By Ashley Mcguire

Altmuslimah, 25 April 2012

She’s been called the “Ice Princess in the Hijab.” And I think she rocks. Zahra Lari is a 17-year-old Olympic figure-skating hopeful from the United Arab Emirates. And you can’t miss her because she wears a black hijab instead of sparkly hair clips and nylon pants instead of the characteristic shiny nude tights. I love seeing a Muslim woman as a competitive athlete. I just love it. I was crushed when the Iranian women’s soccer team was disqualified from the Olympics because of their headscarves.

I thought it was misogynistic to tell those women, already living under a regime that is restrictive to women, that their dream was off-limits simply because they were lawful Iranian women covering their heads. The images of those strong women, humiliated and crying on the field, was devastating.
As a non-Muslim, I have my own mixed views about the hjiab. I don’t understand why a woman would have to cover her hair to be modest. But I have also seen and met Muslim women who embrace the headscarf or the hijab who have a twinkle in their eyes and a freedom in their spirit that must come from shielding oneself from our grasping, hyper-sexualized world.
And I know non-Catholics might look at my faith’s teaching against artificial contraception, for example, as backwards and oppressive, as many rush to label the hijab. But I am grateful and appreciative towards those who try to understand, or at least recognize that I find freedom and dignity in the choice to obey that teaching.
As women of faith, we owe each other understanding and support in our choices that may defy the culture’s terms for our empowerment. It is our right to follow our consciences and make religious choices. And whether the state tries to take that right away through the law, or whether society tries to shame us away from our rights, women of faith should be allies in defending one another’s right to religious choice.
Zahra Lari could have run away from her family and defied the hijab. She probably would have become some feminist hero for doing so. But I think she is a feminist hero nonetheless. She became the first woman in the world to compete in international figure skating in a hijab. In my book, that is more noteworthy than being the first woman to land a quadruple axel. Because that takes a kind of courage that stirs only the deepest part of the soul. She made a choice that would no doubt engender scrutiny from the ultra-conservative religious community that doesn’t want to see a woman dancing on skates and from the liberal pundits who don’t like seeing women in a Muslim headcovering.
Guts, my friends. Guts.
Speaking of her ambition, Lari recently said, “In my country women don’t do much sport and even less figure skating. . . . I want to encourage girls from the Emirates and the Gulf to achieve their dream too and not to let anyone tell them not to do sport, not only figure skating but all sports.” And defending her hijab, she said, “I skate with the hijab, my costume is in line with Islamic tradition.”
Her defense was refreshingly simple and straightforward, almost as if to say, “I don’t really owe you an explanation.”
Zahra Lari exemplifies to the world that you can be a practicing Muslim woman who is competitive, ambitious, and bold. That is a good example for all women of faith, particularly in a world that increasingly views religion as incompatible with female strength and empowerment.
Lari brought to mind the 1980s classic movie, Chariots of Fire. The film centers around two athletes: Eric Liddell, a Scottish Christian who runs for the express purpose of glorifying God, and Harold Abrahams, an English Jew who runs to overcome anti-Semitism. Both men refuse to compromise their faith for the sport, and they are better athletes because of it.
Whether she intended it or not, Zahra Lari has brought Chariots of Fire to the rink. But she is a woman in a part of the world where women are still barred from many opportunities. And a Muslim in a time when anti-Muslim sentiment runs strong. She has brought Chariots of Fire to a whole new level.

So rock on, Ms. Lari.
Ashley McGuire is the Founder and Editor-in-Chief of AltMuslimah’s sister site, AltCatholicah.com.

(Photo Credit: gulfnews.com)

http://www.altmuslimah.com/a/b/spa/4618/

by Muslema Purmul www.SuhaibWeb.com

1. “Say, ‘O My servants who have transgressed against themselves [by sinning], do not despair of the mercy of Allah. Indeed, Allah forgives all sins. Indeed, it is He who is the Forgiving, the Merciful.’” (Qur’an 39:53)

2. “Except those who repent and correct themselves and make evident [what they concealed]. Those – I will accept their repentance, and I am the Accepting of repentance, the Merciful.” (Qur’an 2:160)

3. “But whoever repents after his wrongdoing and reforms, indeed, Allah will turn to him in forgiveness. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 5:39)

4. “[...] Then He turned to them so they could repent. Indeed, Allah is the Accepting of repentance, the Merciful.” (Qur’an 9:118)

5. “[O Muhammad], inform My servants that it is I who am the Forgiving, the Merciful.” (Qur’an 15:49)

6. “And [there are] others who have acknowledged their sins. They had mixed a righteous deed with another that was bad. Perhaps Allah will turn to them in forgiveness. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 9:102)

7. “Those who avoid the major sins and immoralities, only [committing] slight ones. Indeed, your Lord is vast in forgiveness. [...]” (Qur’an 53:32)

8. “[...] indeed He is ever, to the often returning [to Him], Forgiving.” (Qur’an 17:25)

9. “And whoever does a wrong or wrongs himself but then seeks forgiveness of Allah will find Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 4:110)

10. “[...] And seek forgiveness of Allah. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 73:20)

11. “[...] Indeed, no one despairs of relief from Allah except the disbelieving people.” (Qur’an 12:87)

12. “And when My servants ask you, [O Muhammad], concerning Me – indeed I am near. I respond to the invocation of the supplicant when he calls upon Me. [...]” (Qur’an 2:186)

13. “O you who have believed, repent to Allah with sincere repentance. Perhaps your Lord will remove from you your misdeeds and admit you into gardens beneath which rivers flow [on] the Day when Allah will not disgrace the Prophet and those who believed with him. Their light will proceed before them and on their right; they will say, “Our Lord, perfect for us our light and forgive us. Indeed, You are over all things competent.” (Qur’an 66:8)

14. “And those who, when they commit an immorality or wrong themselves [by transgression], remember Allah and seek forgiveness for their sins – and who can forgive sins except Allah? [...]” (Quran 3:135)

15. “[...] Indeed, good deeds do away with misdeeds. That is a reminder for those who remember.” (Qur’an 11:114)

16. “Except for those who repent, believe and do righteous work. For them Allah will replace their evil deeds with good. And ever is Allah Forgiving and Merciful.” (Qur’an 25:70)

17. “And it is He who accepts repentance from his servants and pardons misdeeds, and He knows what you do.” (Qur’an 42:25)

18. On the authority of Anas radi allahu `anhu (may Allah be please with him), who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah   say: “Allah the Almighty has said: ‘O son of Adam, so long as you call upon Me, and hope in Me, I shall forgive you for what you have done, and I shall not mind. O son of Adam, were your sins to reach the clouds in the sky and were you then to ask forgiveness of Me, I shall forgive you. O son of Adam, were you to come to Me with an earthful of sins and were you then to face Me, without having associated anything with Me, I shall grant you an earthful of pardon.’” (Tirmidhi)

19. On the authority of Abu Hurayrah  the Prophet   said, from among the things he reports from his Lord (swt), is that He said: “A servant [of Allah's] committed a sin and said: ‘O Allah, forgive me my sin.’ And He (glorified and exalted be He) said: ‘My servant has committed a sin and has known that he has a Lord who forgives sins and punishes for them.’ Then he sinned again and said: ‘O Lord, forgive me my sin.’ And He (glorified and exalted be He) said: ‘My servant has committed a sin and has known that he has a Lord who forgives sins and punishes for them.’ Then he sinned again and said: ‘O Lord, forgive me my sin.’ And He (glorified and exalted be He) said: ‘My servant has committed a sin and has known that he has a Lord who forgives sins and punishes for sins. Do what you wish, for I have forgiven you.’” (Bukhari and Muslim)

20. On the authority of Ibn Abbas  the Messenger of Allah   said among the sayings he relates from his Lord is: “Allah has written down the good deeds and the bad ones.” Then he explained it [by saying that]: “He who has intended a good deed and has not done it, Allah writes it down with Himself as a full good deed, but if he has intended it and has done it, Allah writes it down with Himself as from ten good deeds to seven hundred times, or many times over. But if he has intended a bad deed and has not done it, Allah writes it down with Himself as a full good deed, but if he has intended it and has done it, Allah writes it down as one bad deed.” (Bukhari and Muslim)

21. Abdullah ibn Omar  says that the Prophet   said: “Allah accepts the repentance of His servant as long as he does not croak (on his deathbed).” (Tirmidhi)

22. Anas ibn Malik  says that the Prophet   said: “When a servant of Allah returns to Him and repents, Allah is happier than a traveler who loses his mount which has all his belongings and provisions on it and then resorts to the shade of tree after losing all hope only to wake up and find his mount staring in his face, and then out of joy and happiness erroneously says: ‘Allah You are my servant and I your Lord.” (Bukhari, Muslim)

23. Narrated Abu Huraira : I heard Allah’s Messenger   saying, “The good deeds of any person will not make him enter Paradise.” They (the Prophet’s companions) said, ‘Not even you, O Allah’s Apostle?’ He said, “Not even myself, unless Allah bestows His favor and Mercy on me.” So be moderate in your religious deeds and do the deeds that are within your ability: and none of you should wish for death, for if he is a good doer, he may increase his good deeds, and if he is an evil doer, he may repent to Allah.” (Bukhari)

24. The Prophet  said,”Every son of Adam makes mistakes, and the best of those who make mistakes are those who repent.” (At-Tirmidhi)

25. He  also said: “I swear by Him in whose hand is my soul, if you were a people who did not commit sin, Allah would take you away and replace you with a people who would sin and then seek Allah’s forgiveness so He could forgive them.” (Muslim)

26. On the authority of Ibn Abbas  that the Messenger of Allah   said: “Allah has pardoned for me my people for [their] mistakes and [their] forgetfulness and for what they have done under duress.” (ibn Majah, Baihaqi and others)

27. The Prophet  said to Mu’adh bin Jabal  , “Shall I not show you the gates of goodness? Fasting is a shield, charity extinguishes sin as water extinguishes fire; and the praying of a man in the depth of night.” Then he recited: “Who forsake their beds to cry unto their Lord in fear and hope, and spend of that We have bestowed on them. No soul knoweth what is kept hid for them of joy, as a reward for what they used to do.” (Qur’an 32:16-17) (Tirmidhi)

28. Ali  said, “The sin which makes you sad and repentant is more liked by Allah than the good deed which turns you arrogant.”

29. A man asked Abdullah ibn Masood  about repenting from a sin which he wanted to commit but did not commit it. Abdullah   turned away from the man and then turned towards him with his eyes weeping and said: “Paradise has eight entrances, all of which open and shut except the entrance of tawbah. This entrance has an angel guarding it so that it does not shut. So repent and do not despair.”

30. Saeed ibn Musayib  said, “Allah will change the bad deeds of those who repent and convert them into good deeds (on the Scales) on the Day of Judgment. Repentance is itself a good deed. So the sinner changes his sins into good deeds.” (Madarij al-Salikeen)

1. Anas ibn Malik   reports: “The Prophet   came one day into the mosque and found a rope stretched between two pillars. He asked what the rope was for. He was told that it was put up for Zainab, so that she would hold on to it during her prayer when she felt too tired. The Prophet said: ‘No. Take it off. Let everyone pray when they feel fresh and comfortable. When they feel tired, they should sit down.’” (Bukhari)

2. Narrated `A’isha : The Prophet   used to say, “Do those deeds which you can do easily, as Allah will not get tired (of giving rewards) till you get bored and tired (of performing religious deeds).” The most beloved prayer to the Prophet was the one that was done regularly even if it were little. And whenever the Prophet offered a prayer he used to offer it regularly. (Bukhari)

3. Narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr: Allah’s Messenger  was informed that I had taken an oath to fast daily and to pray all through the night throughout my life. I replied, “Let my parents be sacrificed for you! I said so.” The Prophet   said, “You cannot do that. So, fast for few days and give it up for few days, pray and sleep. Fast three days a month as the reward of good deeds is multiplied ten times and that will be equal to one year of fasting.” I replied, “I can do better than that.” The Prophet   said to me, “Fast one day and give up fasting for a day and that is the fasting of Prophet David and that is the best fasting.” I said, “I have the power to fast better (more) than that.” The Prophet   said, “There is no better fasting than that.” (Bukhari)

4. Narrated Mujahid from ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr: The Prophet  said, “Fast three days a month.” ‘Abdullah said, “I am able to fast more than that.” They kept on arguing on this matter till the Prophet said, “Fast on alternate days, and recite the whole Qur’an once a month.” ‘Abdullah said, “I can recite more,” and the argument went on till the Prophet  said, “Recite the Qur’an once each three days.” (Bukhari)

5. The Prophet  said, “Make matters easy and do not make them difficult, give glad tidings and do not make people averse.” (Bukhari and Muslim)

Ahmad Deedat is a name which suddenly brings to mind the picture of a smiling white-bearded man fluently speaking in English about Islam. We find him debating with Jimmy Swaggart in the US, or challenging Palestinian American missionary, Anis Shorosh in UK or lecturing in Canada, Sweden, Denmark, Australia or visiting Maldives, Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. He was a man of mission. He dedicated his life for the defense of Islam. Though he did not graduate from any university, the prestigious Faisal Award was conferred upon him in recognition of his great services to Islam. His first public lecture to fifteen people was delivered in 1942 at Durban entitled “Muhammad: The Messenger of Peace.” Later he delivered hundreds of lectures around the globe and published thousands of his books and videos which are distributed for free in the East and the West. Several thousands of people have entered the fold of Islam through his efforts. He was born in a poor family in Surat, India. His father, who was a tailor, migrated to South Africa after his birth. He could see his father only at the age of 9 when he went to Natal. He joined the school, established his worth but could not continue after sixth standard because of financial handicap. He started a private job at the age of 16. In 1936 he was working on a Muslim-owned store near a Christian seminary. The young missionary trainees, taking him a Muslim, hurled a number of insults upon him. Whatever they were taught in the classroom against Islam or its Prophet, they bombarded it upon him. He, being a simple Muslim, was perplexed with this sudden attack. But it infused a stubborn flame of desire within the young man to counter their false allegations. He tried to search for proper books and fortunately he found a marvelous treatise named Izharul Haq (Truth Revealed) by Maulana Rahmatullah Kairanvi who already had a challenging debate with Bishop Fender on April 9, 1854 at Agra. Young Deedat began to study this book in the basement of his employer and purchased his first Bible to attest the references. The next week he was able to defend himself and counteract the trainees in a befitting manner. He got another opportunity when a new Muslim convert Fairfax began classes on Bible and on how to preach Islam to Christians. Ahmad Deedat joined the course but after few months Fairfax left the classes and surprisingly Deedat who was by that time quite competent in the subject took over the class as their tutor which he continued for three years. Now that was his most favorite subject. He began to lecture in Natal and then in nearby cities. A decade later, thousands of people were filling city halls in Johannesburg and Cape Town to hear his dissertations. Ahmad Deedat also conducted guided tours of the vast ornamental Jama Masjid Durban which was a popular tourist spot. A sophisticated program of luncheons, speeches and free handbills was created for the international tourists which was often their first contact with Islam. By 1956 his activity increased many folds and it was felt necessary to establish a separate dawa (preaching) center in the city. He was supported by two of his friends named Ghulam Husain Vanker and Taher Rasool who supported him to establish the Islamic Propagation Center International (IPCI) for publication of books and arranging classes for the ever increasing Muslim converts. The Muslim community of South Africa supported his efforts. A generous Muslim brother donated 30,000-square-meter plot where he established the Al Salaam Educational Institute at Braemar. In 1985 he started his real career as champion of global Dawah work. He rented the prestigious Royal Albert Hall in London twice to debate the world-famed Christian contemporaries in front of packed audience. As a crown of his successes he was awarded with King Faisal International Prize for the service of Islam in 1986. The main subjects of his debates were “ls the Bible True Word of God?” and “Is Jesus God?” which he discussed with Swaggart in US, Anis Shorosh in UK, Pastor Stanley Sjoberg in Stockholm Sweden and Pastor Erick Bock in Copenhagen, Denmark. These debates were recorded on video and distributed in the thousands throughout the world. He was bold enough even to invite Pope John Paul II to a public dialogue in the Vatican Square but the pope did not accept as explained in Deedat’s pamphlet “His Holiness Plays Hide and Seek With Muslims”. He was a prolific author. He wrote the following concise and impressive palm-sized books which were printed and distributed in the millions around the globe. • Is the Bible God’s Word? • What The Bible Says About Muhammad • Muhammad: The Natural Successor to Christ • Christ in Islam • Muhammad The Greatest • AI-Qur’an the Miracle of Miracles • What is His Name • What was the sign of Jonah • Resurrection or Resuscitation The collected version of his four books appeared in “The Choice: Islam or Christianity” in 1993. Later another collection of his six books was published as “The Choice Volume Two.” He also wrote a “Combat Kit” arming the young generation against the Bible thumpers. In 1996 when he was at the climax of his activity, he suffered a serious stroke and remained paralyzed and bedridden for nine years. He was unable to speak or write. Even in this situation he received dozens of letters and visitors daily to pay him respect and homage to his great contribution and he (through signaling) encouraged them to continue the noble work in future. Sheikh Ahmad Deedat breathed his last on 3rd Rajab 1426 (Aug. 8, 2005) at his home and was buried at Verulam cemetery in South Africa. His wife Hawwa Deedat expired at 85 after a year on Aug. 28, 2006. May Almighty Allah bless his soul with Jannatul Firdous for his path-breaking and excellent efforts for dawa of Islam worldwide as well as re-igniting the spirit of self-esteem and renaissance amongst millions of Muslims around the world. Though he could not speak since 1996, he could still be seen on his videos in debating halls and his voice is heard loudly inviting the masses to the truth, in the UK and US, in Sweden, in Canada and Australia. His eternal message is “Come to the light or stay in the dark, the choice is yours.”

http://arabnews.com/lifestyle/islam/article545262.ece

Allah is the Light of the heavens and the earth,

The parable of His Light is as if there were a niche,

And within it a Lamp: The Lamp enclosed in Glass;

The glass as it were a brilliant star;

Lit from a blessed Tree,

An Olive, neither of the East nor of the West,

Whose oil is well-nigh luminous, though fire scarce touched it;

Light upon Light!

Allah doth set forth parables for men: and Allah doth know all things.

Quran 24:35 Al Nur (The Light)

by Mehdi Hassan

The Guardian, Monday 2nd April, 2012

It was the Muslims wot won it. To pretend otherwise is naive if not disingenuous. George Galloway could not have triumphed in the Bradford West byelection, with the biggest swing in modern British political history, had it not been for the loud, passionate and overwhelming support of the constituency’s big Muslim population. “All praise to Allah!” the new Respect party MP gratefully proclaimed, via loudspeaker, to his supporters on Saturday.

by Sarah Walton

Laurent Levy and his daughters

By Daniel Ben Simon

Two sisters became captivated by Islam, and their French liberal, `Jewish-by-chance’ father has found himself having to face up to their religiosity and subsequent expulsion from school. The incident has provoked both private and national ferment.

Laurent Levy, a sworn liberal and a total atheist, noticed dramatic changes in his two daughters, but he did not attribute much importance to them. One day, about two years ago, the two girls stopped eating pork. “No problem,” he said. A while later, they informed him that they intended to fast during the holy Muslim month of Ramadan. Levy thought it the most natural thing in the world that his daughters were adopting.

When Levy’s daughters – Lila, 19, and Alma, 16 – told him that they were going to fast for the entire month of Ramadan, he did not stand in their way. “It is their right,” he said.

A while later the sisters informed him of their intention to pray five times a day, as commanded by the Koran. There is no reason why they shouldn’t do this, thought the father. Then they stopped going to the beach and wearing bathing suits, and even stopped using the family swimming pool during vacations. At night the two sat and learned chapters of the Koran by heart. Friends in the neighborhood and at school were amazed by the change in the two cheerful young women.

Gradually they began to wrap themselves in long clothing, even in the summer, and covered their legs with thick stockings.

About a year ago the transformation was completed. Lila and Alma donned scarves and covered their heads. After a while they also covered their chins and their foreheads. At school they stopped talking to boys, whispered only to each other and distanced themselves from the other students. They did not take part in physical education classes, as they were required to wear gym clothes that they felt revealed too much of their bodies.

Quickly the two sisters became a phenomenon. Even in Aubervilliers, the northern Paris suburb where they live, eyebrows were raised. In recent years this suburb has been taken over by Muslim immigrants from North Africa, and Parisians have moved away. On Fridays, residents started taking the day off and preferred to spend their time in prayer; many young people do not go to school. During the month of Ramadan the neighborhood is silent during the hours of fasting, and wakes up after the evening meal that breaks the fast.

According to the father, his daughters were captivated by the Muslim religion and he found himself helpless in the face of their accelerated Islamization. All his life he had loathed religious beliefs of any sort and blamed them for ignorance and various kinds of distress. He preached secularism and joined the movements of the extreme left, because he only felt at home there. In the not-too-distant past, he served as counsel in suits filed against National Front leader Jean- Marie Le Pen for having described the concentration camps as a “detail” of World War II. He has also represented Islamic organizations that sued actress Brigitte Bardot after she published an anti- Islamic book.

Head-covering debate

About a month ago the two sisters were called into the office of the principal of the Henri Wallon high school, where they studied. Their external appearance, they were informed, was causing ferment among the students, and therefore they must dress like the others; if not, they would be expelled. The girls refused. The school sent a letter to their parents and warned of the steps it was about to take. The parents, who are divorced, defended their daughters, each in his or her own way: The mother tried to moderate her daughters’ militant stubbornness, the father supported their struggle.

The two sisters were suspended from school until the convening of a disciplinary committee that was supposed to decide their fate. The media depicted the affair as a test of the state’s secularism, and the story quickly hit the headlines. The intellectual community was in an uproar, as were local political institutions; both intellectuals and politicians openly applied pressure on the school’s disciplinary committee members to reach a decision that reflected their point of view.

The debate did not remain at the theoretical level, but dealt with the smallest details of items of dress as they express the state’s secularism, compared to clothing that threatens its status. Before the girls were suspended from school, they were asked to remove their head coverings because of their religious significance. The school authorities relied on a law that was passed in 1905 concerning the separation of church and state, and argued that the head coverings violated the spirit of the law.

During the discussion of the suspension, one of the sisters argued that a Jewish skullcap covers the head. She was told that partially covering the head does not constitute a violation of the separation of church and state. “I’m angry,” fumed Lila after she was suspended from school. “They told us we have to show the roots of our hair, the lobes of our ears and our necks. But if we do that we might as well not wear a headscarf at all – we might as well carry it in our hands.”

Last Friday the disciplinary committee met at the school. Dozens of journalists crowded into the entrance to the school, and television cameras broadcast live the arrival of the girls and their father. The deliberations began at 6 P.M. and went on until after midnight. The French waited for the committee’s ruling as if the future of the French Republic depended on the decision of a few members of the school board of an obscure suburb of Paris.

At the end of the discussion, the members of the Levy family left the hall. The expressions on their faces testified to what had happened inside. “This was not a pedagogical discussion,” one of the teachers told the journalists. “It was like a court martial.” Another teacher, with a broad smile on his face, related that the correct and inevitable decision had been taken. “We decided to expel them from the school,” he said, “because the internal `balance’ in France makes it essential that a head covering not cover the hair, the ears or the base of the neck. It turns out that Muslim young women do not want to expose these parts.’

`How low France has sunk’

After midnight, the family got home. Levy was furious; the girls were still wiping away tears.

“They’ve thrown them out like dogs,” Levy told Haaretz two days later, “and this shows how low France has sunk.” According to him, he couldn’t fall asleep that night, nor could his daughters. They read verses of the Koran. “I was proud of them,” he added. “I educated my children to be rebellious and I am proud that they have followed in my footsteps.”

Laurent Levy is a strange individual. This week he was surprised to hear that the reverberations of his daughters’ struggle have reached Israel. “No wonder,” he said. “With a name like mine, in Israel they probably think that I’m a little crazy.”

Levy angrily recalled the deliberations that were held on Friday: “We entered the hall where a number of representatives of the school’s educational council were sitting. I had been summoned with my two daughters, but I was not allowed to bring witnesses. They also refused to allow my partner to enter the hall.”

With almost religious fervor, Levy defended his daughters’ right to lead a strictly religious Muslim lifestyle. He rejoiced that they had chosen a way of life that affords them happiness and argued that even though he is an atheist, he cannot help but admire their choice.

The panel listened and appeared not to be impressed by his fervor. At the end of the deliberations they authorized the expulsion of the two girls from the school on the grounds that their exceptional appearance violated the secular standing of France and the values of the Republic.

Not for a moment did he feel that his Judaism was threatened, nor did he act as a Jew. “I’m a nonreligious person,” Levy admitted. “I grew up without a religion and there was not a trace of Judaism in the education I received. My children ate pork like any other French person. There was no religious influence on my children apart from the fact that my wife’s parents told them about Islam.”

Levy, 47, was born to a Jewish family in Tunis and immigrated to France when he was young. According to him, he is a Sephardic Jew with roots in Amsterdam and Leghorn. His father was active in the Jewish community in Tunis and even wrote a book about the community. “As far as my daughters are concerned, they have never hidden their Jewishness and were even proud of their Jewish heritage.”

Levy has four children: Lila and Alma, Sami, 20, and Noura, 16. “They’re good kids,” he said humorously, “because I educated them, too, not to accept reality the way it is and to be rebellious. I am proud that I have been successful in my education. Lila and Alma have also rebelled in their own way.”

The Fifth Republic has taken a stance against their rebellion with an almost Napoleonic brutality and has given them a tough choice: either school or the head covering.

“Let there be no doubt,” added Levy, “I know that the disciplinary committee’s decision was taken at the highest levels of the country’s government. Only someone who isn’t French is unable to understand this country’s insanity when it comes to the veil. Say `head covering’ to a French person and they’re ready to embark on a civil war. I’m a leftist and definitely a secular person, but as I see it, secularism is the freedom to act on your religious beliefs without the government interfering.

“My daughters are not militants and they didn’t try to convert other girls in the school. None of the members of the disciplinary committee claimed this, but they all demanded that the girls expose parts of their bodies. These people have really become ayatollahs of secularism. Since when, I asked them, can people be forced to expose their bodies? To my regret, this was an embarrassing spectacle. None of them listened to me because the outcome was predetermined.”

In the coming days he intends to find another educational setting for his daughters, so that they will be able to take their baccalaureate exams and so that Alma will be able to complete 11th grade. “At least at university, no one will stop them from covering their heads,” he added. “There they will be able to feel like Muslims without anyone hassling them.”

Scarf or veil?

It would appear that the Muslim religion in France boils down to the matter of head covering alone, as if all the ordinances of the Koran have drained into that piece of cloth called a head covering by some, and a veil by others. The French call it a “scarf” so as to make it less symbolic.

The political establishments breathed a sigh of relief. Left and right went out of their way to praise the school’s decision to expel the two sisters. For several years now the right has been conducting a relentless fight against Muslim immigrants whose ritual observances are depicted as undermining the symbols of the Republic. Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin has recently ordered the preparation of legislation that would prohibit the wearing of head coverings on school premises. The left, which has adopted secularism as its main religion, has fought hand in hand with the right in the war against Muslim ostentation.

Socialist Party leader Francois Holland was enthusiastic about the decision: “We are living in a secular country and the veil is not permitted on school premises.” The Republican Raffarin also expressed satisfaction with the decision and his popular Interior Minister Nicola Sarkozy supported it with all his heart.

Increasing anxiety

In light of the increasing anxiety about Islam in France, the affair of the Levy sisters has demonstrated the extent to which Islam has grown more influential in their country. It is not only Islam that scares the French, but also any religion that lifts its head and threatens to blur the secular outlines of the Republic. Studies show that only one out of 20 French citizens sees himself as connected to religion, the lowest proportion in all of Europe.

The question that is being asked today is how to stop the spread of Islam. About two months ago, worrying details surfaced from a secret report written by the French internal intelligence service about French people who have converted to Islam. The information was leaked to the right-wing newspaper Le Figaro and sparked anger mixed with fear throughout the country. According to the secret report, about 50,000 French people have converted to Islam. The intelligence services described this process as “a disturbing phenomenon that is at the height of flourishing.”

Many of the new converts were considered to have been affiliated to no religion before they adopted Islam. From extreme secularists they have become religious extremists. It turns out that they also stand out in comparison to their Muslim colleagues. While the ordinary Muslims follow a moderate way of life, the new Muslims have shut themselves into mosques and have learned the entire Koran by heart. They have forced a similar lifestyle on their wives and have cut off ties with their families.

Part of this group consists of women who have converted to Islam because of marriage or social pressure. Men have converted for ideological reasons, because they came to the conclusion that there is no religion more sublime and more purifying concerning the soul than Islam. In the report, the intelligence services expressed “great concern,” as they put it, about the exploitation of the new converts by terror elements to advance their aims: It is easy to make the converts operatives as they have European passports and the ability to move among countries without restriction, without arousing suspicion. They look Western and it is easy for them to evade the suspicious looks of border police. This was the case with Pierre Robert, a French citizen who converted years ago and joined a terror organization in Morocco that was responsible for a series of terror attacks in that country last May. He has recently been given a life sentence for his part in the affair.

Not all Muslims are on the same side. More and more Muslim immigrants are speaking up against the exploitation of religion by extremists. “The whole story about the head covering is a matter that is connected to the sexual problem of Muslim men,” says Prof. Leila Babes, a sociologist of religion at Lille University, who is herself a Muslim. “The scarf drives Muslims crazy, because they see a woman’s body as an instrument for sexual lust only and therefore they force her to cover herself from head to toe to calm their sexual desires. If she is covered, she is a `good Muslim woman’ and if not, then she is licentious.”

This is why Babes and many other Muslim academics have taken a stance on the side of the government and have demanded the prohibition of Muslim head coverings on school premises.

Levy, however, supported the wearing of the head coverings on school premises even before his daughters became devout Muslims. According to him, over time he learned to appreciate the path they followed until they adopted Islam, and the strength they needed to carry this out.

“A few days ago my daughter told me that she and her sister met a pious Muslim in the street who wanted to enlist his mosque in their struggle,” he related. “They told him that it was none of his business. Had I thought that they had fallen into the clutches of Muslim proselytizers, I would have acted differently. But their mother and I know that they came to this of their own accord. However, I’m not with them all day long and I can’t swear that something else hasn’t happened.”

