Lives of
the Prophets: Prophet Yusha (Joshua)
When Musa*
passed away, the leadership of Bani Isra'il passed to Yusha ibn
Nun. Yusha ibn Nun is not mentioned directly in the Qur'an but he
is the servant of Musa* who is referred to in the following verse of the Qur'an:
"AND LO! [In the course of his wanderings,] Moses said to his servant (fata),
'I shall not give up until I reach the junction of the two seas, even if I
[have to] spend untold years [in my quest]!'"[TMQ 18:60]
Being a
servant of Musa* he was close to the Revelation, close to the teacher (Musa)
and he was a righteous student of this teacher. And so, when Musa* passed
away, the leadership of Bani Isra'il was passed down to Yusha ibn Nun,
and he became their Prophet.
Under the
leadership of Yusha ibn Nun, Bani Isra'il is made victorious and returns
to the Holy Land, an event which did not occur under Musa* or Harun* (who both
passed away whilst Bani Isra'il was still in the wilderness). The
Prophet* gives us a clue as to why this victory was delayed when he said: "None
of the ones who worshipped the calf entered into Jerusalem.”
The
Children of Isra'il who came out of Egypt were raised up in slavery and
servitude so they were weak and were not fit for victory. Allah made them
stay in the wilderness for 40 years until all of that generation had passed
away. And they were replaced by a new generation raised in freedom and
taught the guidance of the Taurah by Musa* and Harun*, and it was this
generation that was given the victory.
Musa* is
undoubtedly the greatest Prophet that was sent to Bani Isra'il and he
strived eagerly to have this victory, yet we see that victory was not at his
hands but rather at Yusha's. What do we learn from this? That it is not
enough to have an excellent leader alone – applying this to our times, it is
not enough for us simply to wait for Al-Mahdi but rather we need to
ensure we are a generation capable of victory and to be led to that victory by
an excellent leader (be that Al-Mahdi or someone else).
And
through the example of Yusha we see how Allah grants victory to those who have
prepared for it. Yusha ibn Nun led the Children of Isra'il against the Jababirah
(the inhabitants of Jerusalem), who were a large giant-like people. The
fighting was furious and the sun was about to set. Yusha ibn Nun knew that he
could not defeat these people except if the day was longer as, if night came,
the Jababirah would be able to regroup. So Yusha pointed to the sun and
said, "You are receiving orders and I am receiving orders from Allah, O
Allah stop the sun!" Allah, subhanahu wa ta'ala, caused the
sun to stop for Yusha ibn Nun until he defeated the people of Jerusalem.
If you have Allah on your side, don't worry! It's not a matter of
numbers, or weapons, or artillery when Allah is on your side.
The full
story of Yusha ibn Nun is told to us in a sahih hadith of the Prophet*
recorded in Sahih Muslim. The Prophet* said: "One of the
Prophets made a holy war. He said to his followers: One who has married a woman
and wants to consummate to his marriage but has not yet done so; another who
has built a house but has not yet erected its roof; and another who has bought
goats and pregnant she-camels and is waiting for their offspring-will not
accompany me … "
This
Prophet did not want any person to come with him whose heart may be attached to
anything else. This is a Prophet who is not looking for numbers but
rather for ikhlas (sincerity).
The Prophet*
continued: " ... So he marched on and approached a village at or about the
time of the Asr prayers. He said to the sun: You are receiving orders
and I am receiving orders from Allah, O Allah stop the sun! It was stopped for
him until Allah granted him victory."
We know
this Prophet was Yusha ibn Nun because of a separate narration recorded by Imam
Ahmad in which the Prophet, sallallahu 'alayhi wa sallam, said: "The
sun has never stopped for any man besides Yusha when he wanted to conquer
Bayt al-Muqaddis."
Main Topic: Freedom of Speech and the Charlie Hebdo Attacks
Salaam all
Salaam all
Please find below brief notes from Study Circle (a greater,
more detailed explanation was given during the Circle). In addition, we had
many many questions from the children about the attacks in Paris that were
addressed.
These are the main points of the discussion are articulated.
I will also append a few articles that also discuss some of
these points.
Jzk
Naveed
Paris Attacks: Islam is against Terrorism
We have to start off by stating that there is no
justification from Islam for the Paris / Charlie Hebdo attacks. Islam condemns
these actions and no reasonable Muslim would support the actions of the gunmen
involved in the Charlie Hebdo or supermarket killings. There is no excuse for
this terrorism.
Some people may try to justify this by misapplying certain
rules from Islam but vigilante attacks are not allowed, terrorism is not
allowed and targeting innocent civilians is not allowed. Some may point to the
Prophet* having a blacklist of people for execution when he opened Mecca who
were excluded from the general amnesty – and these people were to be killed on
sight for their prolonged defamation/insults of the Prophet* and open
disbelief. However, these were the orders of the Head of State of a proper
Islamic Government and not an excuse for people to take the law into their own
hands. Only the Prophet* had the ability to enact the law or forgive.
