Archive
Television and how it enslaved us…..
Television has spread like a wild fire in the world, including the Muslim world
It seems to have overcome the limitations of space and time.
Consider in a place like Makkah, one can find the imprints of Hollywood only a few yards away from the Haram, the most sacred of all sanctuaries of Islam. Video-cassettes are easily available at stores. A hotel attendant, at a walking distance from the Haram al-Sharif in Makkah can be found busy watching English movies on the television in his office even as the prayers are going on. At the Jeddah airport, the Umrah pilgrims can watch a European beauty contest courtesy of an Egyptian TV channel being broadcast to the airport television sets.
Consider this. Ramadan is the most sacred month in the Islamic calendar, a period of time that is to be devoted to direct acts of worship of Allah. Yet, during Ramadan, believers around the world can be found glued to their television sets when they should be busy making dua, doing dhikr and tilawa or offering mustahab prayers.
Or consider the time of suffering. Hardly a day goes by when we do not get the news of pain and suffering from Palestine, Kashmir,Iraq, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria or a dozen other hot spots around the globe. Yet, between all the suffering and grieving that accompanies the tragedy, the dish antennas on the rooftops have been flourishing. In the past at times of catastrophes people would turn to Allah, would stop going to the cinema houses, and would repent from sins, even though temporarily. Today, there is an ever-increasing appetite for the television fun. This is also true in the lands closest to the areas of suffering. On days when a strike is called to protest Indian atrocities in Kashmir, the video stores in Karachi run out of videos of Indian movies.
Throughout the world religious, moral and social values have been drastically undermined by this great “technological gift” of the century. And entire nations seem to be helplessly “enjoying” the invasion. When people are doing nothing, they watch television. When they are doing something else, they still have television in the background. The device has contributed to the addition of a new space in the architecture of the private home: the TV lounge. It is a space where perfect strangers come to pedal nudity, immorality, and hedonism. This is the space, which increasingly controls the entire house.
It is fashionable to complain about “excessive” sex and violence on television. Even those who make money from this enterprise willingly do that. CNN tycoon Ted Turner said in July 93 before a U.S Congressional subcommittee: “I don’t need experts to tell me that the amount of violence on television today and its increasingly graphic portrayal can be harmful to children. Television violence is the single most significant factor contributing to violence in America.” And a poll released in February 95 in the U.S. by Children Now, whose directors include TV producers and Warner Brothers Chairman, reported that most children believe that what they see on television encourages fornication, disrespect for parents, telling lies, and aggressive behaviour.
The most significant thing here is that what the TV industry wants us to discuss (and we willingly follow) is what is ON television, not television itself. Everyone will wholeheartedly agree with the problems with TV programs and offer all kinds of advice. (Watch the programs with your children. Tell them what is wrong. Be critical. Be creative.) Irrational and meaningless as it is, this exercise will nonetheless soothe your irritation. In the meantime, keep on watching. It is fun. It is also unavoidable.
In about three decades, this “wonderful” technical development has played havoc with societies around the globe. But what is even more unprecedented is the ambivalence with which these societies face this greatest of all invasions. Underlying this is a strongly held belief that television is a neutral tool that can be used with equal facility for good or evil. Unfortunately, this position has been taken without any critical examination of the facts. It is about time that we approached the subject with an open mind.
Tomorrow we all will have to answer this question to our Creator – Allah swt: “How did you spend your time on this earth?” Will watching TV be a good excuse?
Apne Maa Baap Ka Tou Dil Na Dukha
|
Click here to Reply or Forward
|
Details
The First Step in Refinement… By Imam Khomeini
Why Hazrat Zahra (s.a.) demanded Fadak from the government
Hazrat Fatemah Zahra (s.a.) (the chief of all women in Paradise) was least interested in worldly possessions. She being a lady of exalted disposition, enjoyed great spiritual status and this was well-acknowledged by the Islamic world. She had all along remained aloof from the world and was wary of its trappings and deceit. However, after the Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise, she agitated against the government to assert her claim over Fadak.
What brought about this change in her outlook to worldly possessions after snubbing them all her life? Why after recognizing the world for what it is ��” more worthless than a goat’s sneeze or the bone of a pig in the hand of a leper or lighter than the wing of a fly, did she embark on a prolonged struggle with the government over a piece of property?
