion tell some of the grim reality. They suggest additional deaths from a low of around 450,000 in the first 40 months of the war (150,000 of them violent deaths) to 600,000.

With so many people in Iraq suffering so much in so many ways, it may seem callous to discuss the economic costs.

And it may seem particularly self-absorbed to focus on the economic costs to America, which embarked on this war in violation of international law. But the economic costs are enormous, and they go well beyond budgetary outlays.

Americans like to say that there is no such thing as a free lunch. Nor is there such a thing as a free war. The U.S. – and the world – will be paying the price for decades to come.



Joseph Stiglitz, winner of the 2001 Nobel Prize in economics, is professor of economics at Columbia University and co-author, with Linda Bilmes, of The Three Trillion Dollar War: The True Costs of the Iraq Conflict.

Should we celebrate Mawlid ( The Prophet's birthday)?

Bismillah ir-Rahman ir-Rahim

Yes we should celebrate it every year
And every month and every week
And every hour and every moment.

Dr. `Isa al-Mani` al-Humayri, Department of Awqaaf, Dubai
Office of Religious Endowments and Islamic Affairs, Dubai
Administration of Ifta' and Research
We find nowadays publications filled with lies and deception which mislead many Muslims into thinking negatively about the honorable Mawlid of the Prophet. These publications claim that to celebrate the Mawlid is an act of innovation that goes against Islam. This is far from the truth, and it is therefore necessary for those who can speak clearly to help clarify and reverse the doubts surrounding this most blessed day. It is with this humble intention that I present the following proofs in support of celebrating our beloved Prophet's birthday.
The Prophet said, "He who innovates something in this matter of ours that is not of it will have it rejected." He also said, "Beware of innovations, for every innovation (kul bida` ) is misguidance."
Those opposed to Mawlid cite this saying and hold that the word every (kul) is a term of generalization, including all types of innovations, with no exception, and that therefore, celebrating Mawlid is misguidance. By daring to say that, they accuse the scholars of Islam of innovation. At the top of the list of those they have accused, then, is our Master `Umar (r). Those in opposition to Mawlid quickly reply to this, "But we did not mean the Companions of the Prophet Muhammad."
It follows, then, that the meaning of every (kul) cannot be taken in its general sense. Therefore, although the Prophet may not have said to celebrate his blessed birthday, it is nonetheless not innovation to do so. For, as the following examples show, there were many actions and practices instituted by his close followers after his time that are not deemed innovation.

Compiling the Qu'ran.

(From a Prophetic saying related by Zaid Ibn Thabit.(r)) "The Prophet died and the Qu'ran had not been compiled anywhere. `Umar (r) suggested to Abu Bakr (r) to compile the Qu'ran in one book. When a large number of Companions were killed in the battle of Yamama, Abu Bakr wondered, "How could we do something that the Prophet did not do?' `Umar said, "By Allah, it is good.' `Umar persisted in asking Abu Bakr until Allah expanded his chest for it (Allah made him agree and accept these suggestions) and he sent for Zaid Ibn Thabit and assigned him to compile the Qu'ran." Zaid said, "By Allah if they had asked me to move a mountain, it would not have been more difficult than to compile the Qur'an." He also said, "How could you do something that the Prophet did not do?" Abu Bakr said, "It is good, and `Umar kept coming back to me until Allah expanded my chest for the matter." The saying is narrated in Sahih Al Bukhari.

The Maqam of Ibrahim (as) in relation to the Ka'ba.

(Al Bayhaqi narrated with a strong chain of narrators from Aisha.) "The Maqam during the time of the Prophet and Abu Bakr was attached to the House, then `Umar moved it back." Al Hafiz Ibn Hajar said in Al Fath, "The Companions did not oppose `Umar, neither did those who came after them, thus it became unanimous agreement." He was the first to build the enclosure (maqsura) on it, which still exists today.

Adding the first call to prayer on Friday.

(From Sahih Al Bukhari, from Al Sa'ib bin Yazid.) "During the time of the Prophet (s), Abu Bakr (r) and `Umar (r), the call to Friday prayer used to occur when the Imam sat on the pulpit. When it was Othman's (r) time, he added the third call (considered third in relation to the first adhan and the iqama. But it is named first because it proceeds the call to the Friday prayer.)"

Salutations on the Prophet composed and taught by our Master `Ali (r).

The salutations have been mentioned by Sa'id bin Mansoor and Ibn Jareer in Tahzeeb al Aathar, and by Ibn Abi Assim and Ya'qoob bin Shaiba in Akhbar `Ali and by Al Tabarani and others from Salamah Al Kindi .
The addition to the tashahhud by Ibn Mas'ud.

After "wa rahmatullahi wa barakatu," and the Mercy of Allah and Blessings, he used to say, "assalamu `alayna min Rabbina, " peace upon us from our Lord. Narrated by Al Tabarani in Al Kabir, and the narrators are those of the sound transmitters, as it has been mentioned in Majma' Al Zawa'id.
The addition to the tashahhud by Abdullah Ibn `Umar.

He added the basmalah at the beginning of the tashahhud. He also added to the talbia, "labbaika wa sa'daika wal khayru bi yadayka wal raghba'u ilayika wal `amalu " This is mentioned in Bukhari, Muslim, et al.

These are some of the developments instituted by the Prophet's Companions, the scholars, and the honorable members of his nation, which did not exist during the time of the Prophet, and which they deemed good. Are they, then, misguided and guilty of bad innovation?
As for the claim that there is no such thing in religion as good innovation, here are some sayings of the brilliant scholars of Islam belying this claim.