Islam is bigger than any insult
Also, it is important to restate that Islam is bigger than
any cartoon, book, YouTube video or film. Allah will protect Islam and Islam
will survive this crisis. One of the best ways to defend Islam is by our
example and living the life as the Prophet* would want us. We should obey the
Shariah, interact with the non-Muslims through dialogue and invite them to
(study) Islam.
Tolerance
History has proven that Islam is the most tolerant of all
ways of life / religions when for centuries Muslims would live peacefully with
people of all other faiths without persecution. We find the opposite today
where the liberal secular West will only tolerate Muslims if we abandon Islam
and become secular. They talk about tolerance but do not know what it truly
means.
Allah mentions this in the Qur’an when He says: “And
the Jews will not be pleased with thee, nor will the Christians, till
thou follow their creed. Say: Lo! the guidance of Allah (Himself) is
Guidance. And if thou shouldst follow their desires after the knowledge
which hath come unto thee, then wouldst thou have from Allah no
protecting friend nor helper.” [TMQ: 2:120]
Just because they say over and over again that they are
tolerant does not make them tolerant: because they keep telling us what we can
and can’t believe. They keep trying to define us into ‘moderate’ (agree with
them) and ‘extremist’ (disagree with them) ! Hence, they only tolerate those
who are themselves – this is not tolerance. Islam has always historically been
more tolerant than other beliefs.
Saying Sorry
Islam and Muslims have condemned the Paris attacks. However,
there is no need for us to collectively apologise for the actions of these
criminals – as they are criminals and act in opposition to the laws of Allah.
Becoming a political hammer to beat others
However, this whole issue has been blown out of all
proportion and become deliberately politicised in order to attack and weaken
the Muslims community and alienate us even further. It has moved from an issue
of criminal behaviour to a Political Issue to stoke up further Islamophobia and
to criticise Muslims and Islam yet further. The speeches, the rally, the
increased print circulation of the magazine, the leaders jumping on the
bandwagon…all to turn the screw tighter on the Muslim community: physically and
emotionally.
The response
The politicians have painted this in to a binary issue:
either you support the magazine (Freedom of Speech) or you are supporting the
terrorists (gunmen) - much like Bush did after 9/11. But this is a false choice
as there are alternatives. We should, unfortunately, expect more of this in the
run up to the May General Election in the UK.
The French Angle
A recent article by Robert Fisk and others highlighted that
these events do not occur in a vacuum and the context of these attackers needs
to be born in mind – being from Algeria / North Africa. France has a long
tradition of demonising Muslims and being very racist towards the Muslims of
North Africa and is still actively engaged in wars against the Muslims in
Syria, Libya, Mali. Recent ‘Race Riots’ in Paris and other cities highlights
the endemic racism / discrimination towards the Muslims of North Africa, not to
mention the targeted laws against Muslims in France around the banning of the
Niqab and girls with a headscarf cannot go to school or hospital!
There is also the brutal history of French colonialism in
North Africa, their vicious support of dictators and the inhumane response to
the Algerian Civil War – where even the CIA and Americans studied the French
manuals of torture after 9/11! All these with high unemployment rates and
systemic discrimination will inevitably have one reaction or another. Also, how
they reacted post-independence when they were leaving the countries.
The European context
This brouhaha over Freedom of Speech traces back through
modern European history and the struggle between the oppressive Church / Papal
rule and the Free Thinkers post-Renaissance. The alternative to the corrupt
Church rule gave rise to a new system of Man-made laws based upon a
consolidated ‘Four Freedoms’:
- Freedom of Belief
- Freedom of ownership
- Personal Freedom
- Freedom of Speech
Freedom of Speech was sanctified early on because it helped
society account governments, their rulers and helped push forward science and
technology through challenge and the scientific method, and the ability to
criticise the crazy beliefs in organised Christian religion. It served a
purpose.
Now Freedom of Speech is used almost exclusively to demonise
Muslims and the beliefs of Islam and the laws of Islam. The same approach is
lost when accounting their own governments, their own Foreign Policy and double
standards and the power dynamic of Freedom of Speech has shifted to criticise
and silence the marginalised in society. It is used to criticise Muslims but
not other groups! What about Edward Snowden and Julian Assange's right of 'freedom
of speech', it is very obvious that freedom of speech doesn't exist anywhere in
the world if it doesn't suit the ruling paradigm or ideology (western
governments).