On one of the shelves at his law office Levy keeps a picture of his daughters, with their heads uncovered and shoulder-length hair.  Despite the fierce struggle he is conducting, he does not conceal some degree of personal distress. Recently he spoke with his daughters in order to test the limits of their flexibility and willingness to compromise. As a romantic at heart, he feels that they have been swept up as if they had fallen in love. This is why he does not reject an imposed compromise to end the affair. Meanwhile, he has been careful about not hurting them after the state has already done so.

“I am afraid they will leave everything,” Levy admits. “Both school and the family environment.”

Source: Mission Islam – Daniel Ben Simon

http://www.iviews.com/Articles/articles.asp?ref=MI1108-4799

Rabbi Allen S. Maller

Muslims and Jews do not circumcise their children for medical health reasons, although neither religion believes that circumcision is harmful to a man’s health. However, there are vociferous groups in Europe and the U.S. that attack this religious ritual under the guise of medical and moral concern, claiming that circumcision is painful (like a vaccination) and an unnecessary procedure (like plastic surgery). Yet more and more evidence is accumulating that circumcision is good for men physically as well as spiritually. According to a new U.S. study, circumcised men may have a lower risk of developing prostate cancer than those who still have their foreskin.

The World Health Organization already recommends the procedure based on research showing it lowers heterosexual men’s risk of contracting HIV, the virus that causes AIDS. In 2011 scientists also reported that wives and girlfriends of circumcised men had lower rates of infection with human papillomavirus or HPV, which in rare cases may lead to cervical and other cancers. And last week, researchers reported that African men who were circumcised were less likely to be infected with a particular herpes virus. The new study, published in the journal Cancer, jibes with those findings.

Although most U.S. men are circumcised, the procedure has become less popular over the past decade, and various groups have spoken out against it. In September 2011, the Dutch Medical Association discouraged the practice, calling it a “painful and harmful ritual.” The Dutch statement was rejected by both Jews and Muslims, who also joined together in opposing a bill in the Dutch parliament outlawing ritual slaughter of animals.

The new study compared two groups of more than 1,600 men who had answered questions about their medical history, sex life and whether or not they were circumcised. Half had prostate cancer, the others didn’t. In the group with cancer, 69 percent of the men have been circumcised, compared to 72 percent of those without cancer – suggesting a small protective effect.

But after accounting for a host of other factors, such as age, race and whether or not the men had been screened for prostate cancer, those who were circumcised  had a 15 percent lower risk of the disease. “Circumcision before first sexual intercourse is associated with a reduction in the relative risk of prostate cancer in the study population,” the study stated.

The foreskin is known to be prone to tiny tears during sex, which may help bacteria and viruses enter the bloodstream. so some viruses can trigger cancer when they are incorporated into human DNA. Another possibility is that sexually transmitted microorganisms could lead to cancer by causing chronic inflammation. One in six U.S. men will get prostate cancer during his lifetime, although only a minority of them will die from the disease.

My generation grew up at a time when colonial hang up was at its peak. Our older generation had been slaves and had a huge inferiority complex of the British. The school I went to was similar to all elite schools in Pakistan. Despite gaining independent, they were, and still are, producing replicas of public schoolboys rather than Pakistanis.

I read Shakespeare, which was fine, but no Allama Iqbal – the national poet of Pakistan. The class on Islamic studies was not taken seriously, and when I left school I was considered among the elite of the country because I could speak English and wore Western clothes.

Despite periodically shouting ‘Pakistan Zindabad’ in school functions, I considered my own culture backward and religion outdated. Among our group if any one talked about religion, prayed or kept a beard he was immediately branded a Mullah.

Because of the power of the Western media, our heroes were Western movie stars or pop stars. When I went to Oxford already burdened with this hang up, things didn’t get any easier. At Oxford, not just Islam, but all religions were considered anachronism.

Science had replaced religion and if something couldn’t be logically proved it did not exist. All supernatural stuff was confined to the movies. Philosophers like Darwin, who with his half-baked theory of evolution had supposedly disproved the creation of men and hence religion, were read and revered.

Moreover, European history reflected its awful experience with religion. The horrors committed by the Christian clergy during the Inquisition era had left a powerful impact on the Western mind.

To understand why the West is so keen on secularism, one should go to places like Cordoba in Spain and see the torture apparatus used during the Spanish Inquisition. Also the persecution of scientists as heretics by the clergy had convinced the Europeans that all religions are regressive.

However, the biggest factor that drove people like me away from religion was the selective Islam practiced by most of its preachers. In short, there was a huge difference between what they practiced and what they preached. Also, rather than explaining the philosophy behind the religion, there was an overemphasis on rituals.

I feel that humans are different to animals. While, the latter can be drilled, humans need to be intellectually convinced. That is why the Qur’an constantly appeals to reason. The worst, of course, was the exploitation of Islam for political gains by various individuals or groups.

Hence, it was a miracle I did not become an atheist. The only reason why I did not was the powerful religious influence my mother wielded on me since my childhood. It was not so much out of conviction but love for her that I stayed a Muslim.

However, my Islam was selective. I accepted only parts of the religion that suited me. Prayers were restricted to Eid days and occasionally on Fridays, when my father insisted on taking me to the mosque with him.

All in all I was smoothly moving to becoming a Pukka Brown Sahib. After all I had the right credentials in terms of school, university and, above all, acceptability in the English aristocracy, something that our brown sahibs would give their lives for. So what led me to do a ‘lota’ on the Brown Sahib culture and instead become a ‘desi’?

Well it did not just happen overnight.

Firstly, the inferiority complex that my generation had inherited gradually went as I developed into a world-class athlete. Secondly, I was in the unique position of living between two cultures. I began to see the advantages and the disadvantages of both societies.

In Western societies, institutions were strong while they were collapsing in our country. However, there was an area where we were and still are superior, and that is our family life. I began to realize that this was the Western society’s biggest loss. In trying to free itself from the oppression of the clergy, they had removed both God and religion from their lives.

While science, no matter how much it progresses, can answer a lot of questions – two questions it will never be able to answer: One, what is the purpose of our existence and two, what happens to us when we die?

It is this vacuum that I felt created the materialistic and the hedonistic culture. If this is the only life then one must make hay while the sun shines – and in order to do so one needs money. Such a culture is bound to cause psychological problems in a human being, as there was going to be an imbalance between the body and the soul.

Consequently, in the US, which has shown the greatest materialistic progress while giving its citizens numerous rights, almost 60 percent of the population consult psychiatrists. Yet, amazingly in modern psychology, there is no study of the human soul. Sweden and Switzerland, who provide the most welfare to their citizens, also have the highest suicide rates. Hence, man is not necessarily content with material well being and needs something more.

Since all morality has it roots in religion, once religion was removed, immorality has progressively grown since the 70s. Its direct impact has been on family life. In the UK, the divorce rate is 60 percent, while it is estimated that there are over 35 percent single mothers. The crime rate is rising in almost all Western societies, but the most disturbing fact is the alarming increase in racism. While science always tries to prove the inequality of man (recent survey showing the American Black to be genetically less intelligent than whites) it is only religion that preaches the equality of man.

Between 1991 and 1997, it was estimated that total immigration into Europe was around 520,000, and there were racially motivated attacks all over, especially in Britain, France and Germany. In Pakistan during the Afghan war, we had over four million refugees, and despite the people being so much poorer, there was no racial tension.

There was a sequence of events in the 80s that moved me toward God as the Qur’an says: “There are signs for people of understanding.” One of them was cricket. As I was a student of the game, the more I understood the game, the more I began to realize that what I considered to be chance was, in fact, the will of Allah. A pattern which became clearer with time. But it was not until Salman Rushdie’s “Satanic Verses” that my understanding of Islam began to develop.

People like me who were living in the Western world bore the brunt of anti-Islam prejudice that followed the Muslim reaction to the book. We were left with two choices: fight or flight. Since I felt strongly that the attacks on Islam were unfair, I decided to fight. It was then I realized that I was not equipped to do so as my knowledge of Islam was inadequate. Hence I started my research and for me a period of my greatest enlightenment. I read scholars like Ali Shariati, Muhammad Asad, Iqbal, Gai Eaton, plus of course, a study of Qur’an.

I will try to explain as concisely as is possible, what “discovering the truth” meant for me. When the believers are addressed in the Qur’an, it always says, “Those who believe and do good deeds.” In other words, a Muslim has dual function, one toward God and the other toward fellow human beings.

The greatest impact of believing in God for me, meant that I lost all fear of human beings. The Qur’an liberates man from man when it says that life and death and respect and humiliation are God’s jurisdiction, so we do not have to bow before other human beings.

Moreover, since this is a transitory world where we prepare for the eternal one, I broke out of the self-imposed prisons, such as growing old (such a curse in the Western world, as a result of which, plastic surgeons are having a field day), materialism, ego, what people say and so on. It is important to note that one does not eliminate earthly desires. But instead of being controlled by them, one controls them.

By following the second part of believing in Islam, I have become a better human being. Rather than being self-centered and living for the self, I feel that because the Almighty gave so much to me, in turn I must use that blessing to help the less privileged. This I did by following the fundamentals of Islam rather than becoming a Kalashnikov-wielding fanatic.

I have become a tolerant and a giving human being who feels compassion for the underprivileged. Instead of attributing success to myself, I know it is because of God’s will, hence I learned humility instead of arrogance.

Also, instead of the snobbish Brown Sahib attitude toward our masses, I believe in egalitarianism and strongly feel against the injustice done to the weak in our society. According to the Qur’an, “Oppression is worse than killing.” In fact only now do I understand the true meaning of Islam, if you submit to the will of Allah, you have inner peace.

Through my faith, I have discovered strength within me that I never knew existed and that has released my potential in life. I feel that in Pakistan we have selective Islam. Just believing in God and going through the rituals is not enough. One also has to be a good human being. I feel there are certain Western countries with far more Islamic traits than us in Pakistan, especially in the way they protect the rights of their citizens, or for that matter their justice system. In fact some of the finest individuals I know live there.

What I dislike about them is their double standards in the way they protect the rights of their citizens but consider citizens of other countries as being somehow inferior to them as human being, e.g. dumping toxic waste in the Third World, advertising cigarettes that are not allowed in the West and selling drugs that are banned in the West.

One of the problems facing Pakistan is the polarization of two reactionary groups. On the one side is the Westernized group that looks upon Islam through Western eyes and has inadequate knowledge about the subject. It reacts strongly to anyone trying to impose Islam in society and wants only a selective part of the religion. On the other extreme is the group that reacts to this Westernized elite and in trying to become a defender of the faith, takes up such intolerant and self-righteous attitudes that are repugnant to the spirit of Islam.

What needs to be done is to somehow start a dialogue between the two extreme. In order for this to happen, the group on whom the greatest proportion of our educational resources are spent in this country must study Islam properly.

Whether they become practicing Muslims or believe in God is entirely a personal choice. As the Qur’an tells us there is “no compulsion in religion.” However, they must arm themselves with knowledge as a weapon to fight extremism. Just by turning up their noses at extremism the problem is not going to be solved.

The Qur’an calls Muslims “the middle nation”, not of extremes. The Holy Prophet (peace be upon him) was told to simply give the message and not worry whether people converted or not, therefore, there is no question in Islam of forcing your opinions on anyone else.

Moreover, we are told to respect other religions, their places of worship and their prophets. It should be noted that no Muslim missionaries or armies ever went to Malaysia or Indonesia. The people converted to Islam due to the high principles and impeccable character of the Muslim traders. At the moment, the worst advertisements for Islam are the countries with their selective Islam, especially where religion is used to deprive people of their rights. In fact, a society that obeys fundamentals of Islam has to be a liberal one.

If Pakistan’s Westernized class starts to study Islam, not only will it be able to help society fight sectarianism and extremism, but it will also make them realize what a progressive religion Islam is. They will also be able to help the Western world by articulating Islamic concepts. Recently, Prince Charles accepted that the Western world can learn from Islam. But how can this happen if the group that is in the best position to project Islam gets its attitudes from the West and considers Islam backward? Islam is a universal religion and that is why our Prophet (peace be upon him) was called a Mercy for all mankind. (Internews)

This article appeared on < arabnews > , a leading English daily in Saudi Arabia.

Letter from Prophet Muhammad to Heraclius, King of Byzantium

The Prophet wrote to the Caesar of the Byzantine Empire, inviting him to Islam, sending a letter to him with Dihya al-Kalbi. The Prophet directed him to present the letter to the governor of Busra, who would forward it to Caesar.
When God had relieved him of the Persian armies, Caesar walked from Emesa [in central Syria] to Jerusalem, out of gratitude to God for having inured him to trial. So when the letter of the Prophet reached him, Caesar read it and said, “Look for someone from his people around here, so that I may ask about this Messenger of God.”

Now, it happened that Abu Sufyan was then in Syria with some men from the Quraish tribe who had come on business during the truce that then existed between the Prophet and the disbelievers of the Quraish.

Abu Sufyan later said, “The emissary of Caesar found us in a part of Syria, and he took me and my companions to Jerusalem. There we were brought to Caesar, who was sitting at his royal court, his crown on his head, around him the grandees of Byzantium.”

Now, Caesar said to his interpreter, “Ask them who among them is closest in kinship to this man who claims to be a prophet.”

Abu Sufyan [who was not a Muslim at the time] responded that he was nearest of them in kinship.

Caesar asked, “And what is the relationship between you and him?”

Abu Sufyan said, “He is a son of my paternal uncle.” Then Caesar said, “Bring him closer,” and had Abu Sufyan’s companions placed behind him, at his shoulders. Then he told his interpreter, “Tell his companions that I am going to question him about this man who claims to be a prophet; so if he tells a lie, immediately repudiate it as a lie.”

Later Abu Sufyan admitted that he would have lied when asked about the Prophet, if not for the fact that he would have been shamed to have others spreading reports that he was a liar. So he told the truth.

Now, Caesar asked through his interpreter, “How is the lineage of this man among you?”

Abu Sufyan replied, “He is of noble descent among us.” Caesar asked, “And has any one of your people previously said what he has said?”

Abu Sufyan said, “No.”

Caesar asked, “Had you found him a liar before he said what he has now said?”

Abu Sufyan said, “No.”

Caesar asked, “Was any among his ancestors a king?”

Abu Sufyan replied, “No.”

Caesar asked, “And do the highborn people listen to him, or the powerless among them?”

Abu Sufyan answered, “Rather the powerless.”

Caesar asked, “And are they increasing or decreasing?”

Abu Sufyan replied, “Increasing.”

Caesar asked, “And does anyone turn away discontent with his religion after having gone into it?”

Abu Sufyan said, “No.”

Caesar asked, “Is he treacherous?”

Abu Sufyan replied, “No, but we are in a truce with him now, and we fear he may betray us.” Later on, Abu Sufyan admitted that this was the closest he was able to come to putting in a bad word against Muhammad.

Caesar went on, “Then have you fought each other?”

Abu Sufyan said, “Yes.”

Caesar asked, “And how did your wars turn out?”

Abu Sufyan said, “Our contests have had alternating results; sometimes he wins over us, and other times we win over him.”

Caesar asked, “What does he enjoin upon you?”

Abu Sufyan replied, “He enjoins us to worship God alone, not associating anything with the sole divinity. And he enjoins us not to worship the fetishes of our ancestors. He also enjoins us to pray, to give charity, and to be chaste; and to fulfill promises and discharge trusts.”

When Abu Sufyan had said this, Caesar told his interpreter to say to him, “I asked you about his lineage among you, and you stated that he is of a sound lineage. And so were all prophets called forth from sound lineages of their people.

“Then I asked if anyone had said what he said before him, and you stated that none had. I would have said, if someone had said this before, that he was a man following something that had been said before him.

“And I asked you if you had found him a liar before he had said what he has said, and you stated that you had not. So I knew he would not lie about God if he did not lie about humans.

“And I asked you if any of his ancestors was a king, and you stated that none had been. I would have said, if any of his ancestors had been a king, that he was seeking the kingdom of his ancestors.

“And I asked you if the highborn people followed him, or the powerless ones; and you stated that it is the powerless. And they are the followers of the Messengers.

“And I asked you if they were increasing or decreasing, and you stated that they were increasing. And so it is with Faith, until it is complete.

“And I asked you if anyone turns away disaffected with his religion after having gone into it, and you stated that none did; and so it is with Faith, with which no one is displeased when its cheerfulness mixes into hearts.

“And I asked you if he acts treacherously, and you stated that he does not. And so it is with all Messengers; they do not act treacherously.

“And I asked you if you fight with each other, and you stated that you did, and that your fortunes in war alternated, now in his favor, now in yours. And so are all Messengers tried, and final victory will be his.

“And I asked you what he enjoins upon you, and you stated that he enjoins you to worship God, and not to associate anything with God, and not to worship the fetishes of your ancestors. And he enjoins you to pray, to give charity, to be chaste, to keep promises, and to fulfill trusts. And this is the description of a prophet.

“I knew he would appear, but I did not know he would be from among you. If what you have said is true, he will soon rule the ground beneath these two feet of mine. If I could expect to reach him, I would take it upon myself to go and meet him; and if I were with him, I would wash his feet.”

Then Caesar called for the letter of the Prophet, and it was read aloud. In it was this:

In the name of God, the Compassionate, the Merciful. From Muhammad, slave and messenger of God, to Heraclius, ruler of Byzantium. Peace upon all who follow Guidance.

Now then, I call you with the call to submission to God. Surrender to God, and you will be safe. Surrender to God, and God will give you a double reward. If you turn away, then the misdeeds of the peasants will be your fault.

And, people of the Book, come to a Word common to both of us, that we worship only God and do not associate anything with God, and that none of us takes any for lords but God. And if they turn away, then say, “Witness that we have surrendered to God.”

Excerpted from “The Wisdom of the Prophet” by Thomas Cleary.

Salahuddin Ayyubi (Saladin)

By Faysal Burhan

Saladin: A Benevolent Man Respected By Christians

A Hero Respected By Both Muslims & Christians

Both Christians and Muslims admire Saladin.

Saladin’s traits and virtues were purely a reflection of the teachings of his faith.

He defeated the Crusaders, known to Muslims as the Franks, and recaptured Jerusalem in 1187.

The experience of the Crusaders with the Muslims demonstrates that Muslims and Christians are in no civilization clash, but rather in civilization bondage.

In 1099 Jerusalem  fell to the First Crusaders.  They slaughtered its Christian, Muslim and Jewish inhabitants, after promising them safety.  In 1187  Saladin destroyed King Guy’s army at the Horns of Hettin and  recovered Jerusalem. In stark contrast to the Crusades 88 years earlier, Saladin, adhering to the teachings of Islam, did not slaughter the city’s Christian inhabitants. Saladin’s noble act won him the respect of his opponents throughout the world including Richard the Lion heart.Saladin’s generosity and sense of honor in negotiating the peace treaty that ended the Crusade won him the lasting admiration and gratitude of the Christian world.

Saladin’s Birth and Lineage

Saladin was born in Tikrite (a city on the Tigris River), Iraq in 1137, of Kurdish ancestry. The Abbasid Caliph of Baghdad, al Mustarshid, had appointed his father Ayyub, skilled in administration and diplomacy, as the governor of the town.

Childhood and Education

Saladin received his early childhood education in Baalbek and Damascus, Syria. In 1143, when Saladin was six years old, Sultan Zengi of Musel appointed his father Ayyub as the governor of Baalbek. When Zengi died in 1146, his son Nur al Din succeeded him. Nur al-Din was a respected devout leader. After few years, Nur al Din appointed Ayyub as the Head of Damascus Militia. Saladin grew up where political decisions regarding the Crusades were made. His cultural and religious education was typical of the environments surrounding Baalbek and Damascus. Like his peers, Saladin learned Arabic, poetry, the formal prayers and memorization of the Quran and the Hadith.

Saladin in Early Adulthood

In the Middle Ages the youth were given responsibilities of manhood early.  He was sent to his uncle Shirkuh in Aleppo on a career that would lead him to become one of Nur al Din’s emirs. The devout Nur al-Din soon became a mentor for the young Saladin.  He built and funded schools and hospitals. He promoted the divine values of Islam and governed in the light of the Quran.

Nur al-Din set up the Court of Appeals. Saladin regularly attended the Court of Appeals as a student.  Saladin learned to appreciate the wisdom and justice of the Islamic law. Nur al Din was the first Muslim ruler who saw the need for Muslim states to be united.  Saladin respected him tremendously and followed Nur al-Din’s example in uniting the ummah.

Saladin in His Adulthood

Saladin, who learned his military lessons in Nur al-Din’s militia at the hands of his uncle Shirkuh, soon began to stand out among Nur al-Din’s leaders. In 1164, at the age of 26 he was an assistant to his uncle Shirkuh in an expedition to rescue Egypt from an invasion by Amalric, king of Jerusalem. Saladin made a lasting impression on his peers during this expedition.

Saladin used diplomacy and the administrative skills in piecing together this badly divided region. Saladin’s scope of vision was that he gave each situation its due attention and weight, and he never broke a bridge of diplomacy or peace initiative with his opponents. The power or wealth he acquired never spoiled him. Power and position did not mean anything to him. Despite his advisor’s request to keep some of the revenues he received from Egypt and Syria, he never kept any of it. When he died, his wealth was only few dinars.

The Decisive Battle of Hettin

In return for an attack made by the Crusaders of the Kerak on Muslim pilgrims in 1187, Saladin moved his army to northern Palestine and defeated the much larger Crusader army in the decisive battle of Hettin (July 4, 1187). Three months after this battle, Saladin captured Jerusalem., Saladin did not loot, murder or seek revenge for the Muslims. He spared the lives of 100,000 Christians and allowed Christian pilgrims in Jerusalem after it’s fall. In this benevolent act, Saladin was simply emulating Prophet Muhammad when  the Prophet re-entered his birth-city of Makkah, with ten thousand people. There was no bloodshed.

Recapturing Jerusalem shocked the West, and as such it brought about the Third Crusade led by Richard the Lion heart, King of England in 1189. Saladin’s army checked the massive Frankish armies and weakened them in a war of attrition on the land of Palestine. It was during this period Richard negotiated peace with Saladin.   Third Crusade army was exhausted. It was Saladin’s generosity  in  this treaty, which ended the Crusades and established his legendery status.. .

Magnanimity and Benevolence at Work

Some of the stories  that  help the reader to understand why Saladin became a legendary figure in the Western world follow:

a- Preventing a Bloodbath

After capturing Jerusalem in October 1187, Saladin’s act in signing the peace treaty and saving Christian blood was indeed a pious act. He not only spared the lives of 100,000 Christians, but also guaranteed their safe departure along with their property and belongings. They were given forty days to prepare for departure. In this way eighty four thousand of them left the city in perfect safety. What is important to understand is that Saladin was in a  position to seek revenge for his people. However he did not , because his faith taught him  to be merciful and forgiving.

b- Foregoing ransom

Part of the condition of the surrender of Jerusalem, was that each Christian pays her or his ransom. Thousands of Christians, mainly women, were not able to pay their ransom.Al-Adel, Saladin’s brother, Geukburi, Saladin’s brother-in law and Saladin  instead paid their ransom out of their own pockets.

This act was done in spite of the fact that there were some rich Christians such as the Patriarch, Heraclius and Madame la Patriarchesse of Jerusalem.   Saladin was advised to confiscate  that  wealth to use it as ransom for the poor Christians.  He refused to go back on his word.  He allowed the wealthy Christians to depart with all their wealth intact.

c- Excellence Beyond Justice

During the forty days respite that was given to the Westerners to leave Jerusalem, several Christian women approached Saladin asking for  their missing men. They had no one to look after them.  Saladin ordered his soldiers to find their missing guardians, and/or given compensation if they were killed.

This  act is  one of the many.  Having a Muslim paying a ransom to a family of a soldier killed fighting other Muslims is excellence beyond justice

d- “Victory Is Changing the Hearts of Your Opponents by Gentleness and Kindness.”- Saladin

In September 1192, during the siege of Acre,when Richard fell sick, Saladin sent him his own physician to treat him. Along with this health care, he frequently sent him ice to cool down his fever and plum fruits that were necessary for his recovery.

e-  Pure Chivalry

During an offense made by Richard against a Muslim squadron  Richard’s horse was killed and he was down on the ground.  Saladin sent him two mounts so that he would not be at a disadvantage.

f- Returning a child

During the siege of Acre, a Christian woman came to Saladin’s camp weeping and wailing insisting that her child was snatched away by his soldiers. He himself returned the child to his mother and had them mount on the back of a mare to be returned safely to their camp.

g- Libert of faith

During the siege of Acre several soldiers were captured. Among them was an old man who was so old that he was toothless and could hardly walk. Saladin asked him  why he was there. The old man said that he wanted  to make a pilgrimage to the Church of the Resurrection in Jerusalem. Saladin provided a horse for him and had him escorted to Jerusalem to fulfill his  dream.

Conclusion

Saladin was an honorable leader. His character and charitable deeds demonstrates that Muslims were no “infidels”. The Crusaders discovered that Muslims  had  values they consider Christian.  Saladan’s chivalry became the source of many plays and used in literature.   .

Source: This is a summary of an article titled (Saladin: a Benevolent Man, Respected by both Muslims and Christians), from The Institute of Arabic and Islamic Studies web site – http://www.islamic-study.org/

Related Links:

http://www.onislam.net/english/reading-islam/research-studies/islamic-history/453955-saladin-a-benevolent-man.html

by Khaled Abou El Fadl

WHEN Imam Zuhri, a famous scholar of Sunna (Prophet Muhammad’s traditions), indicated to Qasim ibn Muhammd (a scholar of the Qur’an), a desire to seek knowledge, Qasim advised him to join the assembly of a well-known woman jurist of the day, Amara bin Al-Rahman. Imam Zuhri attended her assembly and later described her as “a boundless ocean of knowledge.” In fact, Amra instructed a number of famed scholars, such as Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Hazama, and Yahya ibn Said.

Amra was not an anomaly in Islamic history, for it abounds with famous women narrators of jurisprudence, starting with Aisha, the Prophet’s wife. A conservative count would reveal at least 2,500 extraordinary women jurists, narrators of Hadith, and poets throughout history.

That was then, but now we encounter hardly a single Islamic woman jurist. Women are all but absent from Islamic public and intellectual life. There are remarkable women activists in many Mosques and there are a few impressive writers, such as Zaynab al-Ghazali. But these are exceptions. One will rarely find a woman lecturing to a mixed audience about a gender-neutral topic such as “riba” (usury), for example. And while it is common to encounter professional Muslim women in every walk of life, it is very rare to find them on the boards of Islamic centers, or holding leadership positions.

There are several reasons for this alarming phenomenon. A particularly disturbing one is the derogatory attitude that seems to have infected many Muslim men. Very few are willing to be instructed or taught by women. Muslim men, in North America and elsewhere, seem to have developed a woman-phobia that consistently aspires to exclude women from conferences, meetings, gatherings, and even the Mosques.

May God bless Fatimah bint Qais, who tenaciously argued with Hazrat Umar and Hazrat Aisha over a legal point and refused to change her opinion. And there was Umm Yaqab, who on hearing Abdullah ibn Masud explain a legal point, then confidently told him, “I have read the entire Qur’an but have not found your explanation anywhere in it.”
The fact is, that Islam neither limits women to the private sphere, nor does it give men supremacy over the public and private life. One notices that the Greek and Roman cultures which preceded Islamic civilization did not produce a single eminent woman philosopher or jurist. Likewise, until the 1700s, Europe failed to produce a single female social, political, or legal jurist. Islam did exactly the opposite in every respect, so much so that Hazart Umar bin al-Khitatab used to entrust Shaffa bint Abdullah as an inspector over the market in Medina. Moreover, Islamic history is replete with examples of female professors who tutored famous male jurists.

Yet the sad legacy of our time is that we have taken women back to the pre-Islamic era by excluding them from public exposure or involvement. A modern scholar, Muhammad al-Ghazali, once described this phenomenon as the “ascendency of Bedouin fiqh (jurisprudence).” What he meant by this term is that in much of contemporary culture … the world revolves around men and everything is channeled to their service.

The sunna (traditions) of the Prophet reveal that he used to assist his wives in household duties. But most modern scholars have not had the probity to suggest that the practice of men lending a helping hand in the home is to be recommended or even required in certain circumstances. Most men are content to ignore this and selectively emphasize whatever in the sunna serves only their interests. It is well-known that women like Aisha, Umm Salamah, Laila bint Qasim, Asma bint Abu Bakr, Kaula bint Umm Darda, and many others, were trusted with preserving and teaching one-fourth of our religion.

Isn’t it time we again trusted women to contribute to our public and intellectual lives? May the Muslim community in North America lead the way in producing the first Muslim woman jurist in more than two centuries. It is certainly long overdue.

Scholar of the House is dedicated to providing a path to peace through education and understanding. Please join our cause!

What’s the True Romance?

In Love With All Creation

By Maryam Bachmeier

OnIslam.net, 04 January 2012

February is here, and it is time for people in the US and Canada when husbands and wives, family and friends express their deep feelings of appreciation and devotion to each other, during celebrating the Valentine Day.

It is also a special time for married couples to remember ‘romance’.

Yet, in the midst of all this celebration and good will toward one another, many have not been able to capture the connections that they long for in their life. This sometimes leads people to feel depressed, forlorn and lonely.
• Why is this so?

• What are we missing?

I propose that perhaps we are somewhat misguided on what love is, where it comes from, and how it is sustained.

Like worshiping idols, and hoping that inanimate objects can guide us toward the heavens, we have often looked to a mere human for love.

But what is Love?

Love is an Attribute of God.  The only way we can experience authentic love, is to experience the love of God.  If we put our relationship with God first, we will fall in love with all His creation.

God first, then His creations! If we follow this “formula” we will have an opportunity to experience love in all its expressions. It is the inspiration that leads us to feel love, and these feelings invite us to know the Beloved.

When one operates according to this paradigm, one can experience authentic romance.  There is a reason why the sunset on a warm breezy night captures the heart of lovers;  it gets the love struck creatures in touch with something much greater than themselves, and this is exactly what romance is.