Imam Nawawi said in Sahih Muslim (6-21)
"The Prophet's saying every innovation is a general-particular and it is a reference to most innovations. The linguists say, "Innovation is any act done without a previous pattern, and it is of five different kinds.'" Imam Nawawi also said in Tahzeeb al Asma' wal Sifaat, "Innovation in religious law is to originate anything which did not exist during the time of the Prophet, and it is divided into good and bad." He also said, "Al-muhdathat (pl. for muhdatha) is to originate something that has no roots in religious law. In the tradition of religious law it is called innovation, and if it has an origin within the religious law, then it is not innovation. Innovation in religious law is disagreeable, unlike in the language where everything that has been originated without a previous pattern is called innovation regardless of whether it is good or bad."
Shaykh Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani, the commentator on Al Bukhari, said,
"Anything that did not exist during the Prophet's time is called innovation, but some are good while others are not."
Abu Na'eem, narrated from Ibrahim Al Junaid, said, "I heard Ash-Shafi'i saying,
"Innovation is of two types; praiseworthy innovation and blameworthy innovation, and anything that disagrees with the Sunnah is blameworthy.'"
Imam Albayhaqi narrated in Manaqib Ash-Shafi'i that Ash-Shafi'i said,
"Innovations are of two types: that which contradicts the Qu'ran, the Sunnah, or unanimous agreement of the Muslims is a innovation of deception, while a good innovation does not contradict any of these things."
Al `Izz bin Abdussalam said, at the end of his book, Al Qawa'id,
"Innovation is divided into obligatory, forbidden, recommended, disagreeable and permissible, and the way to know which is which is to match it against the religious law."
Clearly we see from the opinions of these righteous scholars, that to define innovations in worship as wholly negative without exception is ignorant. For these pious knowers, among them Imam Nawawi and Ash-Shafi'i, declared that innovations could be divided into good and bad, based on their compliance or deviance with religious law.

Moreover, the following Prophetic saying is known even to common Muslims, let alone scholars: "He who inaugurates a good practice (sunnatun hasana) in Islam earns the reward of it, and of all who perform it after him, without diminishing their own rewards in the least." Therefore it is permissible for a Muslim to originate a good practice, even if the Prophet didn't do it, for the sake of doing good and cultivating the reward. The meaning of inaugurate a good practice ( sanna sunnatun hasana) is to establish a practice through personal reasoning (ijtihad) and derivation (istinbat) from the rules of religious law or its general texts. The actions of the Prophet's Companions and the generation following them which we have stated above is the strongest evidence.
The ones prejudiced against celebrating the Prophet's birthday have paved the way for their falsehood by deceiving the less-learned among the Muslims. The prejudiced ones claim that Ibn Kathir writes in his Al Bidaya wal Nihaya (11-172) that the Fatimide-Obaidite state, which descends from the Jew, Obaidillah Bin Maimoon Al Kaddah, ruler of Egypt from 357-567 A.H., innovated the celebration of a number of days, among them, the celebration of the Prophet's birthday. This treacherous lie is a grave insult to the scholarship of Ibn Kathir and the scholarship of all Islam. For in truth, Ibn Kathir writes about the Prophet's birthday in Al bidaya wal nihaya [13-136] "The victorious king Abu Sa'id Kawkaburi, was one of the generous, distinguished masters, and the glorious kings; he left good impressions and used to observe the honorable Mawlid by having a great celebration. Moreover, he was chivalrous, brave, wise, a scholar, and just." Ibn Kathir continues, "And he used to spend three hundred thousand Dinars on the Mawlid." In support, Imam Al Dhahabi writes of Abu Sa'id Kawkaburi, in Siyar A'laam al nubala' [22-336] "He was humble, righteous, and loved religious learned men and scholars of Prophetic saying."
Following are some sayings of the rightly guided Imams regarding the Mawlid.
Imam Al Suyuti, from Alhawi lil fatawi, wrote a special chapter entitled "The Good Intention in Commemorating the Mawlid," at the beginning of which he said,
"There is a question being asked about commemorating the Mawlid of the Prophet in the month of Rabi' Al Awal: what is the religious legal ruling in this regard, is it good or bad? Does the one who celebrates get rewarded or not?" The answer according to me is as follows: To commemorate the Mawlid, which is basically gathering people together, reciting parts of the Qu'ran, narrating stories about the Prophet's birth and the signs that accompanied it, then serving food, and afterwards, departing, is one of the good innovations; and the one who practices it gets rewarded, because it involves venerating the status of the Prophet and expressing joy for his honorable birth.
Ibn Taymiyya said in his book Iqtida' Al Sirat Al Mustaqeem (pg. 266)
"Likewise, what some people have innovated, in competition with the Christians in celebrating the birth of Jesus, or out of love and veneration of the Prophet⦣128;榱uot; and he continues "⦣128;洨at the predecessors didn't do, even though there is a reason for it, and there is nothing against it." This is a saying of someone who set fanaticism aside and sought to please Allah and his Prophet. As far as we are concerned, we commemorate the Mawlid for no other reason but what Ibn Taymiya said, "Out of love and veneration of the Prophet." May Allah reward us according to this love and effort, and may Allah bless the one who said, "Let alone what the Christians claim about their Prophet, and you may praise Muhammad in any way you want and attribute to his essence all honors and to his status all greatness, for his merit has no limits that any expression by any speaker might reach."
In the same source previously mentioned, Al Suyuti said,
"Someone asked Ibn Hajar about commemorating the Mawlid. Ibn Hajar answered, "Basically, commemorating the Mawlid is an innovation that has not been transmitted by the righteous Muslims of the first three centuries. However, it involves good things and their opposites, therefore, whoever looks for the good and avoids the opposites then it is a good innovation.' It occurred to me (Al Suyuti) to trace it to its established origin, which has been confirmed in the two authentic books: Al Sahihain. When the Prophet arrived in Medina he found that the Jews fast the day of Aashura; when he inquired about it they said, "This is the day when Allah drowned the Pharaoh and saved Moses, therefore we fast it to show our gratitude to Allah.' From this we can conclude that thanks are being given to Allah on a specific day for sending bounty or preventing indignity or harm." Al Suyuti then commented, "What bounty is greater than the bounty of the coming of this Prophet, the Prophet of Mercy, on that day?"
"This is regarding the basis of Mawlid. As for the activities, there should be only the things that express thankfulness to Allah, such as what has been previously mentioned: reciting Qu'ran, eating food, giving charity, reciting poetry praising the Prophet or on piety which moves hearts and drives them to do good and work for the Hereafter."

