The 'karma' argument in relation to the Arab revolt, while also being theologically and spiritually absurd, is also historically illiterate, which makes it an order of magnitude more horrendous.
The man went ahead and made that assertion in such a blasé manner without stopping to think of how the region where the main Arab rebels were situated is now a fairly prosperous region, though ruled by tyrannical autocrats, while it was Syria and Palestine that remained the loyal parts of Arabia, and now suffer the most under oppressors that put Fir`awn and Jalut to shame.
Jazak Allah khayr for this 'Abd al-Barr. Do you have any good works that cover this period and detail what you're mentioning? I have heard similar but was not able to find any good treatments of the topic during my research.
Wa iyyakum. What I'm mentioning is uncontroversial and part of conventional history. The Sharif's revolt in the Hijaz weakened the Ottomans, and then Syria and Palestine was wrested forcefully from the Ottomans.
In fact, initially, the revolt held sway only in Makkah, where he obviously already held power, and then with foreign backing, it was extended to the rest of Hijaz, and the rest of Arabia. Indeed, it seemed the Sharif was backed more by the Bedouin and the Druze than Arab city folk, and this was driven by Lawrence's diplomacy.
Maybe James Barr's A Line in the Sand might be good to read. I've not read it entirely myself, but I've read bits. Mostly I was referring to conventional history which AHM strangely enough seemed entirely unaware of.
JazākAllahu Khayran for such an amazing article; just one point, what did you exactly mean by: “Meanwhile, it is allegedly part of the ‘aqida (i.e., creed) of the Muslim to obey his rulers whether he likes it or not.” From what I understand you are referring to those who claim you should accept everything the “ruler” does unconditionally including normalisation with Israel (نعوذ بالله من الضلالة)?
Yes, that is precisely what I meant --- not only including normalization with Israel, but promoting and spreading fasad and fahisha, etc. Basically, one is not allowed to utter a word of disapproval according to these folks lest he be accused of disobedience, or, worse yet kharijism. Allahu Alam.
The 'karma' argument in relation to the Arab revolt, while also being theologically and spiritually absurd, is also historically illiterate, which makes it an order of magnitude more horrendous.
The man went ahead and made that assertion in such a blasé manner without stopping to think of how the region where the main Arab rebels were situated is now a fairly prosperous region, though ruled by tyrannical autocrats, while it was Syria and Palestine that remained the loyal parts of Arabia, and now suffer the most under oppressors that put Fir`awn and Jalut to shame.
Jazak Allah khayr for this 'Abd al-Barr. Do you have any good works that cover this period and detail what you're mentioning? I have heard similar but was not able to find any good treatments of the topic during my research.
Wa iyyakum. What I'm mentioning is uncontroversial and part of conventional history. The Sharif's revolt in the Hijaz weakened the Ottomans, and then Syria and Palestine was wrested forcefully from the Ottomans.
In fact, initially, the revolt held sway only in Makkah, where he obviously already held power, and then with foreign backing, it was extended to the rest of Hijaz, and the rest of Arabia. Indeed, it seemed the Sharif was backed more by the Bedouin and the Druze than Arab city folk, and this was driven by Lawrence's diplomacy.
Maybe James Barr's A Line in the Sand might be good to read. I've not read it entirely myself, but I've read bits. Mostly I was referring to conventional history which AHM strangely enough seemed entirely unaware of.
JazākAllahu Khayran for such an amazing article; just one point, what did you exactly mean by: “Meanwhile, it is allegedly part of the ‘aqida (i.e., creed) of the Muslim to obey his rulers whether he likes it or not.” From what I understand you are referring to those who claim you should accept everything the “ruler” does unconditionally including normalisation with Israel (نعوذ بالله من الضلالة)?
Yes, that is precisely what I meant --- not only including normalization with Israel, but promoting and spreading fasad and fahisha, etc. Basically, one is not allowed to utter a word of disapproval according to these folks lest he be accused of disobedience, or, worse yet kharijism. Allahu Alam.