The sensuousness we feel from the expressions of nature and the touch of a loved one increases the Oxcytocin in our brains, and it changes our mood and consciousness, so that we can be open to something Divine.

It is for us to differentiate between a lasting and authentic love, and a fleeting moment.  If we can commit to a life in submission to God, and the life of Islam, then we might be able to make the kind of commitment that will sustain a lasting devoted love.

Post-Tech Love

With this model in mind, while in the post tech-space age universe we live in,   we can ask:  what model of relationship is most likely to increase the probability of creating a stable and lasting relationship?

We have the past model of the arranged marriage.  This works well when this occurs in the context of a culture that still values certain norms.  And these actually have the best statistics for success.

But in these marriages, the spouses are young, committed to the ideals of marriage and family, and they are in a stage of life where identity formation is very active, but not complete.

These marriages survive lifetimes because the identity is formed simultaneously.

So what about marriages of older people, who have already completed some of the stages of identity formation?  The “modern” marriage that occurs later in life has become a necessity for many people in the modern world, due to the fact that one needs to make a certain amount of money, etc., before one can even dream of creating a stable marriage and have children.

So, with all this, the issues of the division of labor have developed into an argument for equality.  But this model has failed.

People date, feel the hormones, call that love, commit to each other (forgetting about God) get married, and then go to work to become financially able to start a family. Then they begin to argue when things become stressful.  They each have their own individual identities, and are determined to “grow”…seeking “support” from each other.

Yet, over half of these marriages fail.  Is it possible to gain the mindset that makes it possible for the arranged marriage to work, by using the formula of putting God first, committing to the path of marriage as a way to complete one’s deen (religion), and enter into awareness that the two identities will merge as each begins to know more about the other?

Is it possible to follow the principles of the “complimentary” model, using “roles” and “functions” as a means to support the overall institution of marriage?

Can our modern society even think of such a notion?

I propose that if we consider this “old fashioned” model, we might find our way back to the original purpose and intent of marriage, and enjoy the benefits of marriage that God wanted us to have.

The Only Love There Is

Love God first.  Let this love be your real compassion.  The Greek define three types of love: love for humanity, love for God and Romantic love, but in fact there is only one source of Love and that is Allah.

If you want to feel REAL love, then you must understand this.  No one can love another truly, without the awareness, acceptance, and expression of the love of God.  This is what the individual must embrace first, before embracing another.

It is the only love that exists, the only love that can be embraced.  Let your love of God,  the Source from which all love flows, be your passion.

If you do this, you will love your spouse.  If your spouse cannot “tune” in to this divine aspect of God, then he or she cannot truly love in the deepest way, and sadly this is the state of affairs for so many, but your happiness does not depend on this.  If you “tune in” to this genuine and eternal love, you will be sustained by it.

But what is even more remarkable is that when a man and his wife first embrace God and allow the Love of God to permeate them; each individually, they will both then truly feel genuine love for each other.

This is the beginning of the True Romance.  And in case you are worried about the sex, if you authentically follow this formula you will be so inspired, that this aspect will be just fine.

The Ties that Last

And that is why, we don’t need to use the failed model of Western dating to “fall in love” with our marriage partners and to have a successful marriage.  Why have the traditional arranged marriages worked so much better in terms of longevity compared to the modern Western marriage?

A combination of reasons, but a lot of it has to do with the fact the each partner has been pre-screened for their character.  And, if both partners are committed to a joint value system, and they both love God, then love can grow.

The journey of discovering each other and themselves as a result can be an enjoyable one.  It is the commitment to this journey and to God and the Path that develops deep love.

The more you know someone, the more you love them.  God is the source of all, we learn about God as we go on this Islamic journey. We learn about God, we learn about our spouses, we learn about our family, our children, our friends, and then we can develop the kind of love that helps people, a family, a community to survive through the ups and downs of the journey.

Instead of making a commitment to each other, make a commitment to God. Make a commitment to live according to His Guidance.  Love, the feeling is nothing, unless it is translated into action.  Love one another, that is something that you must do.  And it is an action that you must take with faith in God and with commitment to serve Him.

So, if it is that simple, what do you do when the marriage gets dull and boring? The truth is it is this simple.  Inspiration comes from Allah.  If you want romance in your life, and you have been married for 20 years, then you know enough about your spouse to know what will bring an inspiration to him or her.

You know how to create a mood and an environment that will foster “love feelings”, it is something that you consciously take action to achieve, if you have journeyed together in honesty and authenticity.

I could take this time to write about many clever ways to get the romance going here in this article, but there are so many articles and books on the “how to’” that I suggest you simply read those.  The key aspect is communication.

• Know what your spouse who is your beloved likes, sexually, physically, emotionally, mentally, and share a spiritual life together.

• Explore communication techniques and find the ones that work with both of you.

The miracle is, all this can be done without costing a penny!  Well, maybe the massage oil, and the candles will cost a few pennies, but not much, the rest is the joy of learning and the pleasure in using that knowledge which you have of each other for each other’s needs. If you love, you will express it.

For better, or worse, rich or poor, good times, and hard times, you will go hand in hand from this day forward and together into Paradise.

This can only become a reality when one first makes a genuine and authentic commitment to God, then to your spouse as an expression of that commitment.

• Don’t give up, don’t walk out.

No matter what it takes, take the time to learn your partner’s communication style, and develop a communication system that works for you both.  And above all, pray together.

Let love light the way.

All Praise be to God from Whom love flows.

Dr. Maryam Bachmeier has 11 years in the mental health field, and is currently a staff psychologist at the Napa State Hospital.

http://www.onislam.net/english/family/gender-issues/intimacy/443587-whats-the-true-romance.html

kindly sent by Adamslist

Courtesy of Adamslist

“There is none amongst the believers who plants a tree, or sows a seed, and then a bird, or a person, or an animal eats thereof, but it is regarded as having given a charitable gift [for which there is great recompense].” [Al-Bukhari, III:513].

The idea of the Prophet Mohammed as a pioneer of environmentalism will initially strike many as strange: indeed, the term “environment” and related concepts like “ecology”, “environmental awareness” and “sustainability”, are modern-day inventions, terms that were formulated in the face of the growing concerns about the contemporary state of the natural world around us.

And yet a closer reading of the hadith, the body of work that recounts significant events in the Prophet’s life, reveals that he was a staunch advocate of environmental protection. One could say he was an “environmentalist avant la lettre”, a pioneer in the domain of conservation, sustainable development and resource management, and one who constantly sought to maintain a harmonious balance between man and nature. From all accounts of his life and deeds, we read that the Prophet had a profound respect for fauna and flora, as well as an almost visceral connection to the four elements, earth, water, fire and air.

He was a strong proponent of the sustainable use and cultivation of land and water, proper treatment of animals, plants and birds, and the equal rights of users. In this context the modernity of the Prophet’s view of the environment and the concepts he introduced to his followers is particularly striking; certain passages of the hadith could easily be mistaken for discussions about contemporary environmental issues.

Three Principles

The Prophet’s environmental philosophy is first of all holistic: it assumes a fundamental link and interdependency between all natural elements and bases its teachings on the premise that if man abuses or exhausts one element, the natural world as a whole will suffer direct consequences. This belief is nowhere formulated in one concise phrase; it is rather an underlying principle that forms the foundation of all the Prophet’s actions and words, a life philosophy that defined him as a person.

The three most important principles of the Prophet’s philosophy of nature are based on the Qur’anic teachings and the concepts of tawhid (unity), khalifa(stewardship) and amana (trust).

Tawhid, the oneness of God, is a cornerstone of the Islamic faith. It recognizes the fact that there is one absolute Creator and that man is responsible to Him for all his actions: “To God belongs all that is in the heavens and in the earth, for God encompasses everything [4:126].”  The Prophet acknowledges that God’s knowledge and power covers everything. Therefore abusing one of his creations, whether it is a living being or a natural resource, is a sin. The Prophet considered all of God’s creations to be equal before God and he believed animals, but also land, forests and watercourses should have rights.

The concepts of khalifa, stewardship, and amana, trust, emerge from the principle of tawhid. The Qur’an explains that mankind holds a privileged position among God’s creations on earth: he is chosen as khalifa, “vice-regent” and carries the responsibility of caring for God’s earthly creations. Each individual is given this task and privilege in the form of God’s trust. But the Qur’an repeatedly warns believers against arrogance: they are no better than other creatures.  “No creature is there on earth nor a bird flying with its wings but they are nations like you [6:38]”; “Surely the creation of the heavens and the earth is greater than the creation of man; but most people know not [40:57]”.

The Prophet believed that the universe and the creations in it – animals, plants, water, land – were not created for mankind. Man is allowed to use the resources but he can never own them. Thus while Islam allows land ownership, it has limitations: an owner can, for example, only own land if he uses it; once he ceases to use it, he has to part with his possession.

The Prophet recognized man’s responsibility to God but always maintained humility. Thus he said: “When doomsday comes, if someone has a palm shoot in his hand, he should plant it,” suggesting that even when all hope is lost for mankind, one should sustain nature’s growth. He believed that nature remains a good in itself, even if man does not benefit from it.

Similarly, the Prophet incited believers to share the earth’s resources. He said: “Muslims share alike in three things – water, herbage and fire,” and he considered it a sin to withhold water from the thirsty. “No one can refuse surplus water without sinning against Allah and against man” [Mishkat al Masabih].

The Prophet’s attitude towards sustainable use of land, conservation of water and the treatment of animals is a further illustration of the humility of his environmental philosophy.

Sustainable Use of Land

“The earth has been created for me as a mosque and as a means of purification.” [Al-Bukhari I:331] With these words the Prophet emphasizes the sacred nature of earth or soil, not only as a pure entity but also as a purifying agent. This reverence towards soil is also demonstrated in the ritual of tayammum, or “dry wudu” which permits the use of dust in the performance of ritual purification before prayer when water is not available.

The Prophet saw earth as subservient to man, but recognised that it should not be overexploited or abused, and that it had rights, like the trees and wildlife living on it. In order to protect land, forests and wildlife, the Prophet created inviolable zones known as hima and haram, in which resources were to be left untouched. Both are still in use today: haram areas are often drawn up around wells and water sources to protect the groundwater table from over-pumping. Hima applies particularly to wildlife and forestry and usually designates an area of land where grazing and woodcutting are restricted, or where certain animal species are protected.

The Prophet not only encouraged the sustainable use of fertile lands, he also told his followers of the benefits of making unused land productive: planting a tree, sowing a seed and irrigating dry land were all regarded as charitable deeds.“Whoever brings dead land to life, that is, cultivates wasteland, for him is a reward therein.” Thus any person who irrigates a plot of “dead”, or desert land becomes its rightful owner.

Conservation of Water

In the harsh desert environment where the Prophet lived, water was synonymous to life. Water was a gift from God, the source of all life on earth as is testified in the Qur’an:  “We made from water every living thing” [21:30].  The Qur’an constantly reminds believers that they are but the guardians of God’s creation on earth and that they should never take this creation for granted: “Consider the water which you drink. Was it you that brought it down from the rain cloud or We? If We had pleased, We could make it bitter” [56:68-70].

Saving water and safeguarding its purity were two important issues for the Prophet: we have seen that his concern about the sustainable use of water led to the creation of haram zones in the vicinity of water sources. But even when water was abundant, he advocated thriftiness: thus he recommended that believers perform wudu no more than three times, even if they were near to a flowing spring or river. The theologian El-Bukhari added: “ The men of science disapprove of exaggeration and also of exceeding the number of ablutions of the Prophet.” The Prophet also warned against water pollution by forbidding urination in stagnant water.

The Treatment of Animals:

“If anyone wrongfully kills even a sparrow, let alone anything greater, he will face God’s interrogation” [Mishkat al Masabih]. These words reflect the great reverence, respect and love that the Prophet always showed towards animals. He believed that as part of God’s creation, animals should be treated with dignity, and the hadith contains a large collection of traditions, admonitions and stories about his relationship to animals. It shows that he had particular consideration for horses and camels: to him they were valiant companions during journey and battle, and he found great solace and wisdom in their presence as the following tradition reveals: “In the forehead of horses are tied up welfare and bliss until the Day of Resurrection.”

Even in the slaughter of animals, the Prophet showed great gentleness and sensitivity. While he did not practice vegetarianism, the hadiths clearly show that the Prophet was extremely sensitive to the suffering of animals, almost as though he shared their pain viscerally. Thus he recommends using sharp knives and a good method so that the animal can die a quick death with as little pain as possible. He also warned against slaughtering an animal in the presence of other animals, or letting the animal witness the sharpening of blades: to him that was equal to “slaughtering the animal twice” and he emphatically condemned such practices as “abominable”.

Conclusion

It is impossible to do justice to the full scope and significance of Prophet Mohammed’s environmental philosophy in this short article. His holistic view of nature and his understanding of man’s place within the natural world pioneered environmental awareness within the Muslim community.

Sadly, the harmony that the Prophet advocated between man and his environment has today all too often been lost. As we face the effects of pollution and overexploitation, desertification and water scarcity in some parts of the world and floods and violent storms elsewhere, it is perhaps time for the world community as a whole, Muslims, Christians and Jews, Hindus and Buddhists, atheists and agnostics, to take a leaf out of the Prophet’s book and address the current environmental crisis seriously and wisely.

http://kalkhausar.wordpress.com/2011/02/18/prophet-muhammed-a-pioneer-of-the-environment/

by Islamweb.net

From Adamslist compiled by A. I. Seedat

The heart is like a fort and Satan the advancing enemy, who is intent on infiltrating and occupying it.

Hence, only by guarding the gates, entrances and vulnerable positions, will it be impenetrable.

Yet, a person who is unacquainted with the structure of the fortress, particularly its access points, cannot adequately defend it.

By the same token, the obligation of guarding the heart from the whispers of Satan cannot be fulfilled and he cannot be warded off, unless a person knows the gates to the heart that Satan may take.

These gateways are, generally, personal characteristics, of which there are many but, here, we will only refer to the ones that are so wide so as to accommodate all the numerous soldiers of Satan:

- Anger and desire: Anger is the ghoul of the psyche; when it weakens the guards of one’s mind, Satan’s soldiers immediately seize the opportunity to attack. Furthermore, when a person becomes enraged, Satan toys with him in the same way children play with a ball.

- Envy and greed: No matter how careful man is, his covetousness makes him deaf and dumb. The light of insight reveals the gates of Satan; when envy and greediness mask this light, man becomes at risk. Hence, Satan seizes that opportunity and adorns for an acquisitive person whatever leads to his or her desires, even if it is heinous and evil. The Prophet, peace be upon him, spoke of avarice:

“If two starving wolves were left in a flock of sheep, they would not be as harmful [to them] as a person’s hunger for money and status is to his [or her] faith.” (At-Tirmidhi)

- Satiating oneself: This is one of Satan’s gateways to the heart; although lawful, eating in excess strengthens one’s desires, which, in turn, are his weapons.

- Impetuosity: Haste and recklessness are among the widest gates of Satan to one’s heart, as the Prophet, peace be upon him, said:

“Hastiness is from Satan and deliberateness is from God.” (At-Tirmidhi)

- Miserliness and fear of poverty: They prevent a person from giving in charity, instead justifying hoarding, which only leads to a painful punishment.

- Bigotry toward a specific school of thought or an inclination toward a desire, bearing grudges against opponents or treating them with contempt: This destroys the immoral and pious alike. Defaming people and calling attention to their faults is one of the predatory characteristics inherent in human nature.

- Thinking ill of Muslims: {O you who have believed! Avoid much suspicion, indeed some suspicions are sins.} (Al-Hujurat, 49: 12). Indeed, only hypocrites seek out flaws in others, whereas believers seek excuses for them.

A person may now ask: “How can one ward Satan off? Is it enough to be in constant remembrance of God or to utter [phrases like] ‘Laa hawla wala quwwata illaa billaah (There is no power or strength except in God)’?” The answer is that you must know that the course of treatment to save one’s heart from the whispers of Satan is to block the gateways [he takes] and to purify the heart from the aforementioned bad characteristics.

The remembrance of God should indeed suffice in stopping Satan from passing by or whispering in one’s heart. However, that cannot happen unless the heart itself is already of a pious nature and purified from evil characteristics. If not, words of His remembrance will be no more than mere thoughts without any impact on the heart or substance to deflect Satan: {Indeed, those who are pious – when an impulse touches them from Satan, they remember [Him] and at once they have insight.} (Al-A’raf, 7: 201).

Therefore, since this is only confined to the pious, once a person manages to uproot evil traits from within, Satan may pass by or whisper, but will never be able to reside in the heart.

You see, Satan is like an approaching starved dog; if a person has neither bread nor meat, it will move away just by your voice which commands it to “go away”. However, if you have meat in your hands and the dog is hungry, it will attack the flesh and your mere words will not be enough to keep the animal at bay.

Similarly, if the heart is free from anything Satan can feed on, Dhikr (remembrance of God) will be enough to fend it off. On the other hand, if a person’s desires dominate his or her heart, the influence of Dhikr is restricted to the outer edges of the heart and instead, its core becomes a residence for Satan. The Prophet said:

“The heart is touched twice: [one of it is] a touch by the angel [which constitutes] a command of goodness and an acceptance of the truth. So, if a man experiences this, he should know that it is from God the Almighty and he should consequently thank Him. On the other hand, [there is] a touch from the enemy [Satan, and that constitutes an] insinuation of evil, disbelief in truth and being barred from good. So, if a person experiences this, he should seek refuge with God from the accursed Satan.” Then, the Prophet recited the Saying of God: {Satan threatens you with poverty and orders you to immorality.} (Al-Baqarah, 2:268).” [An-Nasa’i and At-Tirmidhi]

Expounding on this, Al-Hassan, may God have mercy upon him said: They [i.e., the two touches] are actually two concerns that occur to the heart: one from God the Almighty and the other from the enemy [Satan]. May God have mercy upon a slave who examines his concerns and lets that affect him which is from God, and strives against whatever he deems from the enemy.”

You Decide

By nature, the heart equally accepts both the inspiration of an angel and the incitement of Satan, such that there is a balance. However, the latter aspect dominates when a person acts ravenously and indulges in desires, whereas the former overrules it if a person turns away from wants and whims, and resists them.

When man becomes subservient to his desires and his actions become driven by rage, the influence of Satan will prevail via whims, which are his haven, and the heart will become Satan’s nest and pasture.  On the other hand, if a person strives against his or her desires, barring them from impacting him or her and adopts some angelic traits, his or her heart will become the dwelling and station of angels. Thus, the soldiers of angels and of Satan are in an epic struggle, until the heart opens to one of them, allowing them to reside within and dominate; the other party, then, will only be able to pass with stealth.

Unfortunately, most hearts are conquered by the soldiers of Satan, sustained by obedience to desires and whims, and, therefore, the organs are riddled with base notions that give preference to this temporary life, with clear disregard of the Hereafter. The heart cannot be recaptured except when it is purified from the nutrition of Satan and is supported with the remembrance of Allah the Almighty, which is the haven of angels.

Responses of the Heart to Temptation

Hudhayfah ibn Al-Yaman, may God be pleased with him, narrated that the Prophet, peace be upon him, said:

“Temptations are presented to hearts in the same way as a reed mat is woven, stick by stick. Any heart which is saturated by them will receive a black mark, whereas any heart that rejects them will have a white mark put on it. The result is that there will be two types of hearts: a black and dusty heart, which is like an uneven vessel that neither recognizes good nor rejects evil, except what is impregnated into it of desires; and a white heart that will never be harmed by any temptation, as long as there are heavens and the earth.” (Muslim)

Heart Types

When the lure of desire and doubts are presented to the heart, it transforms into either of two types:

1- A heart that absorbs temptation in the same way a sponge soaks up water. This one will get a black stain every time it gives in to a temptation, until it becomes wholly dark and uneven. When this happens, the heart will be susceptible to two dangerous diseases: firstly, it will be unable to differentiate between good and evil, to the extent that it will not recognize either of them. Thereafter, the illness will pervade the organ until a person believes that good is evil and evil is good, the Prophetic Sunnah (the lifestyle of the Prophet p.b.u.h) is a religious innovation and vice versa, and that truth is falsehood and the opposite holds true as well. Secondly, the heart will begin to be subservient to its whims, making them a criterion for judging the teachings of the Prophet.

2- The second is the white heart that is illuminated by the light of faith. When temptations are presented to it, it will immediately deny and reject them, thereby increasing in brightness and radiance.

As for the temptations themselves, they are categorized into two: desires and doubts. While the first leads to the corruption of both intentions and one’s will, the second taints a person’s knowledge and belief.

Heart Diseases

Accordingly, diseases of the heart are also of base desires and doubts; the former can be interpreted by the verse in which God the Almighty Says (what means): {Do not be soft in speech [to men], lest he in whose heart is disease should covet.} (Al-Ahzab, 33: 32)

Unlike a healthy person, a patient is more sensitive to the slightest changes in heat, cold or movement; likewise, when the heart suffers from an illness, even a small amount of whims or doubts harms it and it is unable to ward them off. On the other hand, a sound heart powerfully fends off these temptations, even in the face of more attacks.

As for the other kind, God referred to the disease of doubt, when He said: {In their hearts is disease, so God has increased their disease.} (Al-Baqarah, 2: 10) Commenting on this verse, Qatadah and Mujahid, may Allah have mercy upon them, stated that “disease” here refers to misgivings.

Remedy

Although illnesses of the heart come in these two forms, the Glorious Quran is a remedy for both. It includes decisive proofs that distinguish between truth and falsehood; with them, the disease of doubt, which corrupts a person’s knowledge and intellect, is removed, and a person can perceive things in their real form. Thus, the Quran is the true cure for malicious allegations and doubts. Yet, its effectiveness is contingent on understanding the Quran and comprehending its essence. And, if God grants that to a person, his or her heart will as clearly distinguish between truth and falsehood, as it does between night and day.

Additionally, the Quran heals the other of the two diseases: desire; for, it includes wisdom, admonition and encouragement. It also contains verses warning people against indulging in the worldly life and instead urging them to work for the Hereafter. Furthermore, it has parables and stories that illustrate various lessons and warnings. Contemplating all this, a sound heart will surely incline towards what benefits it in both worlds and turn away from what will be of harm. The heart will then love guidance and detest vice.

Thus, the Glorious Quran removes diseases that result in corrupt yearnings; it reforms the heart, and so, reforms its wants, thus restoring it to the natural, pure state that it was created in. Referring to this, God says:{And We reveal of the Qur’an that which is a healing and a mercy for believers though it increase the evil-doers in naught save ruin.} (Al-Isra, 17: 82)

{O mankind, there has to come to you instruction from your Lord and healing for what is in the breasts and guidance and mercy for the believers.} (Yunus, 10: 57)

The heart feeds on faith and the Quran, taking from it what purifies and strengthens it. Both the heart and body require growth and development until they become perfect and sound. Hence, just as the body needs nutrients that build it and a healthy diet that protects it from harm, so does the heart. But, it can only obtain its nourishment from the Quran; and if it attempts to get something similar from another source, it would be provided with very little and not be able to reach its potential. Similarly, plants do not grow or become ripe without nutrients and proper environment; only when those are available, can we say they do.

Therefore, a person should study the signs of an ill and a sound heart, so he or she is able to discern which type he or she possesses. If the heart is sick, a slave of God must do his or her best to treat it before he or she meets Him with a sick heart, which will deprive him or her from entering Paradise. If the heart is sound, then he or she must nonetheless continue to safeguard its soundness until he or she dies in this state. If, however, the heart is dead, he or she can take solace in the fact that God gives life to the dead, as He Says (what means):{Know that God gives life to the earth after its lifelessness. We have made clear to you the signs; perhaps you will understand.} (Al-Hadid, 57: 17)

Source: Islamweb.net - http://www.islamweb.net

http://www.onislam.net/english/reading-islam/living-islam/growing-in-faith/453891-satans-gateways-to-the-heart.html

Afghan calligrapher Mohammed Sabeer Hussani, center, and nine student apprentices work on a page for the world's largest Quran - the Islamic holy book - at the Hakim Nasir-e-Khusraw Balkhi Cultural Center in Kabul, Afghanistan. (Credit: Hakim Nasir-e-Khusraw Balkhi Cultural Center)

From WorldWatch, CBS News www.cbsnews.com

The world’s largest Quran has been unveiled in the Afghan capital, Kabul. The cultural center that commissioned the work wanted more than just to own the largest Muslim holy book — it wanted to show the world that despite more than 30 years of war, Afghanistan’s rich cultural heritage has not been destroyed.

Afghan calligrapher Mohammed Sabeer Khedri Hussani, 52, and nine student apprentices spent five years working 18 hours a day, seven days a week, to create the enormous masterpiece. Hussani, a devout Muslim, tells CBS News it was a labor of love, and he is proud of his accomplishment.

“My happiness is when I see each and every group of people coming everyday to see my calligraphy, it makes me feel proud,” he says.

The lavish holy book, with pages measuring more than seven feet tall and five feet wide, has been certified as the world’s largest Quran by the Afghan Ministry of Hajj and Religious Affairs, according to the cultural center which houses it.

It weighs 1,102 pounds, and has 218 pages of cloth and paper bound inside an embossed leather cover made from the skins of 21 goats. Hussani says the book cost a million dollars to create, and was paid for by Islamic spiritual leader Alhaj Sayed Mansoor Naderi.

The Quran combines gold script with millions of tiny colorful dots, forming highly symbolic decorations around the giant pages.

“I wanted to use as many tasteful colors as possible to make this holy book look beautiful,” Hussani says. The book was completed in 2009, but a room at the cultural center had to be built to house it.

The cultural center was originally founded in the 1980s, and was once home to 50 thousand books, a medical center and schools teaching traditional Afghan crafts like carpet weaving, but it was largely destroyed in the 1990s during the Civil War that followed the Soviet pullout.

The founders have been reviving the center since the fall of the Taliban government in 2001, and the new Quran is its showpiece.

By the time I gathered the courage to email my friend Mariam for recommendations on local mosques, I had been keeping my secret for weeks. I was a half-closeted Muslim. My conversion to Islam came about with blinding speed and by accident.

For years I felt my emotional connection to God decay, despite all of my Catholic-sanctioned attempts to reawaken even the smallest degree of fervor. Out of desperation, one spring I began to read an English interpretation of the Quran hoping for a fresh perspective on the familiar Judeo-Christian stories. Since I had lost my ability to focus on or feel moved by well-worn Bible passages, I reasoned that if I just read a few chapters of the same stories narrated in a different way, then surely I would find my Catholic faith revived and would return, newly energized, to reading the stories the “right” way.
I never expected that in less than a week I would develop a powerful craving to read to the oft-repeated promises: God is the All-Knowing, the All-Hearing, the All-Seeing, the most Forgiving, the Dispenser of Grace. I never imagined that the poetic articulations of God’s bounty and the precision of His creation would appeal so vividly to my analytical nature, or that the breathtaking language would stand out as supreme above anything I had read before. I am an avid reader and, as an attorney, have been trained to critique language and spot the weaknesses in arguments. And yet by the time I was halfway through the Quran, I realized I could no longer read it as a cultural experiment or as an idle intellectual pursuit or as a gateway back into my Catholic faith.
I was simply reading my book. Even across centuries of time and strained through English interpretations, I knew I was reading words sent down by God. In mere days of reading the first chapter the Quran, my transformation began. I fought it for only a few more weeks, devouring the Quran a second time to be sure, before I said my shahada.
Telling non-Muslim friends was the easy part. Most of my friends were ivory tower progressives who exalted spiritual independence and disdained Islamophobic political rhetoric. A handful of Christian friends offered a few gentle, respectfully worded concerns, but far more often the news was met with excitement and encouragement for my personal journey of discovery. The accolades were ill-fitting and the attention intimidating. In fact, the more I was commended for my bravery, the more it sank in what a scary thing I had done.
Having given the news of my conversion to non-Muslim friends, I then reached out to a few Muslim friends who I was likely to see in the coming months but who remained outside of my closest circle. Here, my apprehension grew into a sense of inauthenticity. Was it even appropriate to contact them out of the blue to say I converted? “Good luck in your new apartment, hey, I converted to Islam!” Or, “How’s the job hunt going? By the way, I’m a Muslim now!” To mollify my awkwardness, I raised the issue flippantly, deflecting my fear with self-deprecating humor, holding myself out like a spectacle to be judged on their terms. I took what had been a deeply personal decision and did my best to downplay it for their consumption.
After I survived those blundering phone calls, there remained the problem of telling Mariam. She had been one of my best friends since our law school years. I had long admired Mariam for being one of the most incisive thinkers I knew, and for devoting so much of her energy to women’s issues in Islamic countries. Over countless lunches, she would recite in detail the latest injustices occurring in parts of the world that had no connection to my suburban American upbringing. Our friendship including bonding over our own versions of feminism, but she seemed to be fighting two battles: the usual sexism of daily American life to which I could relate, and an entirely different arena of patriarchy in the “community” that remained foreign to me.
After years of seeing Mariam as a complex individual, as my smart and interesting friend who could skewer those who support injustice and yet relate compassionately to my mundane complaints about long hours at the office, I pigeonholed Mariam as “my Muslim friend who doesn’t know I’m Muslim.” She became a prototype of what it meant to me to be a Muslim-American woman. From the political causes she undertook to the effortless way she draped a scarf across her shoulders, from the superficial to the meaningful, I saw her as a full and true Muslim. Islam was her right, and no one could take it away from her. In comparison, I was an outsider, a fraud, a silly little girl who jumped into something headfirst and in utter ignorance of the social consequences.
On some level, converting to her religion without her input or blessing called my entire identity as a new Muslim into doubt. I transposed all of my insecurities on her and feared she would question my choice in the same keen way that she analyzed her cases. And I, of course, would lack the answers to defend my conversion. What if I had misunderstood the Quran? Scholars spend lifetimes pouring over this layered text, and here I had sped through it in a matter of weeks and embraced it instantly. I had never even stepped foot inside a mosque! Would she expect me to say “inshallah” around her, or would I sound ridiculous for suddenly speaking Arabic phrases?
Every aspect of my struggle with my new spiritual identity found a foil in Mariam, and I was too intimidated to approach my friend until months had passed. I was going nowhere on my independent hunt for a mosque, for something beyond reading in my solitary apartment and browsing websites with incomprehensible prayer instructions. I hadn’t required any help in deciding whether to convert, but now that I identified myself as a Muslim (however ill-fitting the description felt) I needed guidance on how to be one. And so I sent Mariam an email with no explanation. “I’m looking for a recommendation on a mosque in the area. Any ideas?”
My phone rang shortly after. I knew it would be her and my voice was unsteady as I answered. Never one to mince words, Mariam asked me outright why I inquired about a mosque. I remember responding in the light, laughing tone I’d used with my more casual Muslim friends but my voice caught in my throat. Mariam asked me why I converted. My reasoning sounded inadequate to my ears, “I read the Quran…and…it seems true to me. Especially by the time I got towards the end, where it’s so powerful and even in English the words are unlike anything a human being could create, I realized this had to be divinely inspired. It couldn’t be from man, it had to be from God.” I remember my words spilling out one over the other and my voice trembling. I cut myself off for fear of sounding even more naïve that I felt sure I already did.
A few moments of silence passed, and when she spoke again I heard the emotion in her voice. She told me how ecstatic she was to hear the news and immediately a weight removed itself from my chest. At last, I could freely discuss my conversion with a friend who understood the beauty and the mystery of that miraculous book.
In time, Mariam became my Quran study buddy and living Cliff-Notes guide to “the community.” She invited me to celebrate my first Eid with her family, and provided an anchor of sanity when all of the adjustments grew overwhelming. Of all our shared moments, I always remember that first day we spoke openly about our love for the Quran as one of the turning points of my conversion. I entered that conversation lacking any claim to my own “Muslimness,” and while it would be misleading to suggest that with a snap of Mariam’s fingers I cemented a new identity, it did mark the first time that we talked as two lawyers, two women, and two friends, like always, but now also as two Muslims.