These are the derivations that those opposed to Mawlid call false conclusions and invalid analogies.
Imam Mohammed bin Abu Bakr Abdullah Al Qaisi Al Dimashqi.
Jami' Al Athar fi Mawlid, Al Nabiy Al Mukhtar, Al lafz al ra'iq fi Mawlid khayr al khala'iq , and Mawlid al sadi fi Mawlid Al Hadi,
Imam Al `Iraqi.
Al Mawlid al heni fi al Mawlid al sani.
Mulla `Ali Al Qari.
Al Mawlid Al rawi fil Mawlid al Nabawi .
Imam Ibn Dahiya.
Al Tanweer fi Mawlid Al basheer Al Nadheer.
Imam Shamsu Din bin Nasir Al Dimashqi.
Mawlid al Sadi fi Mawlid Al Hadi . He is the one who said about the Prophet's estranged uncle, Abu Lahab, "This unbeliever who has been dispraised, "perish his hands" [111: 1], will stay in Hell forever. Yet, every Monday his torment is being reduced because of his joy at the birth of the Prophet." How much mercy can a servant expect who spends all his life joyous about the Prophet and dies believing in the Oneness of Allah?
Imam Shamsu Din Ibn Al Jazri.
Al Nashr fil Qira'at Al `Ashr, `Urf Al Ta'reef bil Mawlid al shareef.
Imam Ibn Al Jawzi
Imam Ibn Al Jawzi said about the honorable Mawlid, "It is security throughout the year, and glad tidings that all wishes and desires will be fulfilled."
Imam Abu Shama
Imam Abu Shama (Imam Nawawi's shaykh) in his book Al ba'ith ala Inkar Al bida` wal hawadith (pg.23) said, "One of the best innovations in our time is what is being done every year on the Prophet's birthday, such as giving charity, doing good deeds, displaying ornaments, and expressing joy, for that expresses the feelings of love and veneration for him in the hearts of those who are celebrating, and also, shows thankfulness to Allah for His bounty by sending His Messenger, the one who has been sent as a Mercy to the worlds."
Imam Al Shihab Al Qastalani
Imam Al Shihab Al Qastalani (Al Bukhari's commentator) in his book Al mawahib Al Ladunniya (1-148) said, "May Allah have mercy on the one who turns the nights of the month of the Prophet's birth into festivities in order to decrease the suffering of those whose hearts are filled with disease and sickness."


There are others who wrote and spoke about Mawlid, such as Imam Al Sakhawi, Imam Wajihu Din bin `Ali bin al Dayba' al Shaybani al Zubaidi, and many more, which we will not mention due to the limited space available. From these many evidences, it should be clear by now that celebrating the Mawlid is highly commendable and allowed. Surely we cannot simply shrug off as heretics the scholars and dignitaries of this nation who approved the commemoration of the Mawlid and wrote countless books on the subject. Are all these scholars, to whom the whole world is indebted for the beneficial books they have written on Prophetic sayings, jurisprudence, commentaries, and other sorts of knowledge, among the indecent who commit sins and evil? Are they, as those opposed to Mawlid claim, imitating the Christians in celebrating the birth of Jesus? Are they claiming that the Prophet did not convey to the nation what they should do? We leave answers to these questions up to you.
And yet we must continue to examine the errors which those opposed to Mawlid utter. They say "If celebrating the Mawlid is from the religion, then the Prophet would have made it clear to the nation, or would have done it in his lifetime, or it would have been done by the Companions." No one can say that the Prophet did not do it out of his humbleness, for this is speaking evil of him, so they cannot use this argument.
Furthermore, that the Prophet and his Companions did not do a certain thing does not mean they made that thing prohibited. The proof is in the Prophet's saying, "Whoever establishes, in Islam, a good practice..." cited earlier. This is the strongest evidence that gives encouragement to innovate whatever practices have foundations in religious law, even if the Prophet and his Companions did not do them. Al Shafi'i said, "Anything that has a foundation in religious law is not an innovation even if the Companions did not do it, because their refraining from doing it might have been for a certain excuse they had at the time, or they left it for something better, or perhaps not all of them knew about it." Therefore, whoever prohibits anything based on the concept that the Prophet did not do it, his claim has no proof and must be rejected.
Thus we say to the rejecters of Mawlid: based on the rule you have attempted to found, that is, that whoever does anything that the Prophet or his Companions did not do is committing innovation, it would follow that the Prophet did not complete the religion for his nation, and that the Prophet did not convey to the nation what they should do. No one says this or believes this except a heretic defecting from the religion of Allah. To the doubters of Mawlid we declare, "Based on what you say, we convict you." For you have innovated in the basics of worship a large number of things that the Prophet did not do⦣128;⦣128; nor did his Companions, the Generation after the Companions, or the Generation after them. For instance:

Congregating people behind one Imam to pray Salat al Tahajjud after Salat Al Tarawih, in the two Holy Mosques and other mosques.
Reciting the Prayer of Completion of the Qu'ran in Salat al Tarawih and also in Salat al Tahajjud.
Designating the 27th night of Ramadan to complete reading the entire Qu'ran in the two Holy Mosques.
A caller saying, after Salat al Tarawih, in the Qiyam prayer, "May Allah reward you."
Founding organizations which did not exist in the time of the Prophet, such as Islamic universities, societies for committing the Qu'ran to memory, and offices for missionary work, and committees for enjoining good and forbidding evil. We are not objecting to these things, since they are forms of good innovation. We merely list these innovations to point out that those who oppose Mawlid clearly contradict their own rule stating that anything that neither the Prophet nor his Companions did is innovation. And since they claim that all innovation is bad, they themselves are guilty.

Yet another claim they make is to say that those who commemorate the Mawlid are mostly indecent and immoral. This is a vulgar statement and it only reflects the character of the one saying it. Are all the distinguished scholars that we have mentioned, from the point of view of those opposed to Mawlid, indecent and immoral? We won't be surprised if this is what they believe. This is a most serious slander. We say, as the poet said, "When Allah wants to spread a virtue that has been hidden, He would let a tongue of an envious person know about it."
Those opposed to Mawlid, may Allah guide them, have confused some expressions, and claim that some religious scholars associate partners with Allah. Take for example the plea of Imam Al Busiery to Prophet Muhammad, "Oh, most generous of creation, I have no one to resort to, save You, when the prevailing event takes place." They must examine carefully the saying of Imam Al Busiery: inda hulul il amim, when the prevailing event takes place. What is al Amim? It means that which prevails over the whole universe, and all of creation, in referring to the Day of Judgment. Imam Al Busiery is asking intercession from the Prophet on the Day of Judgment because on that Day we will have no one to resort to, or appeal to. Imam Al Busiery seeks his intercession to Allah through the Prophet, for when all other Messengers and Prophets will be saying, "Myself, myself," the Prophet will be saying, "I am the one for it, I am for it [the Intercession]" It becomes even more clear now that the doubts of those opposed to Mawlid are unfounded, just as their charges of associating partners with Allah are unfounded. This is due to their blindness, both physical and spiritual.
Another similar example can be found in the well-known saying transmitted by the distinguished Imam Al Kamal bin Al Hammam Al Hanafi, author of Fath il Qadeer fi manasik al Farisi, and Sharh al Mukhtar min al sada al ahnaf . When Imam Abu Hanifa visited Medina, he stood in front of the honorable grave of the Prophet and said, "O, most honorable of the Two Weighty Ones (humankind and jinn)! O, treasure of mankind, shower your generosity upon me and please me with your pleasure. I am aspiring for your generosity, and there is no one for Abu Hanifa in the world but you." Again, we must not misinterpret this entreaty, but realize its true meaning.
Yet another misconception those opposed to Mawlid hold can be seen in their statements such as these: "What occurs during Mawlid is mixing between men and women, singing and playing musical instruments, and drinking alcohol." I myself know this to be a lie, for I have attended many Mawlids and have not seen any mixing, and never heard any musical instruments. And as for drunkenness, yes, I have seen it, but not that of worldly people. We found people intoxicated with the love of the Prophet, a state surpassing even the agony of death, which we know overcame our master Bilal at the time of his death. In the midst of this sweet stupor he was saying, "Tomorrow I shall meet the loved ones, Muhammad and his Companions."
To continue, those opposed to Mawlid say, "The day of the Prophet's birth is the same day of the week as his death. Therefore, joy on this day is no more appropriate than sorrow, and if religion is according to one's opinion, then this day should be a day of mourning and sorrow." This kind of lame eloquence, is answered by the Imam Jalal al Din al Suyuti, in Al hawi lil fatawi (pg.193), "The Prophet's birth is the greatest bounty, and his death is the greatest calamity. Religious law urges us to express thankfulness for bounties, and be patient and remain calm during calamities. Religious law has commanded us to sacrifice an animal on the birth of a child [and distribute the meat to the needy], which is an expression of gratitude and happiness with the newborn, while it did not command us to sacrifice at the time of death. Also, it prohibited wailing and showing grief. Therefore, the rules of Divine Law indicate that it is recommended to show joy during the month of the Prophet's birth, and not to show sorrow for his death."
Furthermore, Ibn Rajab, in his book Al lata'if, dispraising the rejecters of Mawlid based on the above argument, said, "Some designated the day of Aashura as a funeral ceremony for the murder of Al Hussein. But neither Allah nor His Prophet commanded that the days of the prophets' great trials or deaths should be declared days of mourning, let alone those with lesser rank."
We conclude this article with a saying of the Prophet, which has been narrated by Abu Ya'la, from Hudhaifa and about which Ibn Kathir said, "It's chain of transmission is good." Abu Ya'la said, "The Prophet has said, "One of the things that concerns me about my nation is a man who studied the Qu'ran, and when its grace started to show on him and he had the appearance of a Muslim, he detached himself from it, and threw it behind his back, and went after his neighbor with a sword and accused him of associating partners with Allah.' I then asked, "Oh, Prophet of Allah, which one is more guilty of associating partners with Allah, the accused or the accuser?' The Prophet said, "It is the accuser.'"
Completed, with all Praises to Allah and salutations and peace be upon our master Muhammad and the family of Muhammad and his Companions.