What factors made her bear untold hardships, affliction and troubles in her crusade against the government? Were a small piece of land and a few date trees worth so much trouble? After all, she was fully aware that all her efforts would eventually be in vain and the government would not return the land to her. It is natural for conscious readers to raise such questions regarding Hazrat Fatemah Zahra’s (s.a.) anguished demand for Fadak.
The questions are not complex for students of Islamic history, particularly for those who have closely studied the events in the immediate aftermath of the Holy Prophet’s (s.a.w.a.) demise. A cursory analysis of these events will provide the readers the answers they are seeking.
The first and primary reason was that Fadak was usurped to deprive Hazrat Fatemah Zahra (s.a.) of her lawful property and thus financially weaken the progeny of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.a.). Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) was already facing opposition in his claim for caliphate; by withholding the property of Fadak, an attack was being inflicted by the government to weaken him economically. It was anticipated by the government that the people would see Ameerul Momineen (a.s.) as financially weak and would disregard his claim to caliphate. In the process, they wanted to dent his social and religious status. This was the very tactic adopted by the hypocrites with regards to the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) in the early era of Islam, who had imposed economic sanctions against all the companions and helpers of the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.), thereby aiming to weaken him (s.a.w.a.) and his mission.
The second reason was that the income of Fadak was substantial. According to IbnAbil Hadeed al-Mutazali, the number of date trees in Fadak was equal to the total number of date trees in Kufa. Allama Majlisi (r.a.) quotes from ‘Kashf al-Muhajja’, the annual income of Fadak was 24,000 dinars. Another tradition says that the income was 70,000 dinars. Disparity in the amounts could be a result of fluctuation in the computation of income over the years. Obviously, such a significant amount did not escape the government’s attention, especially since the Hashimites were the beneficiaries.
The third reason was that the demand of Fadak had a direct bearing on the demand of her illustrious husband, Ali Ibn Abi Taalib (a.s.) for caliphate. To substantiate this point, it is worthwhile to delve on an incident involving the renowned scholar Ibn Abil Hadeed al-Mutazali. The latter was studying at Madrasah al-Arabiyyah in Baghdad, when he once asked the teacher Ali b. al-Faraqi whether Fatemah (s.a.) was truthful.
The teacher answered, ‘Of course.’
‘Then why did Abu Bakr, who knew she (a.s.) was truthful, not return Fadak to her?’ shot back the zealous student.
The teacher smiled and responded: ‘If Abu Bakr had conceded Fadak to Fatemah (s.a.) based on her pleas, she would have claimed that caliphate is the right of my husband which Abu Bakr had usurped. Under the circumstances, Abu Bakr would not have any excuse for denying Ali his right to caliphate (since he had already conceded Fatemah’s (s.a.) claim on Fadak). Consequently, he would be bound to accept every argument advanced by her after making this concession.
The fourth reason was that right, if not given, should always be demanded. So, the one whose right is usurped, is bound to claim his right and struggle for it, since the right is his whether or not he needs it or is attached to it. The right to claim a usurped property is not related to one’s piety or indifference to the world. One can be pious and aloof from worldly possessions and still claim his usurped right vociferously.
The fifth reason is that a man, however aloof he may have remained from worldly possessions, is duty-bound to spend money on religious obligations (like joining relations – Sila-e-Rahm) and other duties enjoined by Allah the Almighty. Finance is required to perform these obligations and duties, and if that money is usurped by someone, he must attempt to recover the same so as to perform his religious duties. Does history not confirm that the Holy Prophet (s.a.w.a.) was the most pious and God-fearing of all Muslims? Even then, to further the cause of Islam, he needed the property and wealth of Hazrat Khadijah (s.a.).
The sixth reason is that reason demands that one should struggle to assert his usurped right. This can give rise to one of two scenarios:
a) If his struggle bears fruit, he will get what he wanted. Thus, his objective would be achieved in his struggle.
b) If he fails in his endeavor and cannot reclaim his right, the usurper would stand fully exposed before all those who are aware of the truth. Every time the people see the oppressed man, they will be reminded of the usurper regardless of his good qualities and ethics. In fact, the people will come to realize that these qualities are a façade under which the usurper oppresses and cheats people.