(Photo Credit: Yutaka Tsutano)
Natalie Abraham is an attorney and a recent convert to Islam. She wrote this article using a pen name.

http://www.altmuslimah.com/a/b/mca/4542/

Last year, I had a chance to see the film The Imam and the Pastor about Imam Muhammad Ashafa and Pastor James Wuye, two Nigerians, one Muslim, one Christian, who have been able to put aside their differences and come together to fight communal violence in Northern Nigeria. This film really gives me hope. It is also a great example of what real interreligious dialogue, with a vision towards reconciliation, can achieve. It was also just great seeing a documentary about Nigeria, this place I long to see, where my father lives, but which I have yet to journey to.

According to Imam Ashafa: ‘Religion is a candle to light the house or to burn down the house. It is an energy, and like nuclear energy, it can be used for good or destructive purposes. Our task is to see religion used for positive purposes.’

According to Pastor Wuye, ‘Nigeria is a very religious country. The conflict entrepreneurs use faith as the medium to inspire violence. We’re using faith to de-programme violence.’

I really recommend seeing the film. It premiered at the United Nations in New York and was screened at the House of Commons in the UK.

The following in an excerpt from an interview with Pastor Wuye and Imam Ashafa by Africa Today:

I put it to Pastor James that there are those – and there is an extensive list – who do not believe that after vowing to kill each other and confronting each other murderously for a long time, all is now forgiven and that they have kissed and made-up. Is this a match made in heaven or a match made in Hollywood? Pastor James replies, almost shouting: “This is your journalist instinct running wild,” but he admits there are ghosts to be exorcise. “I know some people would find the documentary too good to be true. But I truly believe that this is a marriage. From time-to-time we’ll disagree on things, however, I love this guy and we’ll never get a divorce,” stressing: “Imam and I are in this together, to promote co-operation for the long term in Nigeria and wherever we are called upon.” “I am no quitter. What our story proves is that communication is best,” he adds.
Ashafa told E K’ABO about how they faced opposition from their respective religious groups when they first came together to promote their inter-faith initiatives and local reconciliation in their communities. There was strong rejection. Some incensed people branded them compromising traitors. “Sceptics mocked us and our idea. But today we have majority support in my country and we are being called upon by other countries, organisations and small communities to sort out conflicts before they get out of hand and sometimes to quench already smouldering conflicts threatening to engulf communities.

The source for the following profiles of Imam Muhammad Ashafa and Pastor James Wuye and the description of their initiative come from Ashoka.org
Pastor Wuye and Imam Ashafa believe the only way religious violence can be reduced or stopped in Nigeria is by having leaders of each faith promote religious teachings of peace and non-violence. Their organization, the Interfaith Mediation Center of the Muslim-Christian Dialogue Forum, deals with the psychology of religious violence and addresses its causes and effects. Wuye and Ashafa are influencing schools, houses of worship, and community centers to prevent violence and intervene when conflicts erupt. Their education and media outreach strategies have afforded them unprecedented, widespread support and legitimacy for their efforts to promote peaceful coexistence.

The son of an Islamic scholar from a long line of Muslim clerics dating back 13 generations, Mohammed Ashafa grew up in a conservative family that espoused Islamic socio-cultural values and held deep suspicion for all things Western and Christian. As a young man and the eldest son, he followed the family vocation and became an Imam. To promote his family tradition of Islamic custodianship, Ashafa joined a fanatical Islamic group committed to completely Islamizing the North and chasing away all non-Muslims from the region. Ashafa became the leader of this militant group and also the Secretary General of the Muslim Youth Councils. The Muslim Youth Councils incited great violence in the North, which resulted in the Christians creating their own counter organization, the Youth Christian Association of Nigeria, led by Pastor Wuye.

Born in Kaduna State, Pastor Wuye, an Assemblies of God Pastor, was the son of a soldier who served in the Biafran War. From a young age, Wuye was fascinated by battle and war games. In the 1980s and 1990s he was involved in militant Christian activities and served as Secretary General of the Kaduna State chapter of the Youth Christian Association of Nigeria, an umbrella organization for all Christian groups in Nigeria for 8 years. He recounts that his “hatred for the Muslims had no limits”. He hated seeing people being intimidated and abused, so when Muslims were blamed for inciting a violent conflict in Kaduna, he immediately volunteered to lead a reprisal attack. He lost his right arm during one of the battles against Ashafa’s militant group in Kaduna; increasing his vengeance and deep hatred for Muslims in general and Ashafa in particular.

Ashafa also experienced loss at the hands of Pastor Wuye. In one of the violent clashes between Muslim Youth Councils and Youth Christian Association of Nigeria, two cousins and Ashafa’s spiritual mentor died while fighting Pastor Wuye’s Christian group. For years, both Ashafa and Wuye vowed to avenge the deaths and injuries of their loved ones by killing each other. However, a chance meeting in 1995 brought the two clerics together and through intermediaries and months of soul searching, both leaders decided to lay down their arms and work together to end the destructive violence plaguing their country. This chance meeting and Imam’s extension of the olive branch to Wuye led to the formation of the Interfaith Mediation Center of the Muslim-Christian Dialogue Forum.

Their collective work in peace building began in 1997, and they have since managed to spread their messages of conflict-resolution to all corners of the globe. Their work has earned them numerous accolades including the Peace Activist Award of the Tanenbaum Center of Interreligious Understanding; a joint Honorary Doctorate degree in Philosophy bestowed upon them in Kolkata, India; a Heroes of Peace Award from Burundi; Search for Common Ground on Interfaith Cooperation Award USA; and the Bremen Peace Award from the Threshold Foundation on interreligious reconciliation, among others.

Imam Ashafa and Pastor Wuye have designed a strategy to both prevent religious and political violence and resolve it when it happens. Their early-warning mechanism, developed in 1996, helps communities identify inflammatory situations and provides the means to reduce tensions. For instance, Ashafa and Wuye defused potential violence surrounding the 2006 Dutch cartoon fiasco, which inflamed many communities around the world. Sensing danger, they immediately asked the heads of the Christian Associations of Nigeria to appear on radio and television to publicly condemn the negative depiction of the Prophet Mohammed in the cartoons, and asked the Chief Imams to accept the condemnation and ask for calm. Their tactic of publicly encouraging Muslim and Christian leaders to support each other and sign peace agreements has proven successful in building ties between the two communities and towards their shared goal of mitigating violence.

Another early-warning technique is the “deprogramming” of violent youth through Christian and Islamic instruction that emphasizes forgiveness and non-violence. To reverse a “theology of hate” that is often taught to children at home and in school, Ashafa and Wuye set up Peace Clubs in pre-school, primary, secondary, and tertiary institutions. The Peace Clubs have peace-building and peer-mediation components and involve class representatives who mediate conflict between classmates and teach their peers how to resolve conflicts peacefully.

Students throughout Nigeria receive religious instruction, and particularly in conflict prone states learn that one religion is superior to others. So in 1998 Ashafa and Wuye developed a curriculum entitled “The Ethical Code for Religious Instructions in Schools” which is now used in schools and by other organizations interested in promoting peace. Coupled with Peace Clubs, the curriculum is reducing religious violence in schools. To date, over 30 schools in the majority Muslim Kaduna state, and primary schools and universities in Plateau, Kano, and Bauchi states have Peace Clubs and peace curricula.

They also created “deprogramming” Youth Camps which bring together militant youths from different communities for 5 days of intensive interaction. Camp participants are involved in activities that replace demonization of those of a different faith with the humanization. These militant youth attend skill-building activities such as financial and computer literacy classes. Ashafa and Wuye have also trained youth leaders from across the country to become trainers in their communities.

In addition to their preventive work, Ashafa and Wuye also focus on peace building and resolution. Since 1997, they have been training religious leaders of both faiths on conflict mitigation and organizing peace-building workshops for community members. They organize seminars with opinion leaders and elders that encourage dialogue about differing views on politics, society, and law. There are also practical workshops that encourage good governance, legislation, budget tracking, and building bridges between communities and political and religious leaders.

Ashafa and Wuye also help communities use peace building methods that may have been forgotten or abandoned. They train women of both faiths to monitor elections and educate their communities on the electoral process. Their studies have shown a sharp decline in rigging and violence at polls where the women operate.

The pair offers trauma counselling for those who have suffered losses at the hands of religious violence and trains religious and community leaders to assist those affected by violence. Ashafa and Wuye use scriptures from their two holy books to help people deal with suffering and tragedy. They also force men to deal with the ramifications of trauma; challenging African notions that men should not show emotion.

Media outreach is their main approach to spreading their work beyond the areas where they operate directly. Both clerics have television shows dedicated to preaching the tenets of their respective faiths as well as peaceful co-existence. They are featured in a documentary on conflict resolution which was showcased at the UN headquarters, at the House of Commons in the UK, and in Washington DC. This was made into a case study by the Tanenbaum Center of Interreligious Understanding.

The Center comprises a Secretariat of 14 people (7 Muslims and 7 Christians) with joint deputyships, coordinators, and program managers. Ashafa and Wuye have a rotating portfolio of responsibilities and enjoy an equitable division of labor. The sensitive nature of their work requires participation of both the Imam and Pastor in the programming the Center offers. Due to the dangerous nature of their work, they have succession plans in place for appointed deputies to assume executive leadership positions should anything debilitating happen to them.

They have set up offices in three states in Nigeria, two in the North and one in the East, and have partnerships with various religious groups in other areas. To ensure widespread impact, Wuye and Ashafa set up committees and advisory councils made up of religious and community leaders to monitor peace-building efforts and provide feedback, using a hotline to report religious violence nationwide. At least two people (1 Muslim and 1 Christian) from each of Nigeria’s 36 states are trained in conflict resolution (with more staff in conflict-prone states) and stay in close communication with the Center’s headquarters in Kaduna state. Their work has also spread beyond Nigeria to Northern Ghana, Burundi and Kenya. Their Center is sustained through support from international donor and religious organizations, and local and regional governments in Nigeria.

Ashafa and Wuye want to bring peace to all nations plagued by religious violence. They have assisted organizations in Northern Ireland, Rwanda, and Native American communities in the United States. They also work with Muslim and Christian entities in conflict areas outside of Nigeria. They have partnered in Sudan with the New Sudan Islamic Council and the New Sudan Church Council and in Kenya with the Kenyan Supreme Council of Islamic Affairs and the Kenyan Council of Churches. Their goal is to work with organizations in the Niger Delta region, Middle East peace groups, and are building an office with the African Union staffed with Muslim and Christian practitioners.

Their next steps include the construction of an Interfaith Peace Village, with land donated by the Kaduna state government. They are planning to host a summit on peace and religious harmony which will convene religious leaders and peace practitioners from across Africa. Because they believe peace building without development is ineffective, they have organized Muslim and Christian women rice farmers to work together as an effective peace building and income generation scheme.

http://woyingi.wordpress.com/2009/06/03/film-review-the-imam-and-the-pastor/

Hundreds of thousands of piligrims pray at Mecca's Grand Mosque. Photograph: Fayez Nureldine/AFP/Getty Images

From: The Guardian, Tuesday 24th January 2012

The hajj, subject of a new exhibition at the British Museum, shows that a respect for other faiths is central to Muslim tradition

Karen Armstrong

Ever since the Crusades, when Christians from western Europe were fighting holy wars against Muslims in the near east, western people have often perceived Islam as a violent and intolerant faith – even though when this prejudice took root Islam had a better record of tolerance than Christianity. Recent terrorist atrocities have seemed to confirm this received idea. But if we want a peaceful world, we urgently need a more balanced view. We cannot hope to win the “battle for hearts and minds” unless we know what is actually in them. Nor can we expect Muslims to be impressed by our liberal values if they see us succumbing unquestioningly to a medieval prejudice born in a time of extreme Christian belligerence.

Like Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Christians, Sikhs and secularists, some Muslims have undoubtedly been violent and intolerant, but the new exhibition at the British Museum – Hajj: Journey to the Heart of Islam – is a timely reminder that this is not the whole story. The hajj is one of the five essential practices of Islam; when they make the pilgrimage to Mecca, Muslims ritually act out the central principles of their faith. Equating religion with “belief” is a modern western aberration. Like swimming or driving, religious knowledge is practically acquired. You learn only by doing. The ancient rituals of the hajj, which Arabs performed for centuries before Islam, have helped pilgrims to form habits of heart and mind that – pace the western stereotype – are non-violent and inclusive.

In the holy city of Mecca, violence of any kind was forbidden. From the moment they left home, pilgrims were not permitted to carry weapons, to swat an insect or speak an angry word, a discipline that introduced them to a new way of living. At a climactic moment of his prophetic career, Muhammad drew on this tradition. Fleeing persecution in Mecca in 622, he and the Muslim community (the umma) had migrated to Medina, 250 miles to the north. Mecca was determined to destroy the umma and a bitter conflict ensued. But eventually Muhammad broke the deadly cycle of warfare with an audacious non-violent initiative.

In March 628, to general astonishment, he announced that he was going to make the hajj. This meant that he had to ride unarmed into enemy territory, yet 1,000 Muslims accompanied him. The pilgrim party narrowly escaped being massacred by the Meccan cavalry, and eventually entered the sacred territory of Mecca where they simply sat down beside their camels and refused to move. Knowing that they would lose all credibility if they slaughtered pilgrims on this holy ground, the Meccans negotiated a truce and Muhammad accepted humiliating conditions that filled the Muslims with dismay. But the Qur’an proclaimed that this apparent defeat was a “clear triumph” because, like Jews and Christians, the Muslims had acted in a spirit of peace, self-restraint and forbearance. Two years later, hostilities ceased and the Meccans voluntarily opened their gates to the prophet.

Clearly the Qur’an did not despise Jews and Christians; this affinity with “the people of the book” was also central to the Muslim cult of Mecca. The Arabs firmly believed that they, too, were children of Abraham, because they were the descendants of his eldest son Ishmael – a regional view shared by the Bible. It was said that Abraham and Ishmael had rebuilt the Ka’bah, the sacred shrine of Mecca, when it had fallen into disrepair, had dedicated it to their God, and then performed the rites of the hajj. Many Arabs thought that Allah, their high God, was the God worshipped by the people of the book, and Christian Arabs used to make the hajj pilgrimage to the Ka’bah alongside the pagans.

The Arabs had no conception of an exclusive religious tradition, so they were deeply shocked when they discovered that most Jews and Christians refused to consider them as part of the Abrahamic family. The Qur’an still urged Muslims to respect the people of the book and revere their prophets, but decreed that instead of facing Jerusalem when they prayed, as hitherto, they should turn towards the Ka’bah built by Abraham.

Like Abraham, who had not belonged to a closed-off cult, they would take no pride in an established institution and, as Abraham had done, focus on the worship of God alone. Hence the Muslim hajj is all about the Abrahamic family – not Muhammad himself. Pilgrims re-enact the story of Hagar and Ishmael, symbolically returning to the era that preceded religious chauvinism.

Alas, all traditions lose their primal purity and we all fail our founders. But the British Museum’s beautiful presentation of the hajj can help us understand how the vast majority of the world’s Muslims understand their faith. Socrates, founder of the western rational tradition, insisted that the exercise of reason required us constantly and stringently to question received ideas and entrenched certainties. The new exhibition can indeed become a journey to the heart of Islam and also, perhaps, to a more authentic and respectful western rational identity.

by Irshad Hussain

(reproduced, with his kind permission, from his blog; www.islamfrominside.com )

Man and Ecology: An Islamic Perspective

Added October 20, 2004

Environmental Crisis

“When the earth is shaken with a (violent) shaking,
And the earth reveals what burdens her,
And man says: What has befallen her?
On that day she shall tell her story….” (Qur’an 99:1-4)
In light of today’s environmental crises, many secular and religious  scholars have begun to look into underlying philosophical causes for man’s rapacious attitude towards his environment. Part of this search involves a look at root philosophies affecting the human outlook and interaction with the world and the responsibility religion shares in creating the attitudes and philosophies that have led to the desecration of nature that has occurred in the past few centuries and which seems to be accelerating in our times. As Ziauddin Sardar writes;

“The roots of our ecological crises are axiomatic: they lie in our belief and value structures which shape our relationship with nature, with each other and the lifestyles we lead.” (Sardar, Ziauddin. Islamic Futures. New York; Mensell Publishing Limited. 1985. pg.218)
For this reason traditional religions like Christianity, Judaism and Islam are held accountable as they supposedly espouse an anthropocentric (human-centered) reality. Writers like Lynn White Jr. see this as being the root cause for the ecological/environmental problems of today. He decries not only the dualistic nature of man’s relationship with nature but also the idea “that it is God’s will that man exploit nature for his proper end…” as “Man shares, in great measure, God’s transcendence over nature.” (White, Lynn. The Historical Roots of our Ecological Crises. Science, 155. 1967)

Note: Lynn White refers specifically to the problem inherent in the Christian tradition, but in a general sense extends it to all the monotheistic religions, as opposed to the pantheistic ones. About blaming Christianity, Parvez Manzoor, in The Touch Of Midas, writes: “…Christianity does not bear the blame for our environmental problems. It is the divorce of Christian ethics from the pursuit of knowledge, in fact what is known to be the age of ‘rationalism’ that ushered us into the era of environmental degradation.”

This short essay is a sincere effort to investigate the validity of White’s view that the disrespect for nature is inherent in the very nature of these religions. Dealing only with the Islamic tradition, it will take into consideration the nature of man, his place in relation to God, his rights and responsibilities before God, and his relationship to the rest of the world with regard to his rights over it. In other words the world-view of Islam is to be the starting point for the examination of man’s relation to the world of external nature.

“All religions, customs, schools of thought, and social philosophies rest on a world view. A school’s aims, methods, musts and must nots all result necessarily from its world view… A world view can become the basis of an ideology when it has attained the firmness and breadth of philosophical thought as well as the…sanctity of religious principles.” (Mutahhari, M. Fundamentals of Islamic Thought. Berkeley; Mizan Press. 1985)

The primary basis of an Islamic world view is the idea of Tauhid, or the oneness of God. A world view based on tauhid  sees this universe as originating from God, returning to Him, and centered around Him. It is a world created and sustained by God with a purpose, and a design. As this entire universe is a product of His divine wish, it is a universe unfolding with a divine purpose. The reference point, the center of all things is God.
“…Tauhid  is the matrix for human thought and action, it is all pervasive and penetrates every aspect of our endeavour.” (Sardar, Ziauddin. Islamic Futures. New York; Mensell Publishing Limited. 1985. pg.225)

The essential prerequisite, in Islam, is the belief in this absolute oneness and unity of God.

“God the Ultimate reality is One, and everything other than God comes from God and is related to Him. No true understanding of anything is possible unless  the object in view is defined in relationship to the divine. All things are centered on God.” (Chittick, William. Article, ‘The Concept of Human Perfection.’ from, The World & I. New York; News World Communications. Feb. 1991. pg. 500)

Tauhid  is the point of origin of a theological doctrine of ecology. All things seen or unseen are God’s signs (ayat) and act as witnesses to His existence. All things in the universe are manifestations of Him, all are from Him.

Human nature is the other key facet of the world-view of Islam. Man fulfills a very important role in this cosmos. Although all things are made by God and identified with God in as much as their being created by Him, man enjoys a role as God’s vicegerent (his representative) having a freedom and far-reaching power latent within him. In the Qur’an God says He has breathed His spirit into man.

“When thy Lord said unto the angels: lo! I am about to create a mortal out of mire, And when I have fashioned him and breathed into him of My Spirit, then fall down before him prostrate.” (Qur’an. Ch 38- vrs 72, 73)

This verse provides essential insights into man’s position and nature in this universe. Although he is a creation of God he is superior to the rest of God’s creation as he has within him the Spirit of God. In this way he is unique among the creations of God. It is only man to whom the angels  are commanded to prostrate themselves.
Another aspect that separates him from the rest of creation is his acceptance of the trust offered by God. This trust was offered to all of creation and man was the only one who accepted it.

“We did indeed offer the trust to the heavens and the earth and the mountains; but they refused to undertake it, being afraid thereof. But man undertook it (the trust);…” (  Qur’an. Ch.33 vr.72)

In a matter of trust and trusteeship, the giver of the trust is giving a responsibility to the trustee. In other words the guardian of the trust has a high degree of freedom and accompanying responsibility in the use (or misuse) of the given trust.

The trustee is expected to fulfill the trust in the manner that the giver of the trust would expect of him.  If man did not have the power to either use or misuse this trust given to him by God, then the whole idea of offering the trust, in the first place, would be futile. Abdullah Yusuf Ali, a commentator of the Qur’an says of this verse;

“There is no trust if the trustee has no power, and the trust implies that the giver of the trust believes and expects that the trustee would use it according to the wish of the creator of the trust, and not otherwise.” (Ali, A.Y. The Holy Qur’an; Text, Translation and Commentary. Maryland; Amana Corporation. 1989. pg. 1080)

Note: This is not an attitude that is unique to Islam as can be seen in the following quote from the Bible “When a man has had a great deal given him, a great deal will be demanded of him; when a man has had a great deal given him on trust, even more will be expected of him.” (Luke: 12:48). It is, however, an attitude that is all pervasive in the Islamic world-view.

Thus man has the freedom to do what he wills with the power invested in him through these two means. One is his closeness to God in spirit and second is his acceptance of the trust. Man’s superiority, control and power over nature and the rest of creation was thus a part of this trust. After having taken the responsibility man had to show that he was indeed worthy of keeping it. If he forgets about the responsibility of the trust and instead takes full and destructive advantage of the power conferred upon him, the other side of his  superiority takes over. Because he has the spirit of God within him, he now deems to set himself up in rivalry to God. He wishes to take control of the destiny of the world not as a trustee but as a demi god.

“…He was indeed unjust and foolish. “ (Qur’an. Ch.33 vr.75 & 76)
When the power of his relationship to God is applied without the temperance of the responsibility of the trust, man misuses and abuses the abilities, potentials, and rights given to him by God. Nature has been given to man as a trust and nothing more. His right of domination over it (is) only by virtue of his theomorphic make up, not as a rebel against nature.’ (Nasr. S.H. The Encounter of Man and Nature. London; George Allen and Unwin Ltd. 1968. pg.96) God has given revelation, and the law (shariah) derived from the revelation to assist and guide man in fulfilling this trust. Ziauddin Sardar writes:

“The ultimate consequence of man’s acceptance of  trusteeship is the arbitration of his conduct by divine  judgment. To be a Muslim is to accept and practice the  injunctions of the Shariah. Thus the Shariah is both a consequence of one’s acceptance of Tauhid and it is a path.”(Sardar, Ziauddin. Islamic Futures. New York; Mensell Publishing Limited. 1985. pg.228)

The Shariah gives practical shape to the ethical norms in Islam. No moral or ethical issue is only an abstract idea in Islam. They are codified in the Shariah to be preached, practiced and incorporated into the laws of the land. The Shariah seeks to provide a framework, an environment within which men as individuals and as a society can fulfill the role of trustee. This Shariah sets the limits and parameters and the practical guidelines for giving shape to an ethical principle and when ignored causes the kind of disruption in human life, which can now be seen in the form of severe ecological crises. This is because that part of the Shariah pertaining to nature has been completely ignored. Instead of working in subservience to God as his vicegerent, man has developed an axiology that invites him to dominate nature rather than act as a protector over this aspect of God’s trust. Rather than fulfill a trust, man elevates himself to the status of dominator – deciding the fate of nature without reference to revelation. He has set himself on par with God and about this type of an action the Qur’an says:

“Indeed you have put forth a thing most monstrous! As if the skies are ready to burst, the earth to split asunder and the mountains to fall down in utter ruin.” (Qur’an. Ch.19. vr.88-89. This verse actually deals with the attribution of Jesus, son of Mary, to be the son of God. In this context it is being used to demonstrate the abhorrence of any equal being set up with God.)

In the Islamic world-view the relationship of man with nature should be like that of a just ruler with his subjects. Although the ruler has power over his subjects, his subjects are a trust over which he stands guards. He is expected to act in a responsible way (as defined by the revelation) toward them. Misuse and abuse of his power would shift him from being a leader to being a tyrant. The end result of tyranny is nothing but a revolt against the tyrant. This is precisely what is happening between man the tyrant and nature the tyrannized. Tyranny is effective only in the short term.

Among the works of Zain-al-Abideen (the fourth Imam of the Shi’ites), is his “Treatise on Rights”. Among the many  types of rights described he puts forward the rights of the subjects over their ruler. In this context they can be extended to form a value system for the formation of an ethic toward the environment or any other aspect of the world over which man has power or dominion.

All acts towards the ruled should be imbued with mercy and justice; the ruler’s disposition should be like a father toward his child.

“The right of your subjects through authority is that you should know that they have been made subjects through their weakness and your strength. Hence it is incumbent on you to act with justice toward them and to be like a compassionate father toward them….” (Zain al Abideen.  The Psalms of Islam. London; Mohammadi Trust. 1988. pg.286.)

Man, being above material nature due to his theomorphic make-up and the burden of the trust, must deal in a similar way with the environment. The “Treatise on Rights” also describes the rights a subject enjoys over his ruler through the aspect of the ruler’s knowledge. Taking knowledge to be synonymous with intelligence, man is endowed with a higher intelligence than the rest of creation. Because of this he must assume a role of guardianship over the rest of creation and interact with nature in a way that is worthy of this intelligence. If man does what is befitting of his high station, then God will increase His bounties toward man. If he does not, then whatever he was blessed with is withheld or taken back. Imam Zain-al-Abideen states it as follows:

“The right of your subjects through knowledge is that you should know that God has made you a caretaker over them only through the knowledge He has given you and His storehouses which He has opened up to you. If you do well…, not treating them roughly or annoying them, then God will increase His bounty toward you. But if you … treat them roughly…, then it will be God’s right to deprive you of knowledge and its splendor and make you fall from your place…” (Zain al Abideen. The Psalms of Islam. London; Mohammadi Trust. 1988. pg.286.)

Zain-al-Abideen then goes on to talk of the rights of those over whom you are in a position of mastership, such as a servant.

“…you should know that he is the creature of your Lord….You did not create any of his limbs, nor do you provide him with his sustenance; on the contrary, God gave you the sufficiency for that…and deposited him with you so that you may be safeguarded by the good you give to him. So act well toward him, just as God has acted well toward you.” (Zain al Abideen. The Psalms of Islam. London; Mohammadi Trust. 1988. pg.286.)

Nature has been made subservient to man, but it is as much a creature of God as man is. Neither has man created nature nor is he in any way able to sustain it. It is only because God has given him the sufficiency and capacity can he in any way do so. If he is able to plant a tree and administer its growth or manipulate its genetic characteristics, it is only because of the intelligence placed within him by God. Just as God has been good to man so also man must act with the same beneficence toward nature so that he may safeguard  himself when facing God.

Another key aspect of the Islamic world view is its immense stress on eschatology. Belief in a day of judgment is essential to the faith of an adherent. It creates an action guide arising from an awareness that actions have consequences far beyond their immediately apparent effects. Since man will be called to account for how he looked after the trust bestowed upon him, he is forced to not only consider present gains but to plan for the future in order to fulfill the responsibility with which he has been invested. His acts have repurcussions that ripple out horizontally from himself affecting what surrounds him in this world as well as vertically since his substance has a presence in the higher worlds. So the consequences of his actions accumulate within his substance and after his death he faces the reality of what he has done and what he has become.

“Then on that Day, Not a soul will be wronged in the least, And ye shall but be repaid the meeds of your past deeds” (Qur’an. Ch.36 vr.54)

Eschatology is the policing force within Islam which guides the believer to fulfill the trust that he had taken on. The thought of an impending judgment stops him from taking actions according to his own whims and fancies. It puts a brake on self-centered aspirations.

Man’s role of vicegerency, his mantle of superiority and his responsibility of trust are laid bare before him in the Qur’an, it is then his decision to choose which path to take. On the one hand he has before him all the treasures of nature to use and exploit as he wishes through the fulcrum of his knowledge. On the other hand is the temperance of the responsibility which coexists with the trust and intelligence given to him by God. The world-view of man and the conceptual foundations which underlie that world-view decide which course man will take.