Allah (SWT) gives guidance to those who seek knowledge.



Here's the story of France with Pharaoh Ramesses

When Francisco Mitra became the president of France in 1981. France requested from the Egyptian government to host the mummy of Pharaoh

For the purpose of running laboratory and archeological examinations on the mummy of the most notorious dictator ever lived on earth upon arrival, a very royal attendants were there including the French president himself and all ministers who bowed in honor for the mummy

When the ceremony ended, the mummy was carried to a specially-designed section at the Archeology Centre of France were it started to be tested by the greatest French archeological and anatomical scientists in order to discover more about such a great mummy. The scientists were headed by Professor Maurice Bucaille, scientists were trying to restore the mummy while Professor Maurice was mainly concerned with how did this mummy die!

the final report of the scientists was released late at night which states that the remaining salt in the mummy is an overt evidence that it was drawn in the sea, and the body was rescued very shortly where it was immediately embalmed to be saved

An amazing thing was still confusing Professor Maurice is that how could this body possibly be safer than any other mummy despite being taken out of the sea up until this time

Professor Maurice was writing his final report on what he thought would be a new discovery about saving Pharaoh's body immediately after his death and embalming it. And there, someone whispered to him that Muslims claim to know something about the drowning of this mummy

yet the Professor firmly denied such thing saying that it's impossible to discover this without the development of science and without using his high-tech and complicated laboratories and computers

to his surprise, he was told that Muslims believe in a book called "Quran" and this Quran narrates the story of Pharaoh's drowning and ensures the safety of his body after his death as to be a Sign to mankind. The Professor couldn't believe his own ears and started to wonder:

How can a book existed 1400 years ago speak about the mummy that was only found 200 years ago, in 1898 ??!!

How can that be possible while the ancient Egyptian heritage was discovered only a few decades ago and no one knew about it before??!!

The Professor sat down pondering on what he was told about the book of Muslims while his Holy Book narrates only the drowning of Pharaoh without saying anything about his body "Is it possible that this mummy in front of me is the one who was chasing Moses ??!!". "Is it possible that Muhammad knew this 1400 years ago ??!!"

The Professor couldn't sleep that night till they brought him the Old Testament where he read: "the sea drowned Pharaoh and his army, no one else was left alive" He was surprised that the Holy Book didn't mention about the destiny of the body and that it will be saved

When the scientists were done with the mummy, France retuned it to Egypt, but Professor Maurice couldn't rest for a moment since he was told that Muslims know about the safety of the body. So, he decided to travel and meet anatomy Muslim scientists and there he spoke about his discovery of the safety of the mummy after its death in the sea and so on.

One of the Muslim scientist stood up and simply opened the Quran and pointed to the Professor at one verse:

This day shall We save you in your body, that you may be a Sign to those who come after you! But verily, many among mankind are neglectful of Our Signs"
(Quran 10:92)

The Professor was struck when he read that and immediately stood in front of the crowd and said loudly: "I believe in Islam, I believe in Quran"

Then he went back to France with a different face he traveled with.

In France, he dedicated 10 years investigating the scientific discoveries and comparing them with the Quran and trying to come up with one scientific contradiction with the Quran. Finally he quoted one verse from the Quran to be his conclusion:

"No falsehood can approach it (this book) from before or behind it: it is sent down by One Full of Wisdom, Worthy of all praise" (Quran 41:42)

As a result of all years of his research, Professor Maurice wrote a book that shook all Europe, especially the scientists there

"Quran, Torah, Bible and Science:

A Study of the Holy Books in the Light of Modern Science"

All copies were sold out at a very short time

I personally visited the Qairo Museum where the mummy is preserved and there you get astonished at the scenery of thousands of people from all over the world visiting the place everyday , unfortunately, many of the tourists there would think: "Woow, look at that! Amazing!! So nice to see people of all times!! Without realizing the intended lesson that Allah has kept this body a Sign to all mankind of anyone who denies Allah and His messengers.

In another chapter in the Quran:

"When Moses came to them with Our clear Signs, they said: This is nothing but sorcery faked up: never did we hear the like among our fathers of old!

Moses said: "My Lord knows best who it is that comes with guidance from Him and whose end will be best in the Hereafter: certain it is that the wrong-doers will not prosper.

"Pharaoh said: "O Chiefs! No god do I know for you but myself: therefore, O Haman! Light me a (kiln to bake bricks) out of clay, and build me a lofty palace, that I may mount up to the god of Moses: but as far as I am concerned, I think (Moses) is a lair!"

And he was arrogant and insolent in the land, beyond reason, - he and his hosts: they thought they would not have to return to Us!

So We seized his and his hosts, and We flung them into the sea: now behold what was the end of those who did wrong!

And We made them (but) leaders inviting to the Fire; and on the Day of Judgment no help shall they find.

In this world We made a curse to follow them: and on the Day of Judgment they will be among the loathed (and despised)." (Quran 28: 36-42)

So now,


"Has not the time arrived for the Believers that their hearts in all humility should engage in the remembrance of Allah and the Truth which has been revealed to them, and that they should not become like those to whom was given Revelation aforetime, but long ages passed over them and their hearts grew hard? For many among them are rebellious transgressors.

Know you (all) that Allah gives life to the earth after its death! Already have We shown the Signs plainly to you, that you may learn wisdom.