The seventh reason was to invite the attention of the masses towards their oppressed state. Imposters and frauds use money and influence to win the heart of the masses. But the noblemen win over masses with their sincerity and ethics. When oppressed, such people use wisdom and exhortation to prove their point so that the people can clearly differentiate between the oppressor and the oppressed one and support the latter in his struggle against the former.
Thus, keeping in view the abovementioned factors, there was merit in Hazrat Fatemah Zahra’s (s.a.) crusade against the government that made her address the Muslims in Masjid al-Nabavi, the Mosque of her beloved father (s.a.w.a.) in a bid to establish her right.
She (s.a.) did not go to the house of the first caliph for discussions. Instead, she selected a place which was the centre for discussion and the meeting point of Muslims. She (s.a.) also selected the best time to go to the mosque. At that time, the mosque was filled to capacity by the Muhajireen, the Ansaar and people of various social strata. Moreover, she did not go to the mosque alone; rather she was accompanied by a group of ladies, who surrounded her.
Before her arrival in the mosque, a curtain was suspended at a pre-determined place so that she might address the audience from behind it
These arrangements were made so that she could present her arguments without compromising on etiquette. After all, she was the daughter of the Messenger of Allah (s.a.w.a.) who had claimed, ‘I am the most learned and cultured man in the whole of Arabia.’ She was a role-model for all Muslim women till the Day of Judgment as her father (s.a.w.a.) had declared, ‘An angel informed me and gave me glad tidings that my daughter, Fatemah is the chief of all women of my nation…’
(Al-Khasaaes by Imam Nisaai p. 34)
Fatima [‘a] The Gracious ……….Chapter 51….. The House of Grief
by Abu Muhammad Ordoni
The House of Grief
When political opposition fails, silent protest starts. This kind of protest can be more effective than the first, because in addition to having the benefits of offending and disapproving of the opponent’s acts, it also gives the person the chance of keeping calm and tranquil.
Lady Fatima Zahra (A) acted in such a manner when she realized that with the weaknesses, which afflicted her, she could not prevail. So she took refuge in a house in Baqi’ near the tombs of martyrs, to cry for her father and complain to him about that which grieved her. Fatima (A) used to visit the great tomb of her father and take handful of the dirt from his grave and smell it then begin weeping. Fatima (A)would then return to her home and cry day and night. The elderly men of Medina came to Imam Ali (A) complaining and said:
‘Abu Al-Hassan! Fatima cries day and night so none of us can sleep comfortably. Hence, we demand you to ask her to either cry during the day or the night.”
Imam Ali (A) replied: “Most gladly”
He then proceeded towards Fatima who was crying; when she saw him approaching, she stopped and Imam Ali (A) said:
“Daughter of Allah’s Messenger, the elderly men of Medina have asked me to ask you to either cry during the day or the night.”
Fatima answered:
“Abu Al-Hassan, how short will my stay among them be? And soon I will depart from them. Therefore, by Allah, I join my father-Allah ‘s Messenger (S).”
When Imam Ali (A) saw her insistence, he built a house for her behind Baqi’ which later became known as “The house of griefs.” Thereafter, with every sunrise, Fatima (A) would take Al-Hassan and Al-Hussain to that house and cry until sunset, when Imam Ali (A) would come and bring them back home.
Once, Lady Fatima Zahra (A) longed for the sound of Adhan-the call for prayer-which was performed by Bilal. But Bilal had taken an oath to never perform it again after the Prophet’s death; nevertheless, in respect to Fatima’s request, he decided to do so. Yet, as soon as Bilal said: ‘Allahu Akbar,” Fatima (A) remembered the era of her great father (S) and started weeping, so that when Bilal said:
“I bear witness that Muhammad is His worshipper and Messenger,” Fatima took a deep breath and fell unconscious. When Fatima (A) fell, the people requested Bilal to stop Adhan, because they believed that Fatima had died.
Now that the voice of rejection seized to reveal that which was in Fatima’s heart, the language of tears spoke out for her; and as it is correctly said: “The language of tears, is more painful to the heart and sadder to the eyes”!!
Provoking Thoughts 