“Can we…check this threat to our planet simply by introducing stricter legislation against pollution, industrial waste and nuclear spill? Can we reverse the degradation of our environment by adopting conservationist policies on both national and international levels? Or could it be that the whole ecological imbalance betokens the spiritual and teleological crisis of modern civilization itself? Does it require fundamental revision of our own way of life, our cherished goals, indeed our very conception of ourselves and the world?” (Parvez Manzoor, Touch of Midas)

It has been the contention of this brief essay that the roots of the man made environmental crises, and therefore their resolution, lie in man’s conception of his role in the overall scheme of creation. The crises that are being faced today are approaching a point of critical mass such that man is forced to confront certain basic questions about his relationship to the environment. These are not questions of technology, but questions about the fundamental nature of man, the nature of the universe he exists in, and of the ultimate nature of Reality.

- Atiya and Irshaad Hussain (1991)

Amir Arain, an associate professor of neurology and spokesman for the Islamic Center of Nashville, says, “The only competition (between faiths) is to do good to others.” / George Walker IV / The Tennessean

From: The Tennesean

(kindly Sent by Adamslist, Adam I Seedat)

It could be a call about a patient in crisis. Or a member of the local Muslim community in need of help. Or a reporter seeking comment after another public official has accused local Muslims of being a threat to America.

Arain takes a deep breath and then responds in a calm, clear manner, no matter what the crisis. It’s a trait his colleagues noticed years ago.

“He is pretty unflappable,” said Dr. Tom Davis, who works with Arain in the neurology department at Vanderbilt University. “I don’t think I have ever seen him lose his cool.”

The past few years have been a handful for Arain, an associate professor of neurology and the spokesman for the Islamic Center of Nashville. Local Muslims have faced an organized campaign that has accused them of having ties to terrorism and that claims their faith should be illegal.

His response to critics is calm and straightforward: Nashville’s Muslims love America and are law-abiding citizens. Their faith teaches them to respect their neighbors and be good people.

Arain believes Christianity, Islam and Judaism share common values about how to live as good citizens.

“I don’t think there is a race or competition between our faiths,” he said. “The only competition is to do good to others.”

That’s a lesson his father, a civil engineer, taught him early on. When Arain was growing up in Pakistan, his parents respected their Hindu and Christian neighbors and taught their children tolerance. They also taught Arain and his four siblings — two brothers and two sisters — the value of education.

Arain and his brother Fazal, a doctoral student at Vanderbilt, are both neurologists. Another brother, who lives in Calgary, Alberta, is an architect. One sister is a geneticist in Oman, and the other is a biochemist in Pakistan.

His wife, Aneeqa, has a master’s degree in sociology. She hopes to get a doctorate once their children — Jinan, 7, and Nidal, 11 — are a bit older.

Arain’s interest in neurology also started at a young age. His aunt had epilepsy, and he first saw her have a seizure when he was about 7.

He studied medicine in Karachi, Pakistan, and did a yearlong residency in Flint, Mich., before moving to Nashville in 1995. Michigan was too cold, he said. He finished a residency and then a fellowship in neurology at Vanderbilt before joining the faculty in 2000.

Today, he studies the disparity in care for epilepsy, especially for patients who don’t have access to medicine, and how the disease affects people with developmental disabilities.

As a fellow, he began caring for patients with epilepsy at Clover Bottom Development Center in Nashville and continues to do so today.

“That’s been a very humbling experience,” he said. “I feel like I can contribute to their quality of life.”

An arranged marriage

Aneeqa and Amir Arain first met on their wedding day back in 1997. Their parents arranged the match, and the couple hadn’t so much as spoken to each other before that day.

“All my friends were shocked,” Aneeqa Arain said. “They asked me, ‘You didn’t even talk?’ ”

The couple say their parents did a good job in matching them up. Before their wedding, Aneeqa lived in Karachi, not far from Amir’s hometown. Her aunt knew Amir’s family and recommended the couple’s parents to each other.

Aneeqa said her husband is a giving man who never says no to anyone who needs him. Sometimes that means taking late-night phone calls about patients or being out in the evenings at interfaith events.

“He’s always ready to help anyone,” she said. “If someone tells him they need help, he will go.”

Finding balance is not easy for Arain these days. Along with his teaching and clinic duties at Vanderbilt and volunteering at the Islamic Center, he serves on the board of the Epilepsy Foundation of Middle and West Tennessee and volunteers for regular medical clinics at a local mosque. Weekends are for his son’s soccer games and spending time with his wife and daughter.

His face lights up when he talks about Jinan and Nidal.

The walls of his basement office at Vanderbilt Medical Center are covered with drawings from his daughter. There’s a castle straight out of a fairy tale, a heart that reads “Dear My Family, I love you guys,” and a smiling portrait of Arain.

“If you ask her what she wants to be in her life, she says she’s going to be an artist,” he said, smiling. “I am OK with that, but my son tells her that she cannot take art history as a profession because you won’t earn much money.”

He hopes his son will follow in his footsteps as a doctor, but Arain won’t push him if he chooses a different career.

“That main thing is that he is a good human being,” Arain said.

Interfaith curiosity

The Arains’ home is filled with books on politics, poetry and religion, many in Urdu, one of five languages that Amir Arain speaks. His library includes copies of the Bhagavad-Gita, a Hindu scripture, along with Christian and Jewish versions of the Bible.

Those books and his own curiosity about the beliefs of the other people also drive his interest in interfaith issues.

Davis, Arain’s colleague, has taken part in interfaith events with Arian. He said he respects Arain for both his clinical knowledge and his calm demeanor.

Davis said he is most impressed with how Arain lives his faith and values in day-to-day life.

“He’s like the church member who taught Sunday school and volunteered for everything, and who is big on believing that the best witness to your faith is how you live, not what you say,” he said.

by Abu Hamid Al-Ghazali

(Courtesy of www.islamicity.com)

In an environment with increasing distractions how do we make our prayers more beneficial for our selves? Following is an excerpt from “Inner Dimensions of Islamic Worship”, a compilation of Imam Ghazali’s works that can inspire us to develop humility and become closer to God through prayer.

……………………………………………

God, Allah,  says in the Quran:

‘And perform the Prayer in remembrance of Me.’
[Ta Ha, 20:14]

‘Do not be one of those who are neglectful.’
[al-A'raf, 7:205]

‘Do not approach the Prayer when you are intoxicated, until you know what you are saying.’
[al-Nisa', 4:43]

Some say that ‘intoxicated‘ means inebriated by many anxieties, while others say it means drunk on the love of this world According to Wahb, the meaning is obviously a caution against worldly attachment, since the words ‘until you know what you are saying’ explain the underlying reason. Many are those who pray without having drunk wine, yet do not know what they are saying in their Prayers!

Prophet Muhammad said:

‘If a man performs two cycles of Prayer without the distraction of any worldly thought, all his previous sins will be forgiven.’ (al-Bukhari/Muslim)

‘Prayer is nothing but submissiveness, humility, supplication, sighing and remorse, holding out your hands and saying: “O God! O God!” Otherwise it is fruitless.’ (al-Tirmidi/al-Nasai)

In the earlier scriptures, we find these words attributed to God, Glorified is He: ‘I do not accept the Prayers of everyone who prays. I accept the Prayers of none but those who are humble before My Majesty, who are not arrogant towards My servants, and who feed the poor and hungry for My sake.’

Prophet Muhammad also said:

‘Ritual Prayer was made obligatory, Pilgrimage and circumambulation were ordained, and the rites of sacrifice were instituted, all for the purpose of ensuring remembrance of God, Exalted is He. If your heart is devoid of awe and reverence for the One Remembered, who is the aim and the goal, what is your remembrance worth?’ (Abu Daud/al-Tirmidi)

This advice was given to someone by the Prophet, on him be peace: ‘When you pray, pray like a person who is saying farewell,’ (Ibn Maja/al-Hakim/al-Baihaqi) i.e. saying farewell to himself, to his passions and to his life, before setting off on the journey to his Lord.

Again God Almighty reminds us in the Quran:

‘O Man, you labor towards your Lord laboriously, and you shall meet Him.’
[al-Inshiqaq, 84:6]

‘Be aware of God, for it is God who teaches you.’
[al-Baqarah, 2:282]

‘Be aware of God, and know that you are going to meet Him.’
[al-Baqarah, 2:223]

Prophet Muhammad reminds us: ‘If a man’s Prayer does not deter him from indecency and mischief, he gains nothing from God but remoteness.’ (al-Tabarani)

Since Prayer is intimate communion, how can it go with heedlessness? Bakr ibn Abdullah said:

‘O believers, if you wish to enter the presence of your Lord without permission, and to speak with Him without an interpreter, you have only to enter!’

When someone asked him how this could be he said:

‘You do your ablution correctly and enter your prayer-niche … There you are! You have entered your Lord’s presence without permission and may now speak to Him without an interpreter.’

Said Aisha, may God be pleased with her:

‘God’s Mes senger would talk to us and we to him, but when it was time for Prayer it seemed as though he did not know us, nor we him.’ (Azdi – mursal) This was because they were completely in awe of God the most Great and Glorious.

The Prophet said:

‘God has no regard for a Prayer in which a man’s heart is not present as well as his body.’

It is said that when Abraham , God’s special friend, got up to pray, the throbbing of his heart could be heard from a distance.

When Said al-Tanukhi (Muslim jurist 776/854 CE) was praying, tears used to flow incessantly down his cheeks and onto his beard.

God’s Messenger once saw a man playing with his beard during the Prayer, so he said: ‘If this man’s heart was submissive, every part of his body would also act with humility.’ (al-Tirmidi – daif)

It is related that al-Hasan noticed a man playing with pebbles as he prayed: ‘O God, marry me to the maidens of Paradise!.’ Al-Hasan said ‘A poor suitor you are. You propose to the maidens of Paradise while playing with pebbles!’

Someone asked Khalaf ibn Ayyub (Islamic scholar and poet from Al-Andalus 1013/1081 CE):

‘Don’t the flies bother you so much during your Prayer that you have to chase them away?‘

He replied:

‘I do not make a habit of anything that would spoil my Prayer.’

When asked how he had acquired such patience, he said:

‘I have heard that culprits patiently endure the Sultan’s whip, because this gives them a reputation for being “able to take it.” They boast of their patient endur ance. Here am I, standing before my Lord in Prayer. Am I going to budge for a fly?’

It is related of Muslim ibn Yasar that, when he wanted to pray, he would say to his family:

‘You may talk, for I shall not hear you’.

It is said that he was praying one day in the Great Mosque of Basra, when a corner of the building collapsed. This attracted a crowd, but he was quite unaware of what had happened until he had finished his Prayer.

Whenever the time of Prayer approached, Ali ibn Abi Talib, may God be pleased with him and ennoble his countenance, used to quake and change color. They asked him:

‘What is the matter with you, Commander of the Believers?’

To this he would reply:

‘The time has come for a trust which God offered to the heavens and the earth and the mountains, but they refused to carry it; they were wary of it, but I have taken it on.’

It is said of al-Husayn ibn Ali that he used to turn pale when he made his ablution. When his family asked him what came over him during his ablution, he would say: ‘Do you realize before Whom I wish to stand in Prayer?’

According to Ibn Abbas, may God be pleased with him and his father, the Prophet David, God bless him and give him peace, used to say in his intimate Prayers:

‘My God, who inhabits Your House? And from whom do you accept the Prayer?’

Then God told him by inspiration:

‘David, he who inhabits My House, and he whose Prayer I accept, is none but he who is humble before My Majesty, spends his days in remembrance of Me and keeps his passions in check for My sake, giving food to the hungry and shelter to the stranger and treating the afflicted with compassion. His light shines in the sky like the sun. If he invokes Me, I am at his service. If he asks of Me, I grant his request. In the midst of ignorance, I give him discernment; in heedlessness, remembrance, in darkness, light. He stands out among ordinary people as Paradise towers over earthly gardens, its rivers inexhaustible and its fruits not subject to decay.’

It is related of Hatim al-Asamm, may God be pleased with him, that he said, in answer to a question about Prayer:

‘When the time for Prayer is at hand, I make a proper ablution, go to the spot where I intend to pray and sit there till all my limbs and organs are in a collected state. Then I stand up to perform my Prayer, placing the Kaba between my brows, the Bridge- over-Hell beneath my feet, Paradise to my right and Hell to my left, and the Angel of Death behind me, thinking all the while that this is my final Prayer. Then I stand between hope and fear. I carefully pronounce “Allahu Akbar!” Then I recite the Quran harmoniously, bow in humility and prostrate myself submissively. I then sit back on my left haunch spreading out the top of my left foot and raising my right foot on the toes. I follow this with sincerity. Then I wonder whether or not my Prayer has been accepted.’

Ibn Abbas (Cousin of the Prophet), may God be pleased with him and with his father, once said:

‘Two modest cycles of Prayer, performed in full awareness, are better than a whole night’s vigil when the heart is inattentive.’

Abu Hamid al-Ghazali (450-505 AH / 1058-1111 AD) Also known as Imam Ghazzali is a prominent Muslim jurist and theologian of the 12th Century. He wrote on a wide range of topics including jurisprudence, theology, mysticism and philosophy.

Muslims and Jews in Holland and in California united in 2011 in opposing two political attacks on their joint religious traditions of circumcision, and their religious ways of killing animals for use as food.

In San Francisco anti circumcision forces were seeking to made it illegal to “circumcise, excise, cut or mutilate the whole or any part of the foreskin, testicles or penis of another person who has not attained the age of 18 years.” Under that law, any person who performed circumcisions would face a misdemeanor charge and have to pay a fine of up to $1,000, or serve a maximum of one year in prison.

The ban on circumcisions was opposed by a coalition of Jewish and Muslim organizations as well as many Christian groups that support religious rights and toleration. They were victorious when a Superior Court Judge ruled in July that the measure to criminalize circumcision must be withdrawn from the November ballot because it would violate a California law that makes regulating medical procedures a state — not a city — matter. The judge then ordered San Francisco’s election director to remove the measure from city ballots.

In Holland, a bill that would effectively ban the traditional religious way both Muslims and Jews slaughter animals, sponsored by the Party for Animals, was approved in the Dutch lower house, where it was backed by the anti-Islamic Freedom Party, and opposed only by Christian parties that took a stand in defense of religious freedom. In January, 2012 it goes to the upper house of the Dutch parliament, where most observers expect it to become law.

Positions on religious slaughter vary around the world – in the US, for instance, it is specifically defined as a humane method in the Humane Slaughter Act (1958) – but elsewhere several countries have already restricted or banned slaughtering unstunned animals. Stunning of livestock:

l Introduced in England in 1929 with mechanically operated humane stunner device

l Mandatory in EU since 1979, but member states can grant exemptions for religious slaughter

l Method enables abattoirs to process animals more quickly at lower cost

l Mis-stuns involving captive bolt occur “relatively frequently”, according to 2004 European Food Safety Authority (Efsa) report – which leaves the animal conscious and in pain

l Animals can also regain consciousness after being stunned

Animal rights groups see the Dutch bill as a stepping stone towards further bans on religious slaughter. “The Netherlands is a very important example, but for us it’s just a battle, not the war,” says Dr Michel Courat of Eurogroup for Animals, a federation of animal protection groups. “We need to win lots of other battles after this one to make sure more countries stop this practice.”

If the Dutch bill becomes law, Jewish and Muslim leaders say they will fight it in the European Court of Human Rights, arguing that it is a violation of the right to freedom of religion. “If the Party for Animals proposed a law which said there shouldn’t be any slaughtering of animals any more, and everyone should be vegetarian, I could understand it better,” says Rabbi Jacobs. “But it’s a vote against religion.”

A Dutch Muslim umbrella group, the Contact Body for Muslims and the Government (CMO), accused the Party for Animals of leading an “emotional” campaign based on misleading information which “wrongly created the impression that Muslim and Jewish methods of slaughter are barbaric and outdated”. “We’re afraid that other countries in Western Europe will follow the Dutch example,” says Mr Altuntas from CMO. Jewish and Muslim leaders see a worrying global trend, with the Netherlands a critical test case. They are fighting a battle on two fronts – to dispel the idea there is anything inhumane about their traditional methods of slaughter, and to defend their right to live according to their religious beliefs.

Both faiths put great emphasis on animal welfare, and adhere to a one-cut method of slaughter, intended to ensure the animal’s rapid death. Under Jewish and Islamic law, animals for slaughter must be healthy and uninjured at the time of death, which rules out driving a bolt into the brain – though some Muslim authorities accept forms of stunning that can be guaranteed not to kill the animal. Under Orthodox Jewish law, or shechita, the animal’s neck is cut with a surgically sharp knife, severing its major arteries, causing a massive drop in blood pressure followed by death from loss of blood. Supporters say unconsciousness comes instantaneously – the cut itself stunning the animal. A similar procedure is used in Islamic slaughter, or dhabiha. Both Islam and Judaism stress that diet should not just be about calories. A religious diet is an exercise in spiritual discipline and in God consciousness. We do not eat only to ‘fuel up’. Nor should we eat only to enjoy ourselves.

From the Jewish point of view, God has given us a diet that is good for us physically and spiritually. That diet is found in the Bible, in the later Jewish writings, and in the Qur’an.  Non-Jews can also gain many benefits from following most or all of this diet. Like all diets, a Kosher Holy Diet must be followed daily, to be effective. Like all diets, you should not become a fanatic in following this diet. Moral issues are more important than any one particular part of the diet. Thus, as a Liberal Reform Rabbi, I would say that honoring a parent while visiting at home, is more important than strict observance of a Kosher Diet. Nevertheless, like all diets, and all forms of spiritual exercise and meditation, the more frequently you fail to keep your Kosher Holy Diet, the less you will benefit from it.

Food is the most important single element of animal life. But unlike all other animals humans do not live by bread alone. The act of eating is invested with psychological and spiritual meanings. The Torah asserts that we should  “EAT!;  BECOME SATIATED/SATISFIED!;  AND BLESS THE LORD!” (Deut. 8:10) This is how I, as a Reform Rabbi interpret these words.

EAT! Humans, like all animals need to eat in order to live, but unlike all other animals some humans will not eat certain foods that other humans will gladly eat. This universal human trait proves that “humans do not live by bread alone, but humans may live on anything that God decrees.” (Deut. 8:3) Thus by periodically not eating at all (fasting) Jews, Muslims and Christians live by God’s words. But some people reject the enjoyment of eating and add extra days of fasting to their diet. Other people carry vegetarianism to far and stop eating all egg and milk products. The Torah commands a moderate path between on one hand simply killing and eating any thing you want, and excessive fasting and/or rejecting broad categorizes of food such as vegetarians and vegans do.

BECOME SATIATED/SATISFIED! If we only eat foods that we enjoy, we end up with a physically unhealthy diet. Obesity accounted for almost 26,000 deaths in the year 2,000 and it gets worse each year. Our natural tastes do not lead us to good health. Maximizing enjoyment in the short run leads to disaster in the long run. Self-discipline leads to longer life. Religious self-discipline leads to a higher spiritual life. If you eat your fill you will become satiated. If you eat according to God’s decrees you will become satisfied.

BLESS: The Sages rule that we should say a blessing even if we eat only a small piece of bread the size of an olive. If that is all you have, be grateful you have that. One person can be satiated and not be satisfied, while another can be satisfied yet not satiated. “Who is wealthy? Those who are satisfied with what they have.” (Avot)  The blessing after the meal is a Mitsvah from the Torah. The Sages also ruled that we should say a blessing-the Motzi, before we eat. The Motzi ends “who brings forth bread from the earth.” This phrase from Psalm 104:14 is preceded by “who makes the grass spring up for cattle” to reminded us every time we eat that we are part of the animal world and need to be considerate of their needs too. Thus it is a Mitsvah not to eat until one’s animals have been fed. (Deut. 11:15)

THE LORD: We should also thank the cook, the baker, the miller, the farmer and everyone else involved in producing our food. But the four fundamental elements for producing food are sun, rain, earth and seed; none of which we create. Usually we are so caught up in using the end products that we forget our dependence on the fundamentals. That is why we so blithely harm our environment. The Motzi helps us remember what life is really based on, and why we should be both grateful and reverent to God.

by Irshad Hussain

www.islamfrominside.com
A book is not simply words on a page – it is one mind crafting an effect upon other minds – it does not assume its true form except through the action of reading. By this it creates a world of image and story within our minds like software running within the engine of our imagination. In this way, the text becomes capable of lifting off the page as the words construct elaborate landscapes within the domain of our mind’s eye.
The Qur’an is not words on a page – the Qur’an is not the Qur’an until its verses take shape in the mind, connect and confirm one another, and its unfolding contents settle into the heart – only then does it begin to speak its magic within us. It speaks its content not with words and sounds but through a transformative alchemy arising from layered meanings which work one over from the inside out, taking what lays within in a dormant, unrealized, embryonic state, out of potentiality towards actuality. Descended from a high Reality revelation is coded in this lower world into letters, words, and verses each of which are a sign of its origin and a transforming catalyst for the one who absorbs its reality into themselves. It shapes and forms the clay of our being through its instructive commands which, like the compressed, encoded language of a geonome, can build the spiritual edifice that otherwise lays only partially or haphazardly constructed within our hearts.
This Qur’an is a book meant to be read for what it is – a Messenger from higher worlds speaking directly to us. With such a message, reading is only an initiation of intent, a drawing back of the bow; the message is aimed at the heart – we must bare our chests to receive it, and let it fly from the bow of the intellect to the heart which receives and absorbs it. Let it pierce with sincerity and intensity into the center of our being – that center, that heart through which all the streams of consciousness and awareness flow – open ourselves to it – seek understanding, seek transformation, seek resurrection – a truer self.
This is not an emotional endeavor, it is not simply wishing to achieve understanding, it is shaping and re-shaping one’s life in all it’s aspects so that life itself becomes a straight path that leads to comprehension, to knowledge that is internalized in the heart and clear in the intellect. God spoke to the Prophet through the angel, sending the Qur’an down upon the Prophet’s heart as a guidance for us all – the Prophet received it in his innermost heart and so became the “speaking Qur’an”, the one who actualized within his personality it’s transformative reality. The Prophet in turn passed on to us the alchemical words of the Qur’an. It is for us (with help and guidance) to lift them from the written page and apprehend something of their reality – to approach it as a revelation from God sent down to lift up. He is speaking to us through this Qur’an – our provision lies within it. We activate the Qur’anic speech when the words lift from the page by means of our intellects, settle into our hearts, manifest in our actions, and rise again, lifting us from the dust of the earth towards the “ways of ascent.” Till then, we are slaves of our lower nafs, orphans veiled from the One who made us, the spiritually destitute lying in the dust.
“…and what will make you comprehend what the ascending path is? (It is) the setting free of a slave, Or the giving of provision in a day of hunger, To an orphan, Or to the poor man lying in the dust.” (Qur’an 90:12-16)

- Irshaad Hussain 

British and Afghan forces on patrol in Afghanistan's Helmand province. Photograph: Sean Smith for the Guardian

by Simon Jenkins

The Guardian 27 December 2011

What do Britons “want” in the coming year? An ambassador to Washington was once asked the question on radio and replied, “That’s very kind of you, a box of candied fruits would do.” Such humble responses are now out of date. As the season of goodwill slithers into that of New Year’s resolution, the urge to tell the world how to behave seems uncontrollable.

We can suppress a yawn at David Cameron’s sermon on Christian values and Ed Miliband claiming the Helmand army is making Britain “secure, peaceful and happy“. More troubling is the foreign secretary,William Hague‘s, declaration on Facebook of a Christmas ambition to increase “international pressure on Syria … push Burma in the right direction … improve the situation in Somalia … and protect women’s rights in the Middle East” among other uplifting goals.

The phraseology may seem in place beneath portraits of Pitt and Palmerston, but how must it play with its intended recipients? Imagine the Indian foreign minister sending Britons a Christmas message deploring their addiction to knife crime, or Japan’s expressing his dismay at Britain’s broken homes, or Pakistan’s decrying Ulster sectarianism as “unacceptable”. I am sure Hague would tell them to mind their own business.

Britain’s assumption of an ancestral role in passing judgment on Kipling’s “lesser tribes without the law” seems genetically embedded. Hague might as well have been quoting from The White Man’s Burden, how he must “fill full the mouth of famine / And bid the sickness cease”, even if it meant watching “sloth and heathen Folly / Bring all your hopes to nought”. His tour of the horizon boasted of “saving lives” in Libya, but he was more detached over Syria. He glided past Iraq, Iran and Afghanistan, preferring the clearer ethical waters of Sudan, Somalia, Burma and Muslim women’s rights.

None of the areas of Hague’s concern had anything to do with Britain, let alone being within Britain’s sovereign domain, nor have they been for over half a century. The power has gone. The legitimacy has departed. Only the language of implied command echoes through the Foreign Office’s post-imperial dusk.

That echo is far from an irrelevance. It has conditioned surely the most catastrophic decade in British foreign policy since the 1930s. Another soldier died in Helmand over Christmas, where soldiers will go on dying, to no clear purpose, until 2014. Another hundred Iraqis died in Baghdad bombings, the outcome of Britain’s shared incompetence in restructuring Iraq. Meanwhile, around 5,000 have died in Syria, screaming against the double standard that toppled regimes in oil-rich Iraq and Libya but leaves Syria to empty sanctions and emptier rhetoric.

Over this last decade Britain’s national sovereignty has not been remotely threatened by any other state, yet its government has adopted a stance of hectoring and often open belligerence towards much of the Muslim world. British forces have been sent to ill-judged and ineptly fought wars that have left British cities in a state of perpetual terrorist alert. It is hard to think of any gain to Britain’s foreign interests that has come from these wars – apart from a possible anticipated oil deal in Libya.

The reason goes back in part to Lady Thatcher‘s commitment to “hug close” to Washington in the later years of the cold war. The hug came to be a suicide embrace, since most of the subsequent mistakes have derived from America’s over-reaction to 9/11, leading to mendacious excuses and wars of regime change and destabilisation. Whatever the evils of the Ba’athist and Taliban regimes, they cannot have justified such colossal loss of life, dislocation and destruction. Today we hear the same warlike language towards Iran. Do we really think the security of the region or the lot of the Iranian people can possibly be improved by future British or US military action? The Libyan intervention removed a dictator at relatively small cost, but how is that Nato’s business, any more than it is to dispose of dictators in Africa and Asia?

With the end of the nuclear threat, a revived resort to war as a foreign policy response seems to run deep in British and American psyches. Television programmes and bestseller lists are fixated on the two world wars. Britons consume tales of past horror and cruelty. We excuse a harping on the trenches, on Hitler, on D-Day and on the blitz as a warning to each generation that these were “the wars to end all wars”. Like the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, they are portrayed as exemplary deterrents against the use of such dreadful weapons ever again.

I begin to wonder. The west’s readiness to resort to violence in the aftermath of the cold war suggests something more sinister. The publicity now accorded to political oppression anywhere in the world is a standing casus belli for the military elites of Nato, the UN, the US and Britain. Not a day passes without some global horror being presented to the west’s interventionists with a demand that “something must be done”.

Pity is a noble urge, but its effect is not always wise. Contemplating the outcome of the second world war, Hannah Arendt warned pity could “possess a greater capacity for cruelty than cruelty itself”. It becomes the ubiquitous pretext, the excuse. How often is the cruelty of Saddam or the Taliban used to justify western atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan? How many more Syrians must die, a BBC reporter asks, “before we do something?” The something is, of course, the ever desirable war.

Most citizens regard war as a car crash, a random, irrational event that just happens. They do not see it as the outcome of a political process to which as democrats they are party. War may still be occasioned by pity, clothed in the language of humanitarianism, but it has become a casual, media-guided and exploited pity. A lot of people have a lot of money at stake in pity, and it goes far beyond the UN’s emergency relief fund.

Hence the suspicion that the obsession of so many Britons with past violence and present cruelty is no longer deterring them from risking its repetition, but the opposite. It makes them ready, almost eager, for more. The path from the cosy interventionism of a Christmas-tide foreign secretary to the sabre rattling, drone-killing, suicide bombing and destruction of the last decade is not as wide as might seem. Such intervention is not so much the white man’s burden as his morbid thrill

A few years ago, when Cardinal Ruini, the head of all Italian bishops,  warned Italian Catholics about marriage with  Muslims , some  politically correct  people said it was a Catholic overreaction to Muslim political extremism.  In reality , Cardinal Ruini was only giving young people some good advice, by saying that in addition to the problems any couple faces setting up a family, Catholics marrying Muslims have to reckon with extra difficulties arising from deep cultural as well as religious differences. To a Rabbi who has worked with couples in mixed marriage situations for over 40 years, Cardinal Ruini’s warning was simply a wise caution.

Teenage  marriages have a divorce rate double the rate of those married in their 20′s. Should a religious educator try to influence teenagers against early marriage? I think so! Should a youth worker who hears about a couple age 18 or 19 planning to get married  urge them, or encourage others to urge them, to stretch out their engagement and delay their marriage date? Again I think so! Should a priest, minister, imam or rabbi urge them to enroll in a pre-marriage counseling class? Definitely!

Mixed religion marriages also have a high divorce rate. Disagrement over raising   children is the number one issue. If a couple is of mixed religious background should a priest, rabbi, minister or imam insist that they reach a clear understanding on the issue of the children’s religious identity prior to marriage? Should religious educators try to influence teens and pre-teens to avoid dating people of a different religion, because dating leads to marriage and mixed marriages have so many extra difficulties involved that the chance of divorce is substantially higher? Many people who answered affirmatively to the questions in the first paragraph will be ambivalent about those just raised because we live in an open society that believes that love conquers all.

When a young couple is in love, they do not want to hear of poten­tial difficulties in their relationship and most rabbis, priests, imams and ministers do not want to be seen as negative. Yet we do have a duty to inform people of the facts of married life; and urge them to try to do something about the issues that will arise in a mixed marriage, even if it is late in the game.

Of course, the best time to make people aware of these unnecessary difficulties is before they are in love”, better yet before they first start dating. We have a duty to reduce the incidence of divorce if we can. An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure! The best time to educate against smoking is before kids start smoking. The best time to educate in favor of selective dating is before kids start dating. Love does not overcome all obstacles! People planning marriage should be challenged to face the facts. Kids should be informed of the difficulties before they get involved.