For those who give in charity, men and women, and loan to Allah a Beatiful Loan, it shall be increased manifold (to their credits), and they shall have (besides) a liberal reward.

And those who believe in Allah and His messengers- they are the Sincere (lovers of Truth), and the Witnesses (who testify), in the eyes of their Lord: they shall have their Reward and their Light.

But those who reject Allah and deny Our Signs,- they are the companions of Hell-Fire " Quran 57: 16-19

KAMAN, A RACIAL GROUP OF MYANMAR

A COMMUNITY WELL-KNOWN IN THE HISTORY OF RAKHAING IS VERY LITTLE KNOWN EVEN IN MYANMAR NOT TO SPEAK OF IN NEIGHBOURING COUNTRIES.
THE WESTERN COASTLINE OF THE UNION OF MYANMAR ( BURMA ) ON THE BAY OF BENGAL IS SITUATED THE RAKHAING STATE (ARAKAN) WHERE A COMMUNITY " KAMAN" ( MEANING A BOW IN PERSIAN) OR
" KAMANCHI" LIVES IN HARMONY AMONG THE VARIOUS RAKHAING RACES.
KING NARAMEIKHLA ( 1404 – 1434 ) STRUCK COINS BEARING THE ISLAMIC " KALIMAH" ON ONE SIDE AND HIS NAME IN BURMESE ON THE OTHER. HIS DESCENDANTS, FROM 1434 TO 1531, NINE RAKHAING KINGS HAD MUSLIM TITLES ( D.G.E.HALL, G.E. HARVEY ).
A RECENT BOOK IN BURMESE (MYANMAR) "KAMAN LUMYOZU" PUBLISHED BY A KAMAN ASSOCIATION IN YANGON TRACES THE HISTOUY OF KAMANS OR" ARCHERS" IN THE ARMIES OF RAKHAING ( ARAKANESE) KINGS OF YORE AND HOW THE RETINUE OF THE MOGHUL PRINCE SHAH SHUJA WHO ARRIVED MRAUK-U, THE CAPITAL OF ARAKAN, IN1660, WAS ABSORBED IN THE KAMAN UNITS.
ACCORDING TO A FRENCH PHYSICIST, FRANCOIS BERNIER, THE PRINCE ASKED FOR TEMPORARY ASYLUM FROM THE KING OF ARAKAN, SANDATHUDHAMA ( 1652 – 1687 ).
JOINT ARAKANESE – PORTUGUESE RAIDS IN NEIGHBOURING BENGAL HAVE ENRICHED THE ARAKANESE COURT , ACCORDING TO THE AUGUSTINE MONK TRAVELLER SEBASTIAN MANRIQUE WHO WROTE ABOUT MUSLIM SETTLEMENTS IN ARAKAN DURING THE PERIOD 1629 – 1637.
ACCORDING TO BRITISH HISTORIAN G.E. HARVEY , DUE TO THE SUCCESSION PROBLEM OF THE MOGHUL THRONE IN DELHI IN WHICH AURANGZEB SUCCEEDED, PRINCE SHUJA HAD TO FLEE FROM BENGAL TO THE NEIGHBOURING ARAKAN ( RAKHAING) KINGDOM. THENCE HE INTENDED TO PROCEED WITH HIS FAMILY ON PILGRIMAGE TO HOLY MAKKAH.
THE RAKHAING KING GAVE HIM SHELTER BUT WHEN HE ASKED FOR A DAUHGTER OF THE MOGHUL PRINCE, THEIR RELATIONSHIP TURNED INTO ENMITY. THIS INCIDENT IS RECORDED BY " DAGHREGISTER" OF THFE DUTCH EAST INDIA COMPANY IN BATAVIA (D.G.E.HALL).
ARAKANESE CHRONICLES STATE THAT SHAH SHUJA TRIED TO CONQUER ARAKAN WITH HIS OWN SOLDIERS ( AROUND 300), WITH THE HELP OF MUSLIM SOLDIERS IN THE RAKHAING ARMY AND OF THE LOCAL MUSLIM POPULATION.
SIR ARTHER P. PHAYRE IN HIS " HISTORY OF BURMA " EMPHASISED THAT THE FAILURE OF KING SANDATHUDHAMA TO PROVIDE SHIPS FOR THE PRINCE TO PROCEED TO HOLY MAKKAH AS PROMISED, AND THE DEMAND FOR A MOHGUL PRINCESS MUST HAVE PROMPTED SHAH SHUJA TO TAKE UP ARMS. MOSHE YEGAR IN " THE MUSLIMS OF BURMA " ( 1972- OTTO HARRASSOWITZ, WIESBADEN ) ENDORSED SIR PHAYRE'S VIEW.
ANYWAY, IT IS A WELL – KNOWN FACT THAT SHAH SHUJA AND HIS FAMILY WERE MARTYRED. HIS RETINUE WAS LATER ABSORBED INTO THE RAKHAING ARCHERS' UNITS. KNOWN AS KAMANS, SPEAK RAKHAING, THEY LIVE ON RAMREE ISLAND AND IN VARIOUS KAMAN VILLAGES AND SETTLEMENTS LIKE THINGANET, THAYAGON IN SITTWAY ( AKYAB) .
ACCORDING TO HARVEY , THE KAMANS WERE KING-MAKERS IN RAKHAING "SETTING UP KINGS AT WILL".

TODAY, WITH MODERN EDUCATION MANY OF THEM HOLD IMPORTANT GOVERNMENTAL POSTS. ALTHOUGH FEW IN NUMBERS THEY ARE RESPECTED FOR THEIR INTEGRITY AND SELF – CONFIDENCE. THEY SPEAK RAKHAING & BURMESE, AND DRESS LIKE RAKHAING & BURMESE.