Hypocrisy of French Freedom of Speech
This is highlighted more acutely in recent years when we see
how France has selectively applied Freedom of Speech:
1. A French court injunction banned a Jesus based clothing
advert mimicking the 'Last Supper'. The display was ruled "a gratuitous
and aggressive act of intrusion on people's innermost beliefs", by the
French judge. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4337031.stm
2. In 2005 'Aides Haute-Garonne' organized an informative
evening about the prevention of the HIV-AIDS. The prospectus contained a
head-and-shoulders image of a woman wearing a nun's bonnet and two pink
condoms. On the grounds that the prospectus insulted a religious, a court
convicted Aides Haute-Garonne.
3. In 1994 Le quotidien de Paris published the article
L'obscurité de l'erreur by journalist, sociologist, and historian Paul
Giniewski. The article criticizes the Pope, and states that Catholic doctrine
abetted the conception and the realization of Auschwitz. A court upheld
proceedings on the ground that the article was an insult to a group because of
its religion, and convicted the newspaper.
4. 'Charlie Hebdo Magazine'
itself censored, apologised and then fired long-time cartoonist Siné for
a caricature insulting the son of former president Nicholas Sarkozy and his
wife Jessica Sebaoun-Darty, while staunchly standing on their 'right' to
repeatedly troll Muslims, minorities & immigrants e.g. by showing Muhammad
naked and bending over—which tells you something about the brand of satire they
practice and that they’d rather be aiming downward towards minorities than
upward. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/09/trolls-and-martyrdom-je-ne-suis-pas-charlie.html
5. Dieudonné M'Bala M'Bala - a French comedian and satirist
- was convicted and fined in France for describing Holocaust remembrance as
"memorial pornography". http://www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/nicolas-anelka-anti-semitic-gesture-quenelle-2966787
6. The 'Quennele' hand sign has been described as
anti-establishment and anti-zionist by French youth and famous football players
(e.g. Anelka). It stoked serious controversy in France since first being used
by anti-establishment comedian Dieudonné M'Bala M'Bala in 2005. M'Bala has been barred from many theatres and
convicted many times for his 'freedom of speech.' www.mirror.co.uk/sport/football/news/nicolas-anelka-anti-semitic-gesture-quenelle-2966787
7. As part of "internal security" enactments
passed in 2003, it is an offense to insult the national flag or anthem, with a
penalty of a maximum 9,000 euro fine or up to six months' imprisonment.
Restrictions on "offending the dignity of the republic", and include
"insulting" anyone who serves the public.
8. French Rap Star Facing Prison - For Insulting the French
State, insulting Napoleon and Charles de Gaulle. http://www.nme.com/news/Monsieur-R/23193
. Hence, it is illegal to insult the French state and it seems it's sacred
historical characters like Napoleon and Charles De Gaulle?!
9. Nicolas Sarkozy, then-Interior Minister and former
President of the Republic (until 2012), ordered the firing of the director of
Paris Match — because he had published
photos of Cécilia Sarkozy (his wife) with another man in New York.
10. In 2006, rapper 'Joestarr' had his rap song against
President Sarkozy censored. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_France#List_of_censored_songs
11. The following films have been censored in France, (not
for provoking violence): L'Essayeuse (1976)Romance (1999)Le Mur (2011)
12. Under France's "Public Health Code" passed on
the 31 December 1970, "positive
presentation of drugs" and the "incitement to their consumption"
comes with up to five years in prison and fines up to €76,000. Newspapers such
as Charlie Hebdo and associations, political parties, and various publications
criticizing the current drug laws and advocating drug reform in France have
been repeatedly hit with heavy fines based on this law. http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichCodeArticle.do?idArticle=LEGIARTI000006688178&cidTexte=LEGITEXT000006072665
13. Muslim women are barred from education (it's not just
the Taliban just restrict education for girls) in France, if they practise
their religion by wearing a headscarf, despite French schools having no uniform
policy, and crosses on necklaces are being allowed.
14. "France’s law against “religious symbols in public
spaces” is specifically enforced to target Muslim women who choose to wear
hijab—ironic considering we’re now touting Charlie Hebdo as a symbol of
France’s staunch commitment to civil liberties." http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/01/09/trolls-and-martyrdom-je-ne-suis-pas-charlie.html
15. It is illegal in France take the opinion of the Turkish
side on the then civil war involving Armenians, i.e. illegal to deny that the
killing of Amenians by Turkish troops was a deliberate genocide.
16. In 2007, a tribunal in Lyon sentenced Bruno Gollnisch
and fined him €5,000 for the offence of contesting some of the information
about the Holocaust and ordered him to pay €55,000 euros in damages to the
plaintiffs and to pay for the judgment to be published in the newspapers that
originally printed his remarks.
17. Last year France was the first country in the World that
banned Pro-Palestinian Marches during the Gaza war.