What are the facts? It has long been known that Catholic/Protestant and Jewish/Christian couples have a well above average divorce rate. A study of over 3,000 non-Hispanic white, first time marriages that occurred in the 1960′s, 70′s and 80′s, reported in the August 1993 issue of Demography, found that “First five year dissolution probabilities” increased by 55% for Jews who marry out and by 80% for Catholics who marry out. Similar increases were reported for both Liberal and Fundamentalist Protestants. Extra high divorce rates for religiously mixed couples have been well known to sociologists and marriage counselors for several decades. However, the new research found that for all religious groups, conversion no matter which way it went, reduced the extra-high divorce rate substantially. A national survey of American Catholics in 1999 found that 29% of Catholics have or had a non-Catholic spouse. The divorce rate for the mixed marriages was 22% compared to 10% for marriages of two Catholics, an increase of 120%. However, this cloud has a silver lining. While Catholics who marry non- Catholics have a divorce rate of 22%, Catholics who have a spouse that converts had a divorce rate of only14%, a 1/3 reduction of the chances of divorce. The same reduction (or more) in divorce rates probably takes place for Jews and Muslims.

Alas, most mixed couples do not try, or do not succeed, in unifying their family religiously, and thus do not reduce their extra-high probability of divorce. Jews and Muslims are the least likely to convert to the other spouse’s religion, less than 4% do. Catholics and Protestants are more likely to convert or to influence their partners to convert. Unfortunately, in the last few decades the percentage of Catholic-Protestant couples that unify their religious identity has declined substantially. The 1999 study of American Catholics found that almost half of the generation of Catholics who married out in the 40’s and 50’s unified their families. In the 60’s and 70’s only a little over a third did, and in the 80’s and 90’s only a little over a fifth did. Thus, one of the most important contributions that an Imam, Priest, Minister, Rabbi or religious educator can make to a couple who are planning a mixed marriage is to stress the importance of religious agreement. Delaying their marriage plans for a year or two is much better than a quick marriage and a quick divorce.

How to raise their children is the most important decision facing a religiously mixed couple planing a marriage. Some couples frankly admit that they do not intend to give their children any religious education or spiritual direction. Most people do not find this solution to be acceptable since usually one or both of the parents believe that it is important for children to believe in God and have a religious identity.

Exposing the children to both religions sounds better to most people. It sounds more liberal, evenhanded and even spiritually richer, but it risks really confusing the children. Catholics and Protestants both believe in the Divinity of Jesus. Jews and Muslims do not. Marriages between Christians and Jews or Muslims are much more problematical than marriages between different denominations of Christians. Since Christianity teaches that Jesus is the Son of God while Judaism and Islam deny Divinity to Jesus, the children will be caught between two contradictory beliefs.

Although some couples do try hard to give their children a good Jewish education and also a good Christian education and a true experience of both religions, very few actually go through with it. After a few years they sink to the lowest common denominator; celebrating Hanukkah plus Christmas, and visiting the grandparents for Easter and Passover. To be honest, a few superficial practices engaged in a couple of times a year will hardly be spiritually enriching for anyone. In effect, these couples are not doing both: they are really doing neither. They usually don’t like to admit this, because it sounds like they are depriving their children of any real religious identity. For parents to admit they do nothing is to admit that belief in God and a positive religious identity for their children is unimportant to them. Nevertheless, the both/neither option is the most popular one in Jewish/Christian marriages. It should not be surprising therefore that the most popular religious category for the children of Jewish/Christian marriages is “none”.

I analyzed a nationwide study of college freshmen conducted by UCLA for the American Council on Education. More than 290,000 college freshmen were surveyed. Of them, 3661 were children from mixed Jewish/non Jewish marriages. 41% of the children of Protestants married to Jews, and 32% of the children of Catholics married to Jews claimed no religious identity. This is not surprising, for as I stated before, most couples who plan to do both, end  up doing neither. However, I was surprised to find that from 7% to 18% of the children of these mixed marriages reject both parents’ religion, and have identified with another religion. Thus, 9.6% of the offspring of a Roman Catholic mother and a Jewish father identify as Protestant, Moron, Jehovah Witness, Buddhist or some other religion and 17.9% of the offspring of a Catholic father and a Jewish mother also identify with these other religions. The figures for Protestants married to Jews are similar but somewhat lower.

There is a reasonable explanation for the children’s rejection of both parents’ religion. Most mixed-couples that decide to raise the children as both/neither also say they will let the children decide which way to go when they are old enough. But such a decision is not based on an academic study of theology. Inevitably it means identifying with one parent’s religious heritage, and rejecting the other parent’s. Even if the parents say that whatever the child chooses is acceptable, most children feel uncomfortable in preferring the religious identity of one parent and rejecting the other. Many react by avoiding any decision, and thus have no religious identity. Some who are probably angrier, react by rejecting both parents equally, and select a third alternative for themselves. It is really unfair for parents to ask for a child to make such a decision, when they themselves have been unable to decide between the two of them, what the best course would be.

Although it is initially harder, it is better in the long run for the parents to decide themselves how their children should be raised. The children of course will know that their parents have different religions, but they will be told that their parents have decided that they should be one or the other. Thus the parents accept the responsibility for the choice, and the children do not have to struggle with the choice or be caught in between competing loyalties. Unfortunately, the number of parents who say they will do both has been increasing in the last two decades. Again it is important to urge people to really think through the consequences of a mixed marriage and its effect on the religious identity of the children.

These are some of the problems facing a religiously mixed couple seeking to marry and raise a family. They can not always be solved (that’s why the divorce rate more than doubles) but the only hope a couple has is to face the issues and decide to accept their responsibility for making the hard and sometimes sacrificial decisions that are called for. It may not be pleasant for a couple, their parents or clergy to confront these issues, but they cannot be resolved by denying them. If teachers of religion influence even a small percentage of their students to avoid all these problems by selective dating they may be able to save many couples from divorce and many children from marginal or conflicted religious identities. This would be one of the most important lessons they will ever teach.

There are some people who smoke and get away with it. There are some couples who seem to have no problems as a result of their mixed marriage. But in most cases these few exceptions only prove the rule. Everybody thinks they can beat the odds; that’s why so many people gamble. Very few people actually beat the odds,; that’s why they have so many giant hotels in Las Vegas. Teaching young people that marriage and children are too important to gamble with should be our goal.

Rabbi Maller’s web site is: rabbimaller.com

Jesus in Islam and Christmas

From www.Islamicity.com

Many Christians are unaware that the true spirit of reverence which Muslims display towards Jesus  and his mother Mary spring from the fountainhead of their faith as prescribed in the Holy Quran. Most do not know that a Muslim does not take the name of Jesus , without saying Eesa alai-hiss-salaam i.e. (Jesus peace be upon him).

Many Christians do not know that in the Holy Quran Jesus is mentioned by name twenty-five times.  For example:

.. We gave Jesus the son of Mary Clear (Signs) and strengthened him with the holy spirit. .. Quran 2:87

Behold! the angels said: “O Mary! Allah gives thee glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah. Quran 3:45

.. Christ Jesus the son of Mary was (no more than) an apostle of Allah .. Quran 4:171

And in their footsteps We sent Jesus the son of Mary, confirming the Law that had come before him .. Quran 5:46

And Zakariya and John, and Jesus and Elias: all in the ranks of the righteous: Quran 6:85

The Quranic Titles of Jesus

Though Jesus is mentioned by name in twenty-five places in the Holy Quran he is also addressed with respect as: “Ibne Maryam” – son of Mary; as Masi (Heb) Messiah – translated as Christ; “Abd-ullah” servant of Allah; “Rasul -Ullah” – Messenger of Allah.

He is spoken of as “the word of God”, as “the spirit of God”, as a “Sign of God”, and numerous other epithets of honor spread over fifteen different chapters. The Holy Quran honors this great Messenger of God, and over the past fourteen hundred years Muslims continue to hold Jesus as a symbol of truth.

Christmas and 25th of December

Jesus  is commonly considered to have been born on the 25th of December. However, it is common knowledge among Christian scholars that he was not born on this day. It is well known that the first Christian churches held their festival in May, April, or January. Scholars of the first two centuries AD even differ in which year he was born. Some believing that he was born fully twenty years before the current accepted date. So how was the 25th of December selected as the birthday of Jesus ?

Grolier’s encyclopedia says: “Christmas is the feast of the birth of Jesus Christ, celebrated on December 25 … Despite the beliefs about Christ that the birth stories expressed, the church did not observe a festival for the celebration of the event until the 4th century…. since 274, under the emperor Aurelian, Rome had celebrated the feast of the “Invincible Sun” on December 25. In the Eastern Church, January 6, a day also associated with the winter solstice, was initially preferred. In course of time, however, the West added the Eastern date as the Feast of the Epiphany, and the East added the Western date of Christmas”.

So who else celebrated the 25th of December as the birth day of their gods before it was agreed upon as the birth day of Jesus ? Well, there are the people of India who rejoice, decorate their houses with garlands, and give presents to their friends on this day. The people of China also celebrate this day and close their shops. Buddha is believed to have been born on this day. The great savior and god of the Persians, Mithras, is also believed to have been born on the 25th of December long before the coming of Jesus .

The Egyptians celebrated this day as the birth day of their great savior Horus, the Egyptian god of light and the son of the “virgin mother” and “queen of the heavens” Isis. Osiris, god of the dead and the underworld in Egypt, the son of “the holy virgin”, again was believed to have been born on the 25th of December.

The Greeks celebrated the 25th of December as the birthday of Hercules, the son of the supreme god of the Greeks, Zeus, through the mortal woman Alcmene Bacchus, the god of wine and revelry among the Romans (known among the Greeks as Dionysus) was also born on this day.

Adonis, revered as a “dying-and-rising god” among the Greeks, miraculously was also born on the 25th of December. His worshipers held him a yearly festival representing his death and resurrection, in midsummer. The ceremonies of his birthday are recorded to have taken place in the same cave in Bethlehem which is claimed to have been the birth place of Jesus .

The Scandinavians celebrated the 25th of December as the birthday of their god Freyr, the son of their supreme god of the heavens, Odin.

The Romans observed this day as the birthday of the god of the sun, Natalis Solis Invicti (“Birthday of Sol the invincible”). There was great rejoicing and all shops were closed. There was illumination and public games. Presents were exchanged, and the slaves were indulged in great liberties. These are the same Romans who would later preside over the council of Nicea (325 CE) which lead to the official Christian recognition of the “Trinity” as the “true” nature of God, and the “fact” that Jesus  was born on the 25th of December too.

In Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, Gibbon says: “The Roman Christians, ignorant of his (Christ’s) birth, fixed the solemn festival to the 25th of December, the Brumalia, or Winter Solstice, when the Pagans annually celebrated the birth of Sol ” vol. ii, p. 383.

Christians opposed to Christmas

There are several Christian groups who are opposed to Christmas. For example, they take the verse from the Bible in Jeremiah 10:2-4 as an admonition against decorating Christmas trees.

The King James Version reads: “Thus saith the Lord, Learn not the way of the heathen…. For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not.”

In order to understand this subject, it is helpful to trace some of the history of Christmas avoidance, particularly its roots in Puritanism.

The Puritans believed that the first-century church modeled a Christianity that modern Christians should copy. They attempted to base their faith and practice solely on the New Testament, and their position on Christmas reflected their commitment to practice a pure, scriptural form of Christianity. Puritans argued that God reserved to himself the determination of all proper forms of worship, and that he disapproved of any human innovations – even innovations that celebrated the great events of salvation. The nameChristmas also alienated many Puritans. Christmas, after all, meant “the mass of Christ.” The mass was despised as a Roman Catholic institution that undermined the Protestant concept of Christ, who offered himself once for all. The Puritans’ passionate avoidance of any practice that was associated with papal Rome caused them to overlook the fact that in many countries the name for the day had nothing to do with the Catholic mass, but focused instead on Jesus’ birth. The mass did not evolve into the form abhorred by Protestants until long after Christmas was widely observed. The two customs had separate, though interconnected, histories.

As ardent Protestants, Puritans identified the embracing of Christianity by the Roman Emperor Constantine in the early 300s CE as the starting point of the degeneration and corruption of the church. They believed the corruption of the church was brought on by the interweaving of the church with the pagan Roman state. To Puritans, Christmas was impure because it entered the Roman Church sometime in this period. No one knows the exact year or under what circumstances Roman Christians began to celebrate the birth of their Lord, but by the mid-300s CE, the practice was well established.

Islam requires Muslims to respect the faith of others

Regardless of historical facts and theological differences that Christians may have among themselves or theological differences Muslims may have with Christianity we cannot disregard the sentiments of practicing Christians who use this occasion to revere Jesus .

Prophet Muhammad  was always very respectful towards the Christians. According to Islamic historians, Ibn e Saad and Ibn e Hisham, once there was a delegation of Byzantine Christians, who were traveling from Yemen to Madinah. The delegation was lead by a bishop by the name of Zqyd al-Usquf, who came to discuss a number of issues with Prophet Muhammad . When the time of their prayer came, they asked the Prophet if they could do their worship in the mosque of the Prophet. He answered, “Conduct your service here in the mosque. It is a place dedicated to God.”

We should never ridicule the religious beliefs of others, no matter how much we disagree with them. God says in the Quran: “And insult not those whom they worship besides God, lest they insult God wrongfully without knowledge. Thus We have made fair-seeming to each people its own doings; then to their Lord is their return and He shall then inform them of all that they used to do”.  Quran, 6:108

By Gary Younge

The Guardian, 18 December 2011

Every effort must be made to thwart those who seek to embellish and distort America’s lamentable legacy in Iraq

On 19 November 2005 a US marine squad was struck by a roadside bomb in Haditha, in Iraq’s Anbar province, killing one soldier and seriously injuring two others. According to civilians they then went on the rampage, slaughtering 24 people. They included a 76-year-old man in a wheelchair and a three-year-old child. It was a massacre. “I think they were just blinded by hate … and they just lost control,” said James Crossan, one of the injured marines.

When he heard the news, Major General Steve Johnson, the American commander in Anbar province at the time, saw no cause for further examination. “It happened all the time … throughout the whole country. So you know, maybe, if I was sitting here [in Virginia] and heard that 15 civilians were killed I would have been surprised and shocked and done more to look into it. But at that point in time I felt that it was just a cost of doing business on that particular engagement.”

Eight soldiers were originally charged with the atrocity. Charges against six were dropped, one was acquitted and the other is awaiting trial. We know this because a New York Times reporter found documents from the US military’s internal investigation in a rubbish dump near Baghdad. An attendant was using them to make a fire to cook smoked carp for dinner.

The article ran on the same day that Barack Obama announced the withdrawal of American troops last week, hailing the almost nine-year war a ”success”, resulting in “an extraordinary achievement” that the troops can look on “with their heads held high”. And so it is that America moves on, casting evidence of its war crimes in the trash, holding nobody accountable and choosing to understand defeat as victory and failure as success.

While the departure of American troops should be greeted with guarded relief (guarded because the US will maintain its largest embassy in the world there along with thousands of armed private contractors), every effort must be made to thwart those who seek to embellish and distort their lamentable legacy. You’d think that would be easy. The case against this war has been prosecuted extensively both in this column and elsewhere. (The argument that the removal of Saddam Hussein somehow compensates for the lies, torture, displacement, carnage, instability and humans rights abuses is perverse. They used a daisy cutter to crack a walnut.)

This war started out with many parents but has ended its days an orphan, tarnishing the reputations of those who launched it and the useful idiots who gave them intellectual cover. Nobody has been held accountable; few accept responsibility.

In any case, they could not have done it alone. It was only possible thanks to the systemic collusion of a supine political class and a jingoistic political culture, not to mention a blank cheque from the British government. When the war started, almost three-quarters of Americans supported it. Only politicians of principle opposed it – and there were precious few of those. When Nancy Pelosi was asked why she had not pushed for impeachment of Bush when she became speaker in 2006 she said: “What about these other people who voted for that war with no evidence … Where are these Democrats going to be? Are they going to be voting for us to impeach a president who took us to war on information that they had also?”

Today, withdrawing the troops is about the only truly popular thing Obama has done in the last two years. Polls show more than 70% support withdrawal, roughly two-thirds oppose the war, and more than half believe it was a mistake. But there is a difference between regretting something and learning from it. And while there is ample evidence of the former, there is little to suggest the latter.

According to Christopher Gelpi, a political science professor at Duke University who specialises in public attitudes to foreign policy, the most important single factor shaping Americans’ opinions about any war is whether they think America will win. This solipsistic worldview is hardly conducive to the kind of introspection that might translate remorse into redemption.

It’s a mindset that understands the war in Vietnam as being wrong not because an independent country was invaded, flattened, millions murdered and thousands tortured. It was wrong because the US lost.

And it pervades the political spectrum. Even when the war’s critics slam the blood and treasure squandered, they usually refer only to American lives and American money. This is also the way pollsters frame it. A recent CBS poll asked: “Do you think removing Saddam Hussein from power was worth the loss of American life and other costs of attacking Iraq, or not?” (50% no, 41% yes), and “Do you think the result of the war with Iraq was worth the loss of American lives and other costs of attacking Iraq, or not?” (67% no, 24% yes). The cost to Iraqis simply does not feature.

“It is the end for the Americans only,” wrote Emad Risn, argued an Iraqi columnist in a government-funded newspaper. “Nobody knows if the war will end for Iraqis too.” And few Americans seem to care. It’s been some time since Iraq featured at all on the nation’s priorities, let alone high. Rightly Americans fret about the fate of veterans returning to a depressed economy with a range of both physical and mental disabilities. But Iraqi civilians barely get a look-in.

According to the New York Times report, among the discarded testimony was an interview with Sergeant Major Edward Sax. “I had marines shoot children in cars, and deal with the marines individually, one on one, about it because they have a hard time dealing with that.” When they told him they didn’t know there were children on board he told them they were not to blame, claiming killing would impose a lifelong burden on them.

Progressives, seeking to link the economic collapse to military misadventure, often argue that nation building should begin at home, not in Iraq, thereby – wittingly or not – transforming Iraqis in the public imagination from victims of illegal warfare to recipients of illicit welfare. Without any apparent irony, Obama marked the end of the occupation by calling on others not to meddle in Iraq’s internal affairs.

The combined effect of all of this is like breaking someone’s jaw with your fist only to bemoan the excruciating pain that has been visited on your hand.

America is not alone in this. Amnesia and indifference are the privileges of the powerful. It is for the Kenyans and Algerians to recall the atrocities committed by the British and French under colonialism while the colonisers remain in flight from their history. “The essential characteristic of a nation is that all its individuals must have many things in common,” wrote the 19th-century French philosopher Ernest Renan, “and must have forgotten many things as well.”

No wonder then that a recent Pew poll found that despite all the evidence to the contrary 56% of Americans said they thought the invasion had succeeded in its goals while the number of those who think the invasion was the right decision stands at its highest in five years. The cost of doing business always seems more reasonable when someone else is paying the price.

By Daliah Merzaban

Before I genuinely began to cultivate and nurture my relationship with God, I regarded the five daily prayers that Islam enjoins on believers as laborious. It seemed impractical to expect that I would be able to stop what I was doing during my busy work schedule to take time out and pray.

Working as a news wire journalist, I was often spending upwards of 10 hours a day in the office or at conferences, interviews and meetings, barely able to make time for a lunch break. If I wasn’t working, my time was divided between house chores, errands, family and friends, and exercise. I was punctual with everything in my life, except that I was late five times a day.

In my mind, it was not viable to expect that I could wake up before the crack of dawn to pray the early-morning prayer, fajr, otherwise I would be too tired to work effectively later that morning. It also seemed inefficient to interrupt my work meetings to pray duhr, the mid-day prayer, and asr, the afternoon prayer.

Making the sunset prayer maghrib was often a challenge because the window to pray is typically quite short and coincides with the time between finishing work, having dinner and returning home. So, in effect, the only prayer that was feasible for me to pray on time was isha, the evening prayer. For most of my life, thus, I would at best pray all five prayers in the evening, or skip prayers here and there to accommodate my immediate commitments.

Without realizing it, my inconsistency and approach to praying trivialized the principle behind performing prayers throughout the day. I believed in God and loved Him, but on my own terms, not on the terms very clearly set out in the Quran and Prophetic teachings. Yet praying the five daily prayers, at their prescribed times, is the backbone of being a Muslim; we cannot stand upright in our faith without them. It is one of the essential practices that God has called on those who endeavor to live in Islam, a state of existence whereby a human strives to live in submission to God.

When I came to truly understand the importance of prayer, the realization was both overwhelming and quick. It dawned on me that if I was not fulfilling this precondition, then I really could not claim to be Muslim. Even if I desired to have a solid connection with the Almighty I was not taking the necessary steps to do so. I promptly reoriented my life and it has now been a year and a half that I have not intentionally missed a prayer time, whether I am in the office, mall, grocery store, out with friends or travelling.

Looking back, I see how wrong I was about the impracticality of Islamic prayers, which are succinct and straightforward notwithstanding their resonance. When I moved from trying to fit prayers into my life to fitting my life around my prayer schedule, I instantly removed a great deal of clutter from my daily routine. Since regular prayer promotes emotional consistency and tranquility, I began to eliminate excess negativity and cut down on unnecessary chitchat, helping me be more focused, productive and patient.

Over a short period of time, what amazed me was how easy and fluid the prayers became. Performing the early-morning prayer actually gave me a burst of energy during the day and, gradually, the prayers that I had initially perceived as cumbersome became an essential facet of my routine. With God’s help, I would find ways to make a prayer regardless of the hurdles. While in Canada for the summer, I would often catch duhr prayer in a department store fitting room, with the help of a handy Islamic prayer compass application on my iPhone.

“‘Verily the soul becomes accustomed to what you accustom it to.’ That is to say: what you at first burden the soul with becomes nature to it in the end.”

This is a line drawn from a magnificent book I am in the process of reading by great Islamic thinker Al-Ghazali, entitled “Invocations and Supplications: Book IX of the Revival of Religious Sciences.” Al-Ghazali describes a series of formulas, drawn from the Qur’an and Hadith, which we can repeat to help us attain greater proximity to the divine and purify our hearts.
At each turn in my quest to enrich my faith, I have found that what at first appears difficult becomes easy when performed with sincerity. Soon after I reoriented my life to revolve around prayer, the five prayers felt insufficient in expressing my devotion. I examined Hadith, or the traditions of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, and discovered there were optional prayers I could add to my routine. Since then, I have not let a day pass without praying them.

To supplement my prayers, I have integrated various zikr, or remembrance and mentioning of God, into my days. Zikr, including repeating such phrases as “la illa ha il Allah” (There is no God but God), habitually draws our attention back to God.

Among the many rich invocations mentioned in Ghazali’s book is this one which I have started to incorporate. As we leave our houses each day, if we say “In the name of God” (Bismillah), God will guide us; when we add “I trust in God” (Tawakalt al Allah), God will protect us; and if we conclude with “There is no might or power save with God” (La hawla wa la quwwata illa billah), God will guard us.

I suppose to an outsider, these acts of devotion can appear a bit obsessive, and I have had a couple of people say this to me. Yet it is an obsession with the greatest possible consequences that can improve rather than disintegrate one’s disposition. The more time I devote to God, the greater the peace of mind I find filling my life and the more focused I become on what is important — such as treating my family and friends honourably, working hard in my job, giving charity with compassion and generosity, and maintaining integrity.

Remembering God throughout the day, through prayer and invocation, truly does polish the heart as Hadith teaches; you erase obstructions that would impede faith in its purest form.

“Truly when a man loves a thing, he repeatedly mentions it, and when he repeatedly mentions a thing, even if that may be burdensome, he loves it,” writes Ghazali.

Daliah Merzaban is an Egyptian-Canadian journalist, editor and economic analyst with a decade of experience in the Gulf region, Egypt and Canada.

Source: Dew Point

Christian missionaries are interested in proving the superiority of the Bible to the Qur’an. They say that the Christian Bible (the Old Testament and the New Testament) is the true word of God: the Qur’an is not. They try to prove this by asserting that when the Qur’an’s narratives differ from the Bible’s narratives about the same event; the Qur’an must be wrong. It is sad that these missionaries, who claim to be the disciples of Jesus, ignore his teaching to love not only your neighbors, but also your enemies. They would reply that the search for God’s truth is so important that it justifies insulting other peoples prophets and sacred texts even when they also teach monotheism. These Christian missionaries are ignorant of, or simply reject, two very important Ahadith, that I, a Reform Rabbi who considers himself to be a Muslim Jew, always respect.

I am a Muslim Jew i.e. a faithful Jew submitting to the will of God, because I am a Reform Rabbi. (Reform Jews are now the largest of the Jewish denominations in the U.S. In the U.K..Reform Judaism is called Liberal Judaism.)  As a Rabbi I am faithful to the covenant that God made with Abraham, the first Muslim Jew, and I submit to be bound by the covenant and commandments that God made with the people of Israel at Mount Sinai. As a Reform Rabbi I believe that Rabbis should modify Jewish traditions to prevent them from making religion to hard to practice. This is an important teaching in the Qur’an (7:157) and one that prophet Muhammad taught 12 centuries before the rise of Reform Judaism in the early 19^th century. As Abu Huraira related: The Prophet said, “Religion is very easy and whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way.  So you should not be extremists, but try to be near to perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded.” (Bukhari book 2 #38)

The two Ahadith that every Christian missionary should learn and abide by, teach respect for the Sacred Scripture and the Prophets of other monotheistic religions. A  hadîth Narrated by Abu Huraira   says, “The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. Allah’s Apostle said (to the Muslims). “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in Allah, and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever is revealed to you.’ ” (Bukhari book 92  #460 and book 93  #632)

Following Muhammad’s teaching I too neither believe nor disbelieve in the Qur’an. I do respect the Qur’an very much as a kindred revelation, first given to a kindred people, in a kindred language. In fact, the Arab people, the Arab language and Muslim theology are closer to my own people, language and theology than that of any other on earth. Islam teaches clearly that God does not have just one people or one true religion. Rather, God chose not to create human beings as one nation or with only one religion so that each religion could compete with all the others in order to see which religion produces the highest percentage of moral and loving people; and which people best embody in their personal and communal lives the moral teachings of their prophet. As it is written in the Qur’an [5.48] “For every one of you did We appoint a law and a way. If Allah had pleased He would have made you one people, but (He didn’t) that He might test you in what He gave you. Therefore compete with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; for all return to Allah, so He will let you know that in which you differed.” This is a wonderful further development of the teaching of the Biblical prophet Micah (4:5) that in the end of days-the Messianic Age “All people will walk, each in the name of their own God, and we shall walk in the name of the Lord our God forever.”

In terms of respect for the prophets of other religions I have not seen the equal of the following  hadith: Narrated Abu Huraira: Two persons, a Muslim and a Jew, quarreled. The Muslim said, “By Him Who gave Muhammad superiority over all the people! The Jew said, “By Him Who gave Moses superiority over all the people!” At that the Muslim raised his hand and slapped the Jew on the face. The Jew went to the Prophet and informed him of what had happened. The Prophet sent for the Muslim and asked him about it. The Muslim informed him of the event. The Prophet said, “Do not give me superiority over Moses, for on the Day of Resurrection all the people will fall unconscious and I will be one of them. I will be the first to gain consciousness, and I will see Moses standing and holding the side of the Throne (of Allah). I will not know whether (Moses) had also fallen unconscious and got up before me, or Allah has exempted him from that stroke.” (Bukhari  book 76 #524)  The people of the book; Jews, Christians and Muslims alike, should learn humility from this profound teaching of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).

But missionaries are not the only ones who denigrate the prophethood of prophet Muhammad. Academics do the same thing when they assert that Muhammad took (stole) things from Jewish post Biblical literature; and that he got things wrong when the Qur’an relates different things about events in the Hebrew Bible (what Christians call the Old Testament). An example of these false accusations is the  Qur’an’s account Cain’s killing of Able Qur’an 5:27-32: “²⁷Tell them the tale of the two sons of Adam as it really was. Both presented an offering. It was accepted from one of them, but it was not accepted from the other, who said, “I’m going to kill you!” The former answered, “God only accepts from the conscientious.” ²⁸Even if you stretch out your hand to kill me, I am not stretching out my hand to kill you, for I fear God, the Lord of the worlds. ²⁹I would rather you bring on my sin as well as your sin, so you will be one of those destined for the Fire, for that is the reward of the unjust. ³⁰But he (Cain) did not hold back from killing his brother (Able). He murdered him and became one of the lost.

³¹Then God sent a raven to scratch up the ground to show him (Cain) how to hide his brother’s naked remains. He said: Woe is me! Am I not able even to be like raven to hide the naked corpse of my brother? So he (Cain) regretted (what he had done). ³²Because of that, We decreed for the Children of Israel that whoever kills a human being for other than murder or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all humankind, and whoever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind.”

The first difference is one of style. The Torah loves details and contains a vast number of names of people and places. The Qur’an contains very few names.  The Qur’an does not name which of his two sons Abraham took with him for the sacrifice; the Torah does (Genesis 22). The Qur’an does not name the two sons of Adam; the Torah does. For Jews the names were very important because all these people were like family or tribal members. For Muslims the names were not so important because the Muslims were destined to be a multinational multiethnic community.

The second difference is in emphasis.   Both the Qur’an and the Torah relate the same event; but they point to different aspects of it. The Qur’an does not describe what the two offerings were, but states. “God only accepts from the conscientious.” making explicit the religious lesson that intent is more important than the specific ritual material offering, and this is why God accepted one and not the other. The Torah (Genesis 4:3-8) relates that, “Cain brought an offering to the Lord from the fruit of the soil; ⁴and Abel, for his part, brought the choicest of the firstlings of his flock. The Lord paid heed to Abel and his offering, ⁵but to Cain and his offering He paid no heed. Cain was much distressed and his face fell. ^{6 T}he Lord said to Cain, “Why are you distressed, and why is your face fallen? ⁷Surely, if you do right, there is uplift. But if you do not do right sin crouches at the door; its urge is toward you, yet you can be its master.” ⁸Cain said to his brother Abel…and when they were in the field Cain set upon his brother Abel and killed him.”  The Torah does not explicitly state the reason one was accepted and the other one was not, as the Qur’an does, (it does state “Cain brought an offering” while Abel “ brought the choicest of the firstlings of his flock”) because the lesson is not just why God chose one over the other. The real issue for Jews is how do people in general handle rejection and failure. We are all going to lose or be rejected sometimes; do we yield to frustration, envy and anger or do we control ourselves-”be its master”. This is why the Torah states that Cain said something to Abel and then doesn’t tell us what he said. It doesn’t matter what he said; there are no words that justify murder. Both  lessons; the importance of intentionally in religious behavior, and the importance of avoiding anger and violence through mastering our self control, are important, and both Judaism and Islam teach both of them.