OUTSIDE RAKHAING STATE , THE DESCENDANTS OF KAMANS ARE FOUND IN TOUNGOO, YANGON, AND MANDALAY AND MANY OTHER PARTS OF MYA NMAR. THEY SPEAK MYANMAR AND DRESS LIKE MYANMAR .

U SHWE HMAING , CHIEF OF TOUNGOO, LED THE " THEINGYI
( THEINBYU) TAT" BATTALION OF ABOUT 500 RAKHAING KAMANS DURING THE REIGN OF BURMESE KING BAGYIDAW WHEN THE BRITISH LANDED IN YANGON AND INVADED BURMA (1824 -1826). IN THE SECOND ANGLO- BURMESE WAR
( 1852) , HIS SON BO KARIM COMMANDED THE " THEINGYI TAT" WHICH FOUGHT THE BRITISH COLONIALISTS.

THE PRESENT " TACHANPE MOSQUE" NEAR AUNG SAN STADIUM, YANGON (WHICH IS TABLIGH JAMAAT MARKAZ, AND HAS WOMEN'S APARTMENT FOR FRIDAY CONGREGATIONS) IS BUILT ON LAND DONATED BY KING BAGYIDAW IN 1826.

THE DESCENDANTS OF TOUNGOO KAMANS IN YANGON BUILT OKKYUKKON MOSQUE ON 130 STREET, TAWAJJAH ( SUFI ORDER) MOSQUE IN THE OLD MUSLIM CEMETERY ( KANDAWGLAY) AND MUSTAFA MOSQUE, BOTAHTAUNG.

SPEAKING BURMESE, INTERMARRIAGES AMONG FELLOW MUSLIMS
ARE COMMON AND THE "MIXED" KAMANS TODAY ARE JUST " MYANMAR MUSLIMS".

THE RECENT BOOK ON KAMANS HIGHLIGHTS THE ACHIEVEMENTS OF THE COMMUNITY IN THE FIELDS OF EDUCATION, MILITARY AND CIVIL SERVICES, TRADE, SPORTS, ETC WITH PHOTOGRAPHS OF EMINENT KAMAN MEN AND WOMEN. DUE TO THE ASSIMILATION PROCESS, THE IDENTITY OF THE HISTORIC KAMAN RACE SHOULD NOT DISAPPEAR; THIS IS THE THEME OF "KAMAN LUMYOZU".

MARCH 8,, 2008
( MALAYSIA – 12 TH GENERAL ELECTION DAY)
MAUNG-KO GHAFFARI
CHIEF EDITOR,
" ISLAM ALIN"( THE LIGHT OF ISLAM)
NO 58, 130 STREET, KANDAWGLAY, YANGON , MYANMAR ( BURMA )

Are Muslims up to the challenge?

March 04, 2008
Yilmaz Alimoglu
Community Editorial Board
The Toronto Star; thestar.com




The current state of Muslims is downright depressing, conflicted by internal, ideological wars, pagan nationalism and tribalism.

As Muslims, we love to blame the West and Israel for our current terrible state. This is pure denial and a convenient way of not doing much to change our situation because change for the better is difficult to achieve. Real change starts with individuals who make the choice and commitment to change. It also involves a lot of hard work and asking some serious questions.

Relative to the 15 million to 20 million-strong Jewish community worldwide, there are more than 1 billion Muslims living on this planet today; yet the Jewish community has produced many more scientists, writers, poets, musicians and statesmen than Muslims in the last 200 years and generally is a more active, productive and influential player in the global economy. Both communities continue to waste precious time, energy and resources fighting each other – bookends of the same prophetic lineage. We have fallen victim to power struggles; in the process, the weakest members of our societies end up suffering.

Ironically, between the 8th and 14th centuries in Andalusia (southern Spain and Morocco today) it was a different story. During that time, Christians, Muslims and Jews all lived together in a golden age of intellectual creativity, tolerance, respect and harmony.
Andalusia was a shining light for the world, producing great scholars like the philosopher and scientist Ibn Rushd, also known as Averroes, who some credit with being the founding father of secular thought in western Europe, and the great Islamic mystic Ibn al-Arabi. Ibn Haldun laid out the foundation for modern management, psychology and sociology. Abu al-Qasim, known in the West as Abulcasis, is regarded as the father of modern surgery.

Had Nobel Prizes existed during that era, many Muslims would have won them.
The Muslims of Andalusia were as devoted to serving humanity as they were to the study of the sciences and commerce, if not more so. They asked challenging questions and worked hard to find reasonable answers using their intellect.

Media-savvy individuals claim to speak in the name of Islam or on behalf of all Muslims, but they do more harm than good, falling prey to the fame they gain from being controversial over their use of unwise words. They do an injustice to non-Muslims by creating false perceptions of Islam and play a major role in creating a prison of prejudice.
They are not Muslims by choice but by inheritance, like inheriting a piece of property. Accepting and practising Islam is against their way of life but they still claim to be Muslims. If you cannot agree with the texts and principles, then why bother calling yourself a Muslim? Calling some of them nihilists might be more appropriate.
Ultimately, the quest for truth demands rigorous research, clarity of thought, trust, humility, perseverance, consistency and the avoidance of judgment without understanding.

Are Muslims today up to the challenge? Do we have the intellectual capacity to respond? Are we familiar enough with Islamic scripture to have the courage to remain faithful to core principles? Are we ready to invest the time and energy needed to resolve issues and promote understanding based on the original scriptures and message of the Prophet?