18. And we have already mentioned the ridiculous niqab ban
and ban on headscarves in official buildings (like schools and hospitals).
Charlie Hebdo
This was created out of a magazine that was banned (!) for
criticising the former French Leader General De Gaulle. It used to satirise the
ruling elite but lost its way and has become a forum for ‘petit white racism’
according to some writers and in order to boost its circulation it started to
target Muslims through insults and is active in a process of dehumanising
Muslims and undermining Islam through insult rather than critique. As stated,
they will not criticise other groups now.
The Apologist
It is right to criticize the murders in Paris because they
were wrong. A complete misapplication of Islam has occurred and
Islam/Muslims has been put in a negative
light. Hence, many ‘Muslim leaders’ trot themselves out to line up and condemn
these abhorrent acts. However, they are nearly always so silent when other
wrongs are perpetrated. Where are these same leaders when Muslims are drone bombed, or starving, or gassed or
leaders are thinking of another bombing campaign against Muslims or increased
surveillance and more anti-terror (anti-Muslim) laws?
The Fallacy of Freedom of Speech
The starting point in any discussion should not be Freedom
of Speech is a Universal Right and that we should debate its limits (where we
draw the ‘red lines’) – this is the Ideological Liberal / Secular position of
modern Western political thought. No – the starting point should be basic human
civility and respect for each other (not to insult others through whatever
depravity they have) and the onus should be on the Freedom of Speech fundamentalists
to explain why there is a need to insult.
Freedom of Speech is a completely flawed theory both in
theory and how it is applied. It has NEVER EVER been implemented and can never
be. Freedom of Speech always has limits and is in itself a self-contradiction:
In a Kingdom the monarch (King) is the source of Laws – the
domain of the King. Freedom means that the source of Law is ‘being free’ –
which means no laws. Hence the contradiction. You cannot have freedom! You can
be free of things like slavery, debt etc but can never have freedom. It is a
false slogan. Islam recognised this when the Prophet* stated that ‘This world
is like a prison to the believers and like a paradise to the unbelievers’ and
that Muslims are slaves to Allah and His Law.
Even the countries that falsely claim to have Freedom of
Speech do not have it because there are laws that limit ‘Free Speech’ such as:
- defamation laws
- libel laws
- sedition laws
- public order laws
- holocaust denial laws
- the case of the British Muslim blogger who wrote something
negative about British soldiers on
Facebook and was sent to jail
- the Australian Muslim who wrote letters to families of
Australian soldiers was sent to jail
- the new laws proposed by the UK government monitoring the
way Muslims think (thought police) by making it an obligation on nursery
teachers, schools, universities, nurses and police to report Muslim ideas as
being ‘radical’
Selective Outrage
Where was the Freedom of Speech outrage to Western
civilisation when the above things happened? Or when Professors critical of
Israel were sacked or denied jobs? Or the open ability to criticise Israel or
the recent Gaza bombing? Or the use of illegal weapons by America in Falluja?
Or the outrage as 10,000 children die each day through poverty and effects of
war?
To speak freely or to insult freely
Can we all use the N-word, or shout ‘Fire’ in a crowded
place, or can we teach our children to insult parents and teachers. If we teach
children not to insult as basic human dignity why should we say it’s okay to
insult other ‘just because you can’? It is right to account people but not to
insult.
Modern secular liberal philosophy is implemented through its
military and forced upon people and those that disagree are NOT TOLERATED!!
Muslims are resisting because we hold on to the Qur’an and Sunnah and love our
Prophet and do not like to accept military dictators etc!
Islam has always allowed critique and criticism if done with
respect. However, pure insults are not tolerated easily. Insults are the last
bastion of those that have lost the argument who resort to insult rather than
dialogue. This happened with many of the Prophets and with the Quraish
targeting our Prophet*. The Prophet dealt with these insults and they are even
recorded in the Qur’an! People who insult have no intention to engage but
merely project their own insecurities to others and only offer hate and
divisiveness.
All beliefs have ‘Red Lines’ and we should not accept being
insulted nor racist insults against our Prophet*. The reaction is not to rise
up and kill people. We can demonstrate – but what is the sense in people dying
in demonstrations – where the Prophet* said the life of a Believer is worth
more than the Kaaba? Our response should be proportionate and legal – according
to Islam (Qur’an and Sunnah).
The sense of ‘holy’ has now shifted from the Divine to
secular gods like Freedom of Speech! Think about it!!
Freedom of Speech is an empty slogan not a universal basic
right and we should base human interaction on civility / kindness and elevate
our values. The best way to move forward is to implement Islam completely in
how we live and how society is governed. Rather than shying away from society
it is more important now to interact more positively with society and correct
the injustices – through dialogue and interaction.