The third difference is the account of the raven teaching Cain how to dispose of his brother’s corpse and the final lesson that killing one person, results in all that persons future descendants never having life. This is not found in the Written Torah of Moses, but it is found in the Oral Torah of the Rabbis. A Rabbinic text from the sixth or seventh century, Pirkey deRabbi Eli`ezer chapter 21 relates that “Adam and his helpmate (Eve) were sitting, weeping and mourning for him (Able), and they did not know what to do, for they were unaccustomed to burial. A raven whose fellow-bird died said, “ I will teach this man what to do.” What did he do? He took his fellow and dug in the earth, covered him and buried him before their eyes. Adam said, “I’ll do what this raven did.” And he took the body of Abel, dug in the earth and covered it.” Academics say this is one of many examples of Muhammad borrowing material from Jewish sources. As a rabbi I can tell you this is not true. Rabbinic texts are usually  collections of many different Oral Torah traditions passed down orally over the generations. The early parts of this book may date from the 5^th century and the latest parts may date from the 8^th century. The lesson from the raven might preceded the birth of Muhammad by 100-150 years, or it might date from a century after his death. It doesn’t matter because if you believe that there is only one God who has sent prophets to all the nations of the world, the fact that some material from one holy text is similar to material in another holy text is to be expected. Indeed, you might expect there to be much more duplication when every prophet is reciting from the same source.

The ending conclusion about the cumulative sins of murdering one person is clearly stated for Jews, in the Mishnah, the first written edition of the Oral Torah c.200-250 CE, and for Muslims in the Qur’an. The Mishnah and the Talmud are collections of Oral Torah, similar in function as another source for  God’s law, to the Ahadith and the Sunna of  Prophet Muhammad. Mishnah Sanhedrin 4:5 states, “We observe [in the case of] Cain who killed his brother, “the bloods of your brother call out.” The word is in the plural [to teach] his blood and the blood of his descendants. Therefore Adam was created alone, to teach you that anyone who destroys one human soul [or, in another reading, “one Israelite soul”] is considered as if he destroyed an entire world, and anyone who establishes one human soul is as if he has saved an entire world.” And the Qur’an states, “³²Because of that, We decreed for the Children of Israel that whoever kills a human being for other than murder or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all humankind, and whoever saves  the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all humankind. Our messengers came to them with proofs, but many of them throughout the land are still excessive.” Note that the Qur’an states explicitly that God decreed  “for the Children of Israel” by messengers (plural) the same lesson the Qur’an is teaching right now to Muslims. Notice that in the Oral Torah tradition the original ‘mankind’ has been replaced by ‘ Israelite’ due to the two big wars that the Jews fought and lost with the Romans (66-70 CE and 132-135 Ce) and then three centuries (330-634 CE) of persecution of Jews in the Byzantine Roman Empire until they were liberated by the Arab conquest of most of Byzantine Rome. Thus parallels between Muslim and Jewish texts do not disprove the Divine origin of the Qur’an. These parallels prove it.

The differences in details between the Torah and the Qur’an, and the parallels between the Qur’an and the Oral Torah,  do not in any way prove that the Qur’an is not the word of God. They only show that the Holy One shapes the message of each prophet to fit the circumstances of the people he is sent to. What we have in common is what we should focus on. As the Qur’an (3:64) states: “Say; “O People of the Book! come to common terms between us and you: That we worship none but Allah. that we associate no partners with Him; that we erect not, from among ourselves, Lords and patrons other than Allah.” If then they turn back (reject) you. say: “Bear witness that we (at least) are Muslims (who accept all the previous prophets).

Allah’s Apostle was a messenger for all nations and not just for Arabs or Muslims: “We have not sent you but as an unequalled mercy for all the worlds” (Anbiya 21:107). I think of myself as a Reform Rabbi who is a Muslim Jew. Actually I am a Muslim Jew i.e. a faithful Jew submitting to the will of God, because I am a Reform Rabbi. As a Rabbi I am faithful to the covenant that God made with Abraham – the first Muslim Jew, and I submit to the covenant and its commandments that God made with the people of Israel at Mount Sinai. As a Reform Rabbi I believe that Jewish spiritual leaders should modify Jewish law and tradition as social and historical circumstances change and develop. I also believe we should not make religion difficult for people to practice by adding an increasing number of restrictions to the commandments we received at Mount Sinai.. These are lessons that prophet Muhammad taught 12 centuries before the rise of Reform Judaism in the early 19th century.
Although most Jews today are no longer Orthodox Jews, if the Jews of Muhammad’s time, had followed these teachings of prophet Muhammad, Reform Judaism would have started 1,400 years ago. (In the U.K. Reform Jews are called Liberal Jews. Reform Jews in the U.K.are what we in North America call Conservative Jews.)

I believe that Muhammad was a prophet of Reform Judaism to the Orthodox Jews of his day; although he was 1,200 years ahead of his time. During the six centuries between the birth of Jesus and the arrival of Muhammad in Yathrib (Medina), almost all Jews became Orthodox Jews. Orthodox Rabbis added many extra prohibitions to Jewish law and everyone became increasingly strict in the observance of the laws of Shabbat and Kashrut (dietary laws). Orthodox Rabbis did not follow the example of Muhammad as narrated by his wife ‘Aisha: Whenever Allah’s Apostle was given the choice of one of two matters, he would choose the easier of the two, as long as it was not sinful to do so, but if it was  sinful to do so, he would not approach it. ‘Aisha also said:  Whenever Allah’s Apostle ordered the Muslims to do something, he used to order them to do deeds which were easy for them to do.

Although the Torah of Moses prohibits adding to the commandments (Deuteronomy 4:2 and 13:1) over the centuries Orthodox Rabbis added many restrictions to the laws of prohibited activities under the theory of building a protective fence around the Torah’s laws. Also, whenever Orthodox Rabbis were in doubt if an animal had been slaughtered correctly according to Jewish law, or if one could eat a new species of bird, it was ruled prohibited. They were not guided by Muhammad’s principle as narrated by Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas: The Prophet said, “The most sinful person among the Muslims is the one who asked about something which had not been prohibited, but was prohibited because of his asking.”

The Torah also teaches:”When a woman has a discharge, her discharge being blood from her body, do not come near her for seven days; she is taboo for her menstrual period ” (Leviticus 15:19). Orthodox Rabbis extended the period of no intimate contact by several extra days and demanded no physical contact at all during that period (again making a fence around the Torah;s laws). Muhammad supported the Torah’s ban on sex during a woman’s period, but opposed the additional restrictions enacted by Orthodox Rabbi. As Thabit narrated it from Anas: “Among the Jews, when a woman menstruated, they did not dine with her, nor did they live with them in their houses (they slept in separate beds). The Companions asked the Apostle, and Allah, the Exalted revealed: ‘They ask you about menstruation; say it is a pollution, so keep away from woman during menstruation  and do not approach until they are clean again.’ (Qur’an 2: 222). The Messenger of Allah said: ‘Do everything except inter
course’. Jews heard that and said: This man does not want to leave anything we do without opposing us in it.” Reform Rabbis advise a Jewish Couple today would be much closer to what Muhammad said than to what Orthodox Rabbis would say.

Unlike Orthodox Rabbis, Reform Rabbis accept the doctrine of nullification, which teaches that one verse in scripture can nullify another, and that rulings can be changed due to changed circumstances. Muhammad provides an excellent example of this principle in the following account. The Prophet originally told women not to visit graveyards, but toward the end of his life, he said to them: “I had told you not to visit graves; now I am telling you to visit them.” The reason was that Arabian women used to wail at graves. The Prophet wanted this practice to be stopped. Therefore, he banned women from visiting graves to start with. After sometime, when Muslim women were better aware of how Islam wants them to behave in different situations, he allowed them such visits. In fact, the Prophet encourages visiting graveyards because such a visit reminds the visitor of his or her own death and the fact that they would have to stand in front of God when their actions are reckoned to
determine their reward or punishment. Scholars like Ibn Qudamah, of the Hanbali school of law, make it clear that since this is the purpose of visiting graveyards, both men and women need such visits.

Another important teaching of the Qur’an for people all over the world today is that God chose not to create human beings as one nation and bestowed upon them free will to believe or not to believe. As it is written in the Qur’an [5.48] “For every one of you did We appoint a law and a way. If God had pleased He would have made you one people, but (He didn’t) that He might test you in what He gave you. Therefore compete with one another to hasten to virtuous deeds; for all return to God, so He will let you know (after Judgment Day) that in which you differed.” This is a wonderful further development of the teaching of the Biblical prophet Micah (4:5) that in the end of days—the Messianic Age—“All people will walk, each in the name of their own God, and we shall walk in the name of the Lord our God forever.”

A Muslim is one who submits to the will of God and believes that God has sent thousands of  different prophets to the many peoples of the world. As a Reform Rabbi I believe that Muhammad is a Prophet.  I believe the Qur’an is as true for Muslims as the Torah is true for Jews. Indeed, I love the Hadith also narrated by Abu Huraira that says, “The people of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and then explain it in Arabic to the Muslims. God’s Apostle said (to the Muslims). “Do not believe the people of the Book, nor disbelieve them, but say, ‘We believe in God, and whatever is revealed to us, and whatever was revealed to you.’ ” Following Muhammad’s teaching I too neither believe nor disbelieve in the Qur’an. I do respect the Qur’an very much as a kindred revelation, first given to a kindred people, in a kindred language.   In fact, the Arab people, the Arabic language and  the Qur’an’s theology are closer to my own people, language and theology than that
of any other on earth. Of course, more than 80% of Muslims in the world today are not of Arab decent. But Arabic is the sacred language of all Muslims, as Hebrew is the sacred language of all Jews, and the tradition that Arabs and Jews are cousins is widely accepted.  This makes the present conflict between the Palestinians and the Israelis especially tragic. It is very important to realize that the conflict is a political one and not a religious one. There can be no religious conflict between religions like Judaism and Islam because neither of them declare that their scriptures are the only ones from God. The strong support that the Qur’an gives to religious pluralism is a lesson that is sorely needed by religious fundamentalists of all religions in the world today. It should also be a decisive guide to political and political-religious leaders to avoid maximum claims of righteousness and instead seek to find ways to share with, and care for, other nations, peoples and religions.

Wadah Khanfar

from The Guardian, Monday 28 November 2011

Ennahda, the Islamic party in Tunisia, won 41% of the seats of the Tunisian constitutional assembly last month, causing consternation in the west. But Ennahda will not be an exception on the Arab scene. Last Friday the Islamic Justice and Development Party took the biggest share of the vote in Morocco and will lead the new coalition government for the first time in history. And tomorrow Egypt’s electionsbegin, with the Muslim Brotherhood predicted to become the largest party. There may be more to come. Should free and fair elections be held in Yemen, once the regime of Ali Abdullah Saleh falls, the Yemeni Congregation for Reform, also Islamic, will win by a significant majority. This pattern will repeat itself whenever the democratic process takes its course.

In the west, this phenomenon has led to a debate about the “problem” of the rise of political Islam. In the Arab world, too, there has been mounting tension between Islamists and secularists, who feel anxious about Islamic groups. Many voices warn that the Arab spring will lead to an Islamic winter, and that the Islamists, though claiming to support democracy, will soon turn against it. In the west, stereotypical images that took root in the aftermath of 9/11 have come to the fore again. In the Arab world, a secular anti-democracy camp has emerged in both Tunisia and Egypt whose pretext for opposing democratisation is that the Islamists are likely to be the victors.

But the uproar that has accompanied the Islamists’ gains is unhelpful; a calm and well-informed debate about the rise of political Islam is long overdue.

First, we must define our terms. “Islamist” is used in the Muslim world to describe Muslims who participate in the public sphere, using Islam as a basis. It is understood that this participation is not at odds with democracy. In the west, however, the term routinely describes those who use violence as a means and an end – thus Jihadist Salafism, exemplified by al-Qaida, is called “Islamist” in the west, despite the fact that it rejects democratic political participation (Ayman al-Zawahiri, the leader of al-Qaida, criticised Hamas when it decided to take part in the elections for the Palestinian legislative council, and has repeatedly criticised the Muslim Brotherhood for opposing the use of violence).

This disconnect in the understanding of the term in the west and in the Muslim world was often exploited by despotic Arab regimes to suppress Islamic movements with democratic political programmes. It is time we were clear.

Reform-based Islamic movements, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, work within the political process. They learned a bitter lesson from their armed conflict in Syria against the regime of Hafez al-Assad in 1982, which cost the lives of more than 20,000 people and led to the incarceration or banishment of many thousands more. The Syrian experience convinced mainstream Islamic movements to avoid armed struggle and to observe “strategic patience” instead.

Second, we must understand the history of the region. In western discourse Islamists are seen as newcomers to politics, gullible zealots who are motivated by a radical ideology and lack experience. In fact, they have played a major role in the Arab political scene since the 1920s. Islamic movements have often been in opposition, but since the 1940s they have participated in parliamentary elections, entered alliances with secular, nationalist and socialist groups, and participated in several governments – in Sudan, Jordan, Yemen and Algeria. They have also forged alliances with non-Islamic regimes, like the Nimeiri regime in Sudan in 1977.

A number of other events have had an impact on the collective Muslim mind, and have led to the maturation of political Islam: the much-debated Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979; the military coup in Sudan in 1989; the success of the Algerian Islamic Salvation Front in the 1991 elections and the army’s subsequent denial of its right to govern; the conquest of much of Afghan territory by the Taliban in 1996 leading to the establishment of its Islamic emirate; and the success in 2006 of Hamas in the Palestinian Legislative Council elections. The Hamas win was not recognised, nor was the national unity government formed. Instead, a siege was imposed on Gaza to suffocate the movement.

Perhaps one of the most influential experiences has been that of the Justice and Development Party (AKP) in Turkey, which won the elections in 2002. It has been a source of inspiration for many Islamic movements. Although the AKP does not describe itself as Islamic, its 10 years of political experience have led to a model that many Islamists regard as successful. The model has three important characteristics: a general Islamic frame of reference; a multi-party democracy; and significant economic growth.

These varied political experiences have had a profound impact on political Islam’s flexibility and capacity for political action, and on its philosophy, too.

However, political Islam has also faced enormous pressures from dictatorial Arab regimes, pressures that became more intense after 9/11. Islamic institutions were suppressed. Islamic activists were imprisoned, tortured and killed. Such experiences gave rise to a profound bitterness. Given the history, it is only natural that we should hear overzealous slogans or intolerant threats from some activists. Some of those now at the forefront of election campaigns were only recently released from prison. It would not be fair to expect them to use the voice of professional diplomats.

Despite this, the Islamic political discourse has generally been balanced. The Tunisian Islamic movement has set a good example. Although Ennahda suffered under Ben Ali’s regime, its leaders developed a tolerant discourse and managed to open up to moderate secular and leftist political groups. The movement’s leaders have reassured Tunisian citizens that it will not interfere in their personal lives and that it will respect their right to choose. The movement also presented a progressive model of women’s participation, with 42 female Ennahda members in the constitutional assembly.

The Islamic movement’s approach to the west has also been balanced, despite the fact that western countries supported despotic Arab regimes. Islamists know the importance of international communication in an economically and politically interconnected world.

Now there is a unique opportunity for the west: to demonstrate that it will no longer support despotic regimes by supporting instead the democratic process in the Arab world, by refusing to intervene in favour of one party against another and by accepting the results of the democratic process, even when it is not the result they would have chosen. Democracy is the only option for bringing stability, security and tolerance to the region, and it is the dearest thing to the hearts of Arabs, who will not forgive any attempts to derail it.

The region has suffered a lot as a result of attempts to exclude Islamists and deny them a role in the public sphere. Undoubtedly, Islamists’ participation in governance will give rise to a number of challenges, both within the Islamic ranks and with regard to relations with other local and international forces. Islamists should be careful not to fall into the trap of feeling overconfident: they must accommodate other trends, even if it means making painful concessions. Our societies need political consensus, and the participation of all political groups, regardless of their electoral weight. It is this interplay between Islamists and others that will both guarantee the maturation of the Arab democratic transition and lead to an Arab political consensus and stability that has been missing for decades.

• By Syed Hamad Ali, Special to Weekend Review

Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad was voted Britain's most influential Muslim by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre in Jordan

For a man who is apparently Britain’s most influential Muslim, Shaikh Abdul Hakim Murad has rather unorthodox views on the way Islam is presented in the Western media. “I don’t think Islam is ever covered,” he tells Weekend Review.

“I have never actually seen an article in a Western newspaper that covers the core aspects of Islamic religion that are of significance to Muslims themselves. The focus is exclusively on social, economic and political dimensions of the religion. I have done interviews with journalists who say they don’t want to talk about the religious dimensions of Islam. That’s just the nature of modern Britain, unfortunately — we are going through a very secular period.”

Is there an Islam fatigue in Britain? “I think it’s not just an Islam fatigue,” he says. “It’s that people have been told everything about Islam except what makes it significant to Muslims themselves, which is often why they are so mystified.”

I am sitting with Murad — also known as Dr Timothy Winter — in his office at the Faculty of Divinity, Cambridge University. Around us on both sides are shelved an ocean of books, including many on Islam and religion with titles such as Ibn Batuta and Islam and Taoism, some in distant foreign languages (Murad speaks Arabic, Persian and Turkish).

While he is speaking, I wonder whether this rather bookish, almost quintessential scholar of the Oxbridge type could really be Britain’s most influential Muslim, as voted by the Royal Islamic Strategic Studies Centre, based in Jordan. It has compiled a list of 500 most influential Muslims in the world.

Murad himself dismisses his lofty new title. “It’s a little bit of silliness, isn’t it?” he asks. “I don’t know how you could rank such people. I am sure if you would ask most Muslims in England they would certainly name other people. They wouldn’t have heard of me.

“My interests are rather abstract, philosophical and academic. Most Muslims in Britain are interested in more practical bread and butter issues. So I think it was probably a curious misunderstanding that led them to put my name on the list.”

A Muslim celebrity he may not be like the boxer Amir Khan or singer Yousuf Islam, but Murad is certainly a well-respected figure among Muslims, not only in Britain but also internationally, as a leading Islamic scholar. He holds a number of prestigious titles, including director of the Sunna Project, secretary of the Muslim Academic Trust and director of the Anglo-Muslim Fellowship for Eastern Europe.

Last year he helped set up the Cambridge Muslim College, which trains imams for mosques in the United Kingdom. Murad is also very active in the local community and is heading a new mosque-building project in Cambridge, set to replace the present one which is stretched to capacity, with worshippers being forced to pray on the street outside.

Born in 1960, Murad converted to Islam at the age of 19. Back then, many people in Britain did not know much about the religion. The reaction from others to his new faith was one of curiosity. “The main concern was that I might have joined a cult,” he says. “That I was being manipulated by some evil puppet master, which was a fear among middle-class parents at the time. It was an age when cults were spreading very fast in Western countries. But as soon as it became clear that’s not what I was interested in, I think their anxieties receded.”

Compared to Britain’s total Muslim population, estimated at 2.4 million, converts form a small percentage at an estimated 60,000 to 70,000.

However, one odd bit of fact about converts in this country is that they sometimes keep their Islamic faith a secret by not telling others, according to Murad.

He attributes this strange phenomenon partly to an English sense of reticence. “We call them submarines,” he explains. “People who are under the surface and are practising the religion, including praying and fasting. But their close friends and family don’t know.”

For instance, Murad knows one professor at Cambridge University who has been a Muslim for 30 years and comes to the mosque when he can but his colleagues at the university aren’t aware he is a Muslim. Then there is a Christian clergyman who converted to Islam but hasn’t told his wife because he is sure she wouldn’t understand and would divorce him and he would end up losing the children.

But while the case of some converts can at times be rather awkward, Murad himself has lived quite a colourful life as a Muslim. Since graduating from Cambridge University with a first-class honours in Arabic in 1983, he travelled to Egypt, where he studied Islam at the renowned Al Azhar University. He lived for three years in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, before returning to London to study Turkish and Persian. Murad is at present the Shaikh Zayed Lecturer in Islamic Studies at Cambridge University.

Muslims are sometimes criticised for apparently having developed a “victim mentality” — and some prominent Islamic thinkers have also kind of agreed with this. Does Murad concur?
“I don’t find that particularly among Muslim communities,” he says. “The kind of Muslim leaders who the media notice may well think that Muslims are being unfairly singled out. That the West didn’t come to their rescue in Bosnia, the West has been indifferent to their fate in Palestine, the West did something to Iraq that it would never have done to, say, Spain under General Franco. That it is behaving in a cavalier fashion in Afghanistan. That it supports unpopular autocratic regimes throughout the Muslim world — and therefore the West is generically hostile to Muslims and victimises them. I think that is a ridiculous oversimplification.

“There are some Muslims who resent the fact that so many of the victims of Western foreign policy have been Muslims. But I don’t think that is the prevailing view of most mosque-going Muslims in the UK. They are more interested in immediate bread and butter issues of getting jobs, educating their children and finding their way into society.”

Alongside his passionate defence of Britain’s Muslim community, Murad is known for speaking eloquently about those who have gone to the extreme within the religion. I ask him how he would argue, using religion, against these people who find themselves at the radical fringe?

“Well, one has to do it using the traditional instruments of Muslim debate, which are Quran and Hadith quotations with reference to the past consensus of the scholars of the religion,” he says. “That debate is easily won because the radicals very seldom have a very proper religious education.

“Bin Laden is an engineer, Zawahiri is a medic. The typical profile of the radical Islamist is not that he is an expert on Islam, rather it is that he is somebody with a Western technical type of education who is sufficiently incensed by Western policies that he is using an Islamic language misunderstood to justify what is essentially a temper tantrum.”

In Bombing Without Moonlight: The Origins of Suicidal Terrorism, Murad argues that an Islamist suicide bomber is very much a by-product of a Westernised mindset and is in fact an alien phenomenon to the religion of Islam when viewed from a historical context. In the book, he notes how many on both sides will furiously deny an “Islamism with Western roots”. Suicidal militancy is, he points out, entirely absent from the Islamic scriptures. But shouldn’t one be weary of labels such as “moderate” Islam because it gives the impression of some type of “Islam lite” that people should be following? In other words, it is as if there is something wrong with following the religion in its fullness.

“Yes, you may say we have two alternatives,” he says. “We have the alternative of being Muslim extremists or being extremely Muslim. And I don’t accept the category of moderate at all because it is far from clear. Because when it is used usually by Western pundits and politicians, what is intended is anything other than a form of Islam that politically doesn’t obstruct present Western policies. And I don’t think that is a helpful way of developing a meaningful sense of priorities within a religion. So I don’t use this category ‘moderate’ Muslims at all. I think the ongoing face-off between radicals and the mainstream is a face-off between heresy and orthodoxy. Those are the terms which are more indigenous and authentic than ‘moderation’ and ‘extremism’.”

This brings the discussion back to where this interview started: the great Islam debate in the media. Murad believes there is little point in expecting a more accurate account of Islam in the British tabloid press. Instead, he tells me what worries him is that among the educated classes in the UK, who, to some extent, conduct their conversation through the more respectable broadsheets, there is an unwillingness to acknowledge that non-Western cultures may have definitions of happiness and human flourishing which could be worthy of respect and have a right to exist.

“There is something implicitly totalitarian about the assumption that the value set esteemed by Westerners must alone be right,” he says. “This comes from the universalism of the Enlightenment, which thought that ‘man’ was a single sort of subject and about whom large generalisations could always be offered.”

More recently, he acknowledges, such thinking has come under a good deal of attack. “But that does not seem to have percolated to the public sphere,” he says, “where it is assumed that the West alone can define ‘universals’, such as ‘universal human rights’, even though philosophically Western thinkers have an increasingly hard time establishing any universals at all. Some thinkers, such as Gavin D’Costa, Geoffrey Stout — and, I think, Slavoj Zizek — are very aware of this paradox. D’Costa’s new book holds that everything Westerners say to other cultures can be reduced to variations on ‘Be like us’. That’s not entirely accurate, of course.”

Clearly, it would be wrong to put the entire burden of blame on the shoulders of the West. Murad believes part of the problem is the reluctance so far of Muslim states and agencies to encourage a broader and more thoughtful cultural discussion in the West which is rooted in a better understanding of Muslim culture.

He gives the example of the Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayip Erdogan, whose Alliance of Civilisations at times seems to attempt such an effort. But if Middle Easterners really wish to be better respected in the West, he believes they need to engage in deep and extensive cultural investment. “The Arab League, or the OIC, should direct resources to creating something like the British Council,” he says, “or the Goethe Institute, with landmark institutions in Western capitals which promote a correct understanding and a healthy dialogue. At the forefront should be teaching the Arabic language. Unless the Muslim world engages in better public diplomacy on behalf of its culture, it cannot expect to be better understood and respected.”

Syed Hamad Ali is an independent writer based in Cambridge.

For more information or to make donations, log on to www.cambridgemosqueismoving.org.uk

Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad

From: The Guardian 12 October, 2009

O you who believe! Let not your wealth nor your children distract you from remembrance of Allah. Those who do so, they are the losers. (63:9)

This verse in the Qur’an is an invitation for humanity to make a relatively small effort in this world, in return for the eternal reward of the hereafter. It is a call to save ourselves from becoming fixated on our wealth and on providing our children with the latest gadget and games, which ultimately are mere distractions from our remembrance of the creator.

But humans are short-termist; we think primarily of our pleasures now rather than the harmony and serenity of the world to come. Chapter 102 of the Qur’an says that we are distracted by competing in worldly increase, until we finally end up in our graves where we will be questioned about our excesses.

Does this mean that it is wrong to own things? Of course not, as money and offspring can be positive things in the life of a believer, and we do of course have basic needs which need to be met. But we must remember that the pleasures of consumption are quickly gone, while lasting benefit comes only from using our wealth to uphold the rights of others; namely the orphan, the traveller, and the needy. Wealth is thus truly ours only once it has been given away.

Those who are genuinely distracted by worldly increase, and who make it an end in and of itself rather than as a means towards something better are in effect guilty of a form of idolatry. Ours is an age that has made idols of the great banks and finance houses, driven to frenzy by competition amongst billionaires who are kept awake at night by the thought that a rival might make a business deal more quickly than them. A banker who can asset strip companies and throw its employees out onto the street is someone who is in the grip of an obsession that has thrown him beyond of the normal frontiers of humanity.

Neo-classical economics has traditionally focused on four things: land, labour, capital and money, the first three of which are finite, while the fourth, money, is theoretically infinite, and is therefore where human greed has been particularly focussed. Thus arose a system where someone could, with approval, set up a bank with only £1, and then lend £100 using property and other assets promised by others as security.

The lender now has £100 including interest, which they earned by just sitting there and doing nothing. On the basis of this £100, they can then lend £1000, and on and on, until the cancerous growth lubricated by greed becomes so huge that it leads to a fundamental breakdown in the system. Such a system based on usury, with interest as the bizarre “price of money” which itself becomes a commodity, was once prohibited by all faiths. People had a simple and natural intuition that the commoditisation of a measurement of value would open the door to trading in unreal assets, and ultimately to a model of finance that would destroy natural restraints and even, potentially, the planet.

In the classical Islamic system, by contrast, money is the substance of either gold or silver. With a tangible and finite asset being the only measure of value, there is a great deal more certainty about the value of assets and the price of money. This basic wisdom was though not just a theoretical ideal; it succeeded. Muslim society at its height was mercantile, and it was successful. Never was money assigned its own value and never was it seen as an end in and of itself.

Since the abolition of the gold standard however, theoretical limits on the price of money were removed. Last year’s meltdown, whose final consequences were unguessable, was a sign of the inbuilt dangers of a usurious world. Humans are naturally short-termist but in times of crisis we must take stock. As with the related environmental crisis, now is the time to be smarter and more self-restrained. The believer is in any case allergic to the mad amassing of wealth, since he or she expects true happiness and peace only in the remembering of God and in the next world.

Now is the time to think seriously about finding an economic system to replace the one whose dangers have just been revealed. Upon the conquest of Mecca, a verse of the Qur’an was revealed commanding people to give up what remained of their interest-based transactions, upon which a new system based on the value of gold and silver was initiated.

Those who relied so heavily on the old system would of course have been unable to understand a system without banking charges, but not only was such a system created but a successful civilisation was created using these ideas.

Last year we peered into the abyss; now we must apply self-restraint and wisdom, before complete catastrophe ensues.

The Guardian, Wednesday 23rd November 2011

Bemusement at the findings of Muslim pride in Britain stems from stereotyping about religious groups

Crowds in London with Union flags welcome the Queen on her jubilee tour in 2007. Illustration: Tim Graham/Getty Images

The finding in Demos’s report A Place for Pride that 83% of Muslims said they were proud to be a British citizen, compared with the national average of 79%, has been met with surprise in some parts of the press. Clearly many British citizens have both a strong religious identity and a strong national identity. Yet it also seems clear that many people see these identities as mutually exclusive. Why is this the case?

That 83% of Muslims are proud to be British does in fact make sense. Many British Muslims come from families that have sought the opportunity and refuge offered in this country. The Demos report suggests that “People who are religious are more likely to be patriotic than are those who self-define as atheists or nonbelievers”; 88% of Anglicans and Jews agreed that they were “proud to be a British citizen”. Many British Jews have a family history of refugee status and it follows that this leads to a sense of pride in their British identity. People with a strong religious identity are also often part of a strong community, and benefit from the co-operation and collective goodwill that can come with this. Patriotism, the report suggests, isn’t only concerned with Queen and flag, but also with community values.