Perhaps, if we can first learn from our roots, know where we come from and understand what shapes who we are today. After resolving the identity crises endemic within Muslim societies, we will then be ready to discuss with each other issues facing humanity, based on diversity, equality and common values.

Yilmaz Alimoglu, an electrical engineer with a management degree, works as a consultant in the high-tech field.

Putting blame on Pakistan won't help war on terror

March 05, 2008, The Toronto Star; thestar.com
Tariq Amin-Khan


The Harper government, with the support of the Liberals, appears set to extend Canadian troop deployment in Afghanistan beyond 2009. The question is: What are Canadian troops doing in Afghanistan , and by extending the mission will Canada be able to assist the U.S. and NATO in their objective to win the war on terror and eliminate Al Qaeda, the Taliban and the militant Islamists? A tall order to be sure, but is it achievable? The short answer to the question is no.

If the mission objectives are unattainable, then why are Canadian troops in Afghanistan ? The situation gets murkier as we examine the rhetoric of security analysts who pin the blame squarely on Pakistan . They claim that the issue is not the insurgency in Afghanistan ; the problem really is with Pakistan .

But it appears that the problem is neither in Afghanistan nor in Pakistan . Rather, there is a direct relationship between foreign military presence in Afghanistan and the rise of militant Islam. Furthermore, the absence of a democratic alternative gives militant Islam a free hand to operate in both of these states.

The foreign militaries occupying Afghanistan take the view that militants are on the run as NATO intensifies its military campaigns against them. The reality is otherwise.

Even a cursory look at the developments in Afghanistan , Iraq and even Pakistan (until recently) shows that militant Islamists have gained in strength, and have become bolder since the occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq . The Taliban in Afghanistan have not been contained but have actually become stronger.

Militant Islam is a political movement and its aim is to capture state power. The U.S. played a significant role in the 1970s and 1980s to empower Islamists. The Taliban in Afghanistan took advantage of this nurturing environment to hone their political and military skills. They have had a taste of holding onto state power and are eager to return.
It is now becoming clearer that militant Islam cannot be defeated militarily. Every time overwhelming force has been used, NATO, Afghan, Iraqi and Pakistani casualties have increased and Taliban, Iraqi and Pakistani militant Islamists have withdrawn and regrouped to relaunch their attacks another day. This has been the pattern.

All this raises the possibility that the war on terror is not a war to be won at all.
By all accounts, the Bush administration has crafted this war as the new permanent war, a "long war," along the lines of forcing a stalemate as in the Cold War. This permanent war fuels not only the military-industrial complex, but now also the security-industrial complex all combined with the synergy that exists between Big Oil, the military and Western economies.

This idea of forcing a stalemate is also echoed by professor Janice Gross Stein in the recent book The Unexpected War: Canada in Kandahar . Her view, expressed in terms of Canada 's military strategy in Afghanistan, is that based on the U.S. Cold War policy of containment, the aim at best would be to attain a stalemate in the war on terror.
It is not possible here to discuss in any detail the fallacy of applying the logic of the Cold War in relation to militant Islam and the war on terror. But it can be said that this strategy of forcing a stalemate is ill-conceived against adversaries that are mobile and geographically untethered. These adversaries, in the heat of battle, can simply melt into the populace as NATO commanders are left to mull over their battle plans.

Blaming Pakistan for the war on terror going badly for NATO, therefore, does not help; it merely compounds the problem. The sobering fact is that Pakistan has very little to do with the war on terror being won or lost. But alienating Pakistan is an option that NATO takes at its own peril.

As to the support that militants in northwest Pakistan have provided the Taliban on the Afghan side, there is a need to understand the ground realities of the area. Southern Afghanistan and northwest Pakistan is a contiguous area inhabited by the same ethnic group, the Pashtuns, who have had historical kinship ties. The border, the Durand Line, is an arbitrary divide between Pakistan and Afghanistan established by British colonial rulers, and it has never been possible to effectively police it.

Consequently, the border has always been porous and an attack by an occupying force against Pashtuns on one side is seen as an attack against the other side as well. However, when you overlay religious ideology onto this ethnic solidarity, it becomes a potent combination that produces a resilient guerrilla force. A force that is able to take on the most sophisticated militaries within an inhospitable terrain against which standing armies and modern weaponry have not been very effective.

This reality of guerrilla warfare worked wonders for the U.S. when its Islamist proxies in Pakistan and Afghanistan were waging the jihad against "godless communism."

Ironically, now that the shoe is on the other foot, Pakistan is being blamed for the war on terror going badly for Canada , the U.S. and NATO.

The only way militant Islam can be contained, nay challenged, is for a democratic alternative to take root in Pakistan and Afghanistan . However, it would be naive to assume that even if this shift comes about, the transition will be simple and painless because the democratic alternative will be resisted. But democracy will eventually deal with the militants.

In this context, the outcome of the Feb. 18 elections in Pakistan gives pause for hope. The outcome reinforces the position that the political and democratic alternative is the best antidote to check the rise of militant Islam. Just look at the rout the Islamist parties have suffered in these elections in the Northwest Frontier Province . A province where the Islamists had formed the government after the 2002 elections, and where people resoundingly said no to intimidation and suicide bombings.

This is the message that Stephen Harper also needs to hear. Even with additional troops, Canada will end up fighting for more stalemates. But what will this no-win situation mean in human terms – in lives lost for an objective that is neither clear nor within the mission's grasp.

Tariq Amin-Khan is an assistant professor in the department of politics and public administration at Ryerson University .