There is a lot of misinformation about the British Muslim community. In 2009 the Gallup Coexist Index found that only 36% of the British public thought that British Muslims were “loyal to this country” as opposed to 82% of the British Muslim community. The surprise at the findings of Muslim pride in Britain is rooted in a prejudice that leads people to believe that it is paradoxical for someone to hold both their religious and national identities as important. Lazy caricatures of Islam as contradicting many of the rights and values that are seen as quintessentially British – particularly freedom and democracy – only exacerbate this problem.

So, how do we tackle the prejudice that leads to this view? We must start by challenging perceptions of faith groups that rely on broad stereotypes, and instead provide people with opportunities for meaningful engagement, where they can meet and learn about each other as individuals. The report quotes a student who participated in Three Faiths Forum’s Undergraduate ParliaMentors programme, which gives young people the opportunity to work with students of different faiths and non-religious beliefs on social action projects, and to be mentored by MPs and peers.

The “people I worked with, neither of them had even met a Jewish person before. I found it quite daunting but it was good and it helped me in a way to understand who I am as well as to know more about Islam and Christianity. In the end, the things we sometimes fell out about were what we were doing on the project – not God.”

Finding out that the difficulties that come with working with others are often simply the usual interpersonal challenges is an important part of seeing others as individuals, not just a Muslim, Jew, atheist etc.

What we need are more opportunities for this humanising process. If we can find these while people work together on a social cause then this is all to the good. One of the clear implications of the Demos research is that public pride is linked closely with “social engagement, interpersonal trust and volunteerism”. If we embrace opportunities to work with people of all faiths and beliefs then we can start to overcome the prejudice that leads to surprise that other people are also proud of Britain. We will, in turn, also give ourselves more reasons for civic pride.

Added February 17, 2008
“And He it is Who created the heavens and the earth in six days (periods/phases) – and His dominion/throne (extends) on the water – that He might manifest to you, which of you is best in action….” (Qur’an 11:7)
Six periods of creation
Time has a mysterious existence, a nature that is, as yet, unfathomable to us. It does not have any immediately evident, firmly graspable reality such as that found in material objects (and even our understanding of matter succumbs to mystery as we peer deeper into its innermost structures).
Time has variously been regarded as “a dimension in which events occur in sequence” or else as a “mental measuring system” rather than a dimension or an objective thing having its own independent reality. It has sometimes been viewed as a way consciousness has of measuring motion or change (with the (Qur’anic) proviso that everything in existence has some degree of consciousness (some way of interfacing with and perceiving or detecting it’s surroundings), however infinitesimally minute). Our consciousness of time exists primarily as a retention in memory and an anticipation of the future since the immediate “now” (the present moment) is of ungraspable granularity. It slips away even as we experience it. No matter how finely we slice our measurement of time (into nano or pico seconds), there is never an instant we can claim as now since each moment is endlessly sliding away leaving only an imprint in our memory and an anticipation of the moment still to come. We only see what has slipped past and wait for what we project into the future, but can never grasp the present moment although we may have an illusion of doing so because of the retention of a succession of moments in our memory like the persistence of vision. And it is the constant slipping, the endless change from moment to moment in external and internal worlds that makes possible our perception of time – the awareness of the difference between one instant and another.
Our perception of time’s attributes and characteristics can vary, depending on the motion of things and their relationship and interaction with one another (time exhibits a quality of relativity). Our own circumstances, the region of space we inhabit, the motion inherent in the system we inhabit and interact with, and the link between our individual consciousness and the larger societal consciousness that surrounds and impacts us – all of these have a bearing on time and our subjective perception of it.
According to Mulla Sadra “…time is not an independent realm for things and phenomena, so that is has a separate existence and temporal things are contained in it. Rather, like the volume of a body, it (time) is an essential and internal characteristic of body, and naturally, every phenomena, will possess a specific time for itself which is considered to be an aspect of its existence.” (Amuzish Falsafah) So each object is wrapped in its own cloak of time and space and if our perception of time was sufficiently keen we would be individually aware that we each possess our own specific experience of time. Nevertheless, humans on earth share a sufficiently close proximity and similarity such that we experience a common way of measuring time – we share a more or less common idea of what constitutes a day based on characteristics of our local environment (e.g., the period of rotation of the earth). However, there are strange pointers in the Qur’an, that appeal to us to transcendthe common view of what constitutes time. These indicate that time and it’s perception varies greatly not just within the material universe but across levels and gradations of reality. It is possible for humans, whose being is capable of spanning different realms, to experience these different gradations (such as the experience of the Prophet during his mir’aj – his ascension).
While some of the Qur’an’s verses emphasize our shared sense of time and the orderliness visible in the universe, other verses hint at the limits of our understanding and point to borders beyond which a transformation of the order and patterns that we take for granted occurs. Certain verses provide oblique metaphysical glimpses of this shift in time and its perception. For example, the Qur’an speaks of “aday whose measure is a thousand years of what you count.” (Qur’an 22:47) and of “a day whose measure is fifty thousand years.” (Qur’an 70:4) It also speaks of a day so short as to be immeasurable – this isyawm al-sha’n, the day of the task - “And in every day(moment/instant) He exercises universal power” (Qur’an 55:29).

Note 1: In a hadith, the Prophet says that in the time of al-Dajjal (an anti-christ like figure) there will be a day like a year, a day like a month, a day like a week, and the rest of his days are like your days.” So in our own world, time or its perception or the interpretation of time and our perception of time during the period of the dajjal’s manifestation may seem to transform and change. Or, an alternate interpretation may be that the appearance of the Dajjal in this world occurs gradually, like a slow but accelerating descent away from the divine. As the metaphysical underpinnings of religion weaken and humankind’s connection with the divine fades into the realm of myth and skepticism, a Dajjal-like system begins to manifest and its elements strengthen and solidfy over time until eventually it establishes and manifests powerfully in this world (“the rest of his days are like your days” ) establishing its dominance and the apparent overthrow of all genuine religious systems.

Note 2: As well, the Prophet (s.a.) and Imams (a.s.) speak of other realms (levels of reality) in which time and being have an altered aspect and in which they exhibit metamorphosed qualities. So there is a higher archetypal world exhibiting a flow of time, “…dimensions, and extent other than that of the material sensible world. Infinite are its marvels, countless its cities, each with a thousand gates. They are peopled by countless (intelligent) creatures who are not even aware that God has created terrestial Adam and his posterity….” In these cities “seven million languages are spoken, each different from the other….seventy thousand communities dwell in the city called Jabalqa. Not one among them but symbolizes with (and indicates the existence of) some community in this lower universe….” (Hadith from Imam Hasan and Imam Husayn (a.s.))

So each level of existence, each realm, has it’s own “day”. Which day the days of creation correspond to we do not know, which is why many translators render it as six periods of creation, in which each period is an unknown length of time during which an emergent process engendered, sustained, and suffused with God’s creative command is at work. Time flows at a different rate, with an altered quality, within each realm. Each realm has not only its own quantitative time but also differs in the essential quality and priority of what exists within it (see sidebar text).

The other question that arises is why it refers to six periods. Why six? No really definitive answer can be given to this beyond a reference to other verses which mention the days of creation. However,  symbolic congruences with the six days have been suggested by some commentators. One such congruence (suggested by Ibn Arabi’s writings) is that human beings journey through six realms, six levels of existence. Their creation, life, death, and afterlife offers the possibility of travel through six matrices involving different manifestations of human life  across different levels of reality. Within these there are many sub realms, but in general, there are six dominions, six demarcated levels and intervals in which human existence can manifest in some manner and in which different intensities of the experience of reality occurs, and in which time manifests in varying ways.

1st interval
The first is the pre-existence in which every configuration of the human soul destined to be born in this universe was drawn out from Adam and brought before God Who asked them, “Am I not your Lord?”

“And when your Lord brought forth from the children of Adam…all their descendants, and made them bear witness against their own souls: Am I not your Lord? They said: Yes! we bear witness. Lest you should say on the day of resurrection: Surely we had no inner knowledge of this.” (Qur’an 7:172)
This indicates a pre-existence at some level for every human being who has ever been born or ever will be born. The recognition of God’s Lordship lies in the original human nature (the fitra) since God took this shahada (testimony) affirming His Lordship from all human beings before they entered into existence on the earth. They are asked, “Am I not your Lord?” and they affirm God’s Lordship. So this recognition and affirmation is woven into a human being’s very substance. The implication is that everyone who is born into this world has agreed in substance (in the essence of their soul) to this covenant, and that although we may have no conscious knowledge or memory of this pact, its reality is woven into our very nature. This world is a place of distraction and forgetfullness but at our core lies the metaphysical truth of this covenant and one of the purposes of religion is to awaken to consciousness an awareness of this bond between God and man as well as all the concealed potentials that flow from this bond.

At that time our existence was of a different nature, dwelling in a different reality – our conception and birth (the beginning of our physical existence) took us out from that realm and injected us into the world of matter.

2nd interval
The second world is the universe in which we now live. This is the world where we write the book of our individual lives. Death will lift us out from this world.
3rd interval

The Third is the world of the barzakh, also known as the world of the lesser resurrection or the world of the grave – it is one in which the human soul tastes its own nature and inner reality.
4th interval

The fourth world is the world of the greater resurrection – when we awaken on an earth that has been remade, spread out, and extended to accommodate every creature that ever existed and to usher in the judgement. It is a world illuminated by the light of clear and deep perception so that every soul perceives in a penetrating manner its own reality and the realities underlying its every action.
5th interval

The fifth world is the world of paradise and ghenna, the world in which actions and natures and their consequences return to their owners and only God’s mercy provides relief.

6th interval

The sixth world is the heights/the raised places (upon the dunes) a place elevated above paradise  - “…and on the most elevated places there shall be men who know all by their marks….” (Qur’an 7:46-48) – this is a place of intimate proximity to God and for those granted special insight.

In each of these worlds there are lesser realms, and realms within realms but in general there are six broad categories and levels.

Each one has its own unique days, its own unique measure of time. So this is one possible indication of some congruence with the six days of creation – human existence in its totality maps onto the various levels of reality through which the human essence can journey.

But this present world in which we are now living was created as the place of trial, testing, and responsibility – so it is (as Ibn Arabi indicates) with our conduct here that we have to concern ourselves. The many levels of existence are all part of the totality of human existence – but, as the verse says, the crux of it is within this realm of testing, that He might “…determine which of you has the most beautiful conduct (actions).” (Qur’an 11:7)

Note: In some verses the Qur’an enumerates the breakdown of the six days (a total of four for the creation of the “earth” and what is in it, and two for the “heavens” and what is in them (Qur’an 41:9-12). The two periods for the heavens would then perhaps encompass the heaven of the covenant, and the seven heavens of the gardens of paradise. The four periods for the earth would perhaps encompass this material universe (including our earth), the earth of the barzakh, the earth of the resurrection (of judgement day), and the earth of the dunes (the elevated heights). However, all interpretation is at best nothing more than speculation and possibility and most commentators refrain from any absolute mapping out of the six days of creation.

Note: Another (esoteric) interpretation of the six days of creation includes a seventh day in which the purpose of creation is revealed and fulfilled – the seventh day is said to be alluded to in the ascension to the throne which follows the process of creation. “Lo! Your Lord is God Who created the heavens and the earth in six days. Then He ascended the Throne…” (Qur’an 7:54) This interpretation is detailed by Shafique Virani in his paper “The Days of Creation in the thought of Nasir Khusraw”. He writes that according to Khusraw… “This account of the genesis of the cosmos, shared by the Abrahamic faiths, does not concern the creation of the physical universe. Rather, the tradition refers to the genesis of a spiritual cosmos governed by God’s emissaries. This creation commenced with Adam, who represented the first day…and continued with Noah, Abraham, Moses and Jesus….The cycles of creation were brought to their completion by Muhammad….Yet to come was the last and final day (the sign of which is the advent of the Mehdi), which would consummate the entire spiritual creation. This was the…cycle of the Lord of the Resurrection or Qa’im-i qiyamat. It is through the Lord of the Resurrection that the divine unity and grandeur of God would be revealed and the purpose of creation fulfilled.”

The Throne on the water

“…and His dominion/throne (extends) on the water….”

Water here perhaps refers to the primordial substance from which all things emerge – the liquidity suggests that it is full of potential but not yet manifested into specific creations. It is the perennial, foundational substance out of which the physical universe is created. It is described as water – fluid, liquid, able to be poured into any form, as yet formless, but able to flow into any form. The life giving properties of the water of this lower universe is a symbol of this primordial water.

The “water” over which the throne extends perhaps represents “undifferentiated reality” – ‘every potential is within it but as yet it has not given birth to any specific forms.’ As a “liquid” it is unified, one substance, and not yet articulated into separate creations. But it contains the ability to give birth to myriad creations.

God’s Arsh, His throne – that is to say the realm from which His commands issue forth, is above the water. In other words it is a realm that has dominion and control over this water. A throne is a symbolic place from which a King’s commands issue forth to the kingdom over which he rules. The commands, the Divine Will issues forth from the throne and the potential that is in the water begins to be realized. Creation in all its forms manifests itself – the perennial foundational substance articulates into infinite varieties of creations.

Elsewhere the Qur’an refers to the emergence of all life from water. This can perhaps also be tied to this primordial substance whose water is like a fountain of life issuing forth form after form, creations of every variety emerging into existence. The Qur’an is not concerned with detailing the mechanism by which this happens – it is not a science book. It is concerned with telling us the higher reality behind the creation that we witness. Our science will explain a portion of the process – that portion that is visible to us in this material world. The Qur’an is concerned with making us aware of the deeper, concealed realities that underlie the mechanisms we witness at work in this world. Science can show us a limited “how” as it is restricted to the observable methods and mechanisms of this universe and it can show us how to put this knowledge to instrumental use – it illuminates, at its own level, the subtle mechanisms of this world. The Qur’an points out to us the invisible realities which are the intelligence and the underlying substrata that drive the mechanisms of this world.

The water, is perhaps then the ground of all being, all existence. Mulla Sadra speaks similarily of a “sort of invisible background that we do not ordinarily see because it is everywhere – because we see with it – and ultimately because we are it….” (pg 63, Wisdom of the Throne) because we are articulated forms arising within it.

According to the traditional scholars, human existence is unique in that it has a presence that extends beyond this world – because the nature with which humans are created reaches from this earth to the Throne. The innermost heart or reality of man is connected to the Throne of God. Those few human beings who have perfected their nature, who have purified their nafs – their hearts are consciously awake to this reality and God bestows ability upon them through this conduit. He bestows upon them a presence and a power and issues through them His commands – they can (to the extent allowed) shape, influence, and direct the mechanisms of this lower world whose substrata is the water upon which the Throne rests – they have a seemingly miraculous influence in this world.

That water, that deep and subtle substance from which we are created is within us even now and it is amenable to being shaped by God’s command. It is a deep well which we can draw upon to give life, vitality, correct form, and real presence to our inner configuration and to the actions which arise from this configuration. It is as if God has allowed us a hand in our own creation, in our shaping our own selves – He has (through our turning to Him) given a portion of the command to us. So no human is closed to transformation, to reaching elevated stages except through their own turning away and petrifying their own inner substance and nature. The human journey through the various realms of existence will display for us our inner configuration and our actions and the nature of the Divine realities within which we journey “…that He might manifest…which of you is best in action (conduct).” (Qur’an 11:7)

-Irshaad Hussain

By Fahad Faruqui

Altmuslim, 22 August 2011

KARACHI, PAKISTAN One can learn many lessons at a graveyard. I once found myself helping carry the corpse of a stranger, an old woman, to its final abode. At the time, I was a 20-year-old on a family trip to the Holy City of Medina in Saudi Arabia. Following theish’a (night) prayers at the Prophet’s Mosque (Al-Masjid al-Nabawi) and the recitation of obligatory funeral prayer, I came across a middle-aged man searching for help to transport the coffin of the woman, who I later learned was his mother. She had passed away a few hours earlier and her son was eager to fulfill her final wish: to be buried immediately after death.

The son was the only family member present. He was anxious to hastily transport the steel coffin, containing the corpse of his mother wrapped in a white shroud, to the Garden of Heaven or, as it is called in Arabic, Janatu l-Baqi’, a graveyard adjacent to the Prophet’s Mosque. (Photos of the Prophet’s Mosque and the Garden of Heaven are below.)

Since it was late at night, the mosque had emptied quickly and there weren’t many eager beavers to lend a hand. A few men on their way out of the mosque regrettably declined the man’s pleas for assistance, saying they had far travel before reaching home. I wanted to help, but I was unsure if I would be able to carry the coffin all the way to the grave situated a couple of hundred meters away. After a handful of men gathered to move the coffin, four men including me lifted it in unison and rested each corner on the shoulder. As we proceeded toward the graveyard, the coffin was tilted toward my side since I was relatively shorter than the other three.

“She isn’t heavy,” I thought to myself in relief.

A man behind me yelled blessings to the dead as we commenced our walk towards the Medina graveyard. We all joined in enthusiastically, chanting blessings to the dead.

Our voices started to get dimmer as we ran out of breath. The farther we moved away from the mosque, the darker it became. In the sunlight, the sands of Medina graveyard vary in color from orange to a shade that borders on red, with volcanic rocks scattered throughout the grave marking the grave. But at night, it was pitch-black. Our pathway was lit only by the light illuminating from the towering minarets atop the mosque, where Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings be upon him, rests along with Abu Bakr, the first caliph, and Umar ibn Al-Khattab, the second caliph, may God be pleased with both.

After a few uneven steps, the buckle of one of my sandal’s broke, forcing me to push it aside as we continued forward. The ground was warm, even at this late hour. I could barely see where my feet were stepping in the wide graveyard around us. I was granted some relief when a man volunteered to help, seeking only reward from the Creator.

We walked aimlessly for a bit, trying our best not to trample over the other graves as we searched for the woman’s resting spot. Once we located it and rested the coffin beside the dugout, I took a peak at the grave. It was remarkably dark — the darkest shade of black that I have ever seen.

As I stood among these strangers with death before my eyes, and a six-foot deep grave that felt suffocating from above, the importance of my worries drifted away, and I began reflecting on the temporality of life. It dawned on me how near we are all to death, our inevitable fate, although many of us think about death very rarely.

Quite out of the blue, I felt I was granted clues and answers to questions that had been filling my mind: Why am I here? And where will I go from here?

I had little to no sense of time. My startled parents went out looking for me when they saw all the doors of the Prophet’s Mosque closed from the window of our hotel room. I arrived back at the hotel more than an hour later than usual, yet the impression the experience left on me has been lasting. It was a moment of clarity, an hour that changed the very foundation of my existence.

“A moment of true reflection is worth more than ages of heedless worship,” Faraz Rabbani, a leading Islamic scholar, said recently on Twitter.

His words reminded me of that night. At certain points in our lives, we have experiences that shake us to the core and compel us to question our outlook on existence and, if we cultivate them properly, bring us nearer to the Almighty. Even many years later, in times when anger, distress, tribulation or temptation has attempted to sway me, my mind returns to that graveyard.

When you become mindful of death, you think and act differently. It becomes difficult to lash out in anger when we know how near death could be. A person conscious of death would think twice before defrauding and deceiving another human being. By remembering that we will all perish and be buried in dirt, taking none of our possessions with us, it becomes undesirable to wrong or hurt someone intentionally. But one has to realize that death is inevitable.

My recollection of the funeral procession that night is vivid. I remember how time seized for me in the midst of that graveyard. I recall the haunting feeling of suffocation and discomfort that kept me awake that night. Back in the hotel, as I rested my head on the plush pillow, in an arctic air-conditioned room, I thought of the rock-hard walls encircling that meagre grave.

We need not reflect on death at all times to keep us on track. Paying attention to life — to the wondrous creations of the universe around us — can always draw us near to God and prompt us to be grateful. But also reflect on death, since it turns you away from the superficiality of the world and curbs your ego.

I would not say I am a man of immense knowledge. I haven’t spent an adequate amount of time fully uncovering the miracles of the Quran as deeply as I should. I have my ups and down. My faith, at times, dangles, and then I have to realign my thoughts. It happens more often than I am ready to confess here.

Yet I find remembering the inevitability of death from time to time is one way to stay grounded. During a course on Buddhist ethics I took a decade ago withRobert Thurman, the professor related a tale of a newlywed royal couple who went to a celebrated monk, Atisha, for marriage advice.

Initially hesitating to offer any since he had never been married himself, the monk finally yielded, giving some of the soundest marital advice I have heard: “Eventually, husband and wife, each will die. So now while alive, you should strive to be kind to each other.”

Thoughts of death need not flood our minds with sorrow and negativity, as we should understand that death is a natural part of the journey of life.

If we work on making every prayer count as if it’s our last and set aside time from our busy schedules, including the social media that consumes a measurable chunk of our day, to unwind the thoughts and worries entangled in our minds, we may become better humans and will indeed have a greater chance of living with peace.

Fahad Faruqui is a journalist and an educator. He studied Philosophy of Religion (with a particular interest in Sufism) and Middle Eastern Studies as an undergraduate at Columbia University and then pursued an M.S. in Journalism from its Graduate School of Journalism. Follow him on twitter athttp://twitter.com/fahadfaruqui. This article was originally published at theHuffington Post

http://www.altmuslim.com/a/a/a/4422

Faithful believers, who worship the One and only God, and sincerely follow the teachings of their religion, find it very hard to understand how other people who worship the same God and follow the same religious teachings, can engage in acts of corruption, coverup, and deliberate terrorism. Perhaps we think that people of other religions can do such things; because we do not know in much detail what their religions actually teach them. But we do know our own religion, and we know that it does not permit the sexual exploitation or murder of women and children. Yet we frequently read of such activities, not only being done by members of our own religion, but condoned or covered up, by some leaders of our own religion. How can this be explained?

All religions condemn hypocrisy. Almost always this refers to those who claim to be believers, and yet do less than they should. But what about those who do more than they should? Examples of condemnation of religious fanaticism and extremism as hypocrisy within ones own religion are much less frequent. It is not easy to tell your own pious followers that more isn’t always better, or that pious intentions do not justify evil deeds. The Talmud records a good example of this rare type of criticism of the more is better philosophy. Rabbi Isaac condemned the extremism of some super pious Jews who advocated extra self-imposed abstinence saying, “Aren’t the things prohibited by the Torah enough for you, that you wish to prohibit yourself additional things?” And as I said above. Muhammad told Muslims, “Religion is very easy, whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So do not be extremists, but try (only) to approach perfection, and receiv
e the good tidings that you will be rewarded (just for that).”

If self-imposed extremism is condemned, how much more the extremism that hurts others. Indeed, all disgraceful activities by religious people reflect negatively on their religion and on God. In Judaism this is called Hillul Hashem- profaning God’s name/reputation. In recent years religious riots in India, the slaughter of innocent Muslims at prayer by an Orthodox Jew in Hebron, Muslim suicide bombers throughout the Middle East and in Pakistan, and the cover up by Bishops of molestation of young boys by some Catholic Priests in the U.S. and Europe, brought terrible disgrace upon organized religion’s reputation. One way to understand these terrible events is in the light of a saying by a Hassidic Rabbi (Michael) who taught, “When the Evil Urge tries to tempt people to sin, it tempts them to become super righteous.”

God tells us that such activity must not be covered up or sanitized by religious believers. It must be vigorously and publicly condemned since it undermines the very ability of God’s religion to influence people to live according to God’s directives. We all know that religious people are human and sometimes religious people can do dastardly things. But when piety influences religious leaders to attempt to rationalize, sanitize, or cover up, rather than to publicly condemn these activities, people will increasingly reject organized religion and God. A religious piety that does not require morality and kindness is valueless and hypocritical, and thus as serious a sin as worshiping other Gods or idols, the first two of the Ten Commandments. The third commandment applies to pious religious hypocrites ‘DO NOT MAKE VALUELESS THE NAME OF ADONAI YOUR GOD, FOR ADONAI WILL NOT SANITIZE ONE WHO MAKES HIS NAME VALUELESS.’ Exodus 20:7 and Deuteronomy 5:11 (My translation) This commandment doesn’t refer to the important issue of perjury, or to the trivial issue of profanity. Perjury is prohibited in the ninth commandment and profanity by itself isn’t serious enough to be placed in the Ten Commandments.
This commandment refers to the great harm done to religion, and to God’s reputation, when religious people do despicable deeds in God’s name and/or religious leaders try to cover up or sanitize the sins of religious people to preserve the institution’s name. The burning of witches, the Inquisition, and Jihad suicide bombers, are examples of the misuse of God’s name by some segments of organized religion. This commandment warns religious people and their leaders that, “Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction.” (Pascal)

Fanatics believe the ends justify the means, thus subordinating God’s goal to their personal or political goal. Extremists believe that more is always better. To them the Talmud says, “If you (try to) grasp too much, you don’t grasp anything.” Our Rabbinic sages extended the prohibition of misusing God’s name even to taking unnecessary oaths i.e. not required by a court, and making unnecessary blessings i.e. not required by Jewish law. Personal piety and sincerity do not justify excessive behavior even if self-limited. How much the more so if extremists judge others by their perfectionist standards?
Religious people should not misuse their piety by going beyond normal community limits, and then try to justify it in God’s name. This is a religious principle that Islam, Judaism and Christianity apply to both excessive personal, as well as political behavior. As the Bible says, “Do not be overly righteous.” (Ecclesiastes 7:17): and as Muhammad told Muslims, “Religion is very easy, whoever overburdens himself in his religion will not be able to continue in that way. So do not be extremists, but try (only) to approach perfection and receive the good tidings that you will be rewarded (just for that).”
Rabbi Allen S. Maller retired after serving for 39 years as Rabbi of Temple Akiba in Culver City, Ca. His web site is rabbimaller.com.

The Kaaba at night

In the center of Masjid al-Haram you see the Kaaba. A simple cube like structure made of dark rough stones with white chalk filling the fissures. At the first sight a shiver runs through you and you wonder in amazement … This plain and empty structure is the center of our faith, prayers, love, life and death?

You question in admiration; Where have I come? What is this place?

What you see is the antithesis of your visual imaginations of the Kaaba. Some might perceive a sacred place to be an architectural splendor whose ceilings are covered in silent beauty or it could be a sacred tomb housing the grave of an important person – a hero, a leader or prophet! But No! – instead it is an empty room. It reflects no architectural skill, beauty, art, inscription or quality; and no graves are found here. There is nothing specific that captures your attention or feelings except a yearning pulling you towards the Kaaba.

You will realize that there is nothing here to disturb your thoughts and feelings about God. The Kaaba, which you want to embrace, is a gateway for your feelings to ascend to the heavens and connect with your creator. This is something you were unable to achieve in your world filled with distractions and fragmentation. Before you could only theorize, but now you can see the “absolute”, the one who has no direction – Allah! He is every where.

How fortunate it is to that the Kaaba is empty! It reminds you that you are at the Kaaba to start a pilgrimage. It is not your destination. Moreover, it is a guide to show you the destination.

Having decided to move toward eternity, you begin the Hajj by moving around the Kaaba. It is an eternal movement towards Allah not towards the Kaaba. The Kaaba is the beginning and not the end. It is the place where Allah , Ibrahim , Mohammed and other great people will meet you. You will be present there only if your mind is not preoccupied with self-centered thoughts. You must be one of the people! Everyone is dressed in the same special garments and is being honored as guests of Allah. He has more enthusiasm toward humanity than any one else. However, the Kaaba the house of Allah is called the “house of people”.

“Behold! The first sanctuary appointed for humankind was that at Bekka (Mecca), a blessed place, a guidance to all people.”  (Quran 3:96)

If you enter this house while still being attached to your material self you will miss the sacredness of this house.

Mecca is called “Baite-Atiq”. Atiq represents being free! Mecca belongs to nobody. It is free from the reign of rulers and oppressors; therefore, no one controls it. Allah is the owner of Mecca while the people are its residents.

Under the provisions of travels, a Muslim is allowed to shorten his prayers if traveling at least forty miles away from his home. But at Mecca, regardless of where you are from or how far you have traveled, you devote yourself to the complete prayer. It is your land, your community and you are safe. You are not a visitor, but you are at home.

Before coming to Mecca, you were a stranger, exiled in your own land. But now, you have joined the family of humanity. Humankind, the dearest family of the world, is invited to this house. If you as an individual are “self centered”, you will feel like a homeless stranger lost with no shelter and no relatives. Therefore, shed the self distinctive tendencies. You are now prepared to enter the house and join this family. You will be welcomed as an honored guest of  Allah.

As you enter this house visualize Prophet Ibrahim  who was considered a radical for his times. Rejecting all the idols of his forefathers, he oriented his loved and obedience to the One True God. With his own hands and along with his son, Ismail , he built the Kaaba. A structure that symbolizes the singular nature of Allah in the world.

The building is uncomplicated. Black rocks of “Ajoon” are laid on top of each other. There is no design or decoration involved. Its name, Kaabah, means a “cube” – but why a “cube”?

Why is it so simple and lacking in color and ornamentation? It is because Almighty Allah has no “shape”, no color and none is similar to Him. No pattern or visualization of Allah that man imagines can represent Him. Being omnipotent and omnipresent, Allah is “absolute”.

Although Kaaba has no direction (because of its cubic shape), by facing the Kaaba when performing prayers, you choose Allah’s direction and face Him. Kaaba’s absence of direction may seem difficult to comprehend. However, universality and absoluteness prevails. The six sides of the cube encompasses all directions and simultaneously their sum symbolizes no direction!

“Unto Allah belongs the east and west, and wherever you turn you will be facing Allah.” (Quran 2:115)

When praying outside of Kaaba you must face it. Any structure except the Kaaba directs north, south, east, west, up or down. Kaaba is an exception; it is facing all directions while it is facing none. Truly a symbol of Allah, it has many directions yet it has no particular direction.

Toward the west of Kaaba there is a semi-circular short wall which is arching towards the Kaaba. It is called Ismail’s Hagar. Hagar signifies lap or skirt. The semi lunar wall resembles a skirt.

Sarah, the wife of Ibrahim had an Ethiopian maid called Hagar. She was a poor and humble servant of Sarah, who was given to Ibrahim  in order to bear him a child. Here was a woman who was not equal to Sarah’s noble stature yet Allah connected the symbol of Hagar’s skirt to His symbol, Kaaba.

The skirt of Hagar was the area in which Ismail was raised. The house of Hagar is there. Her grave is near the third column of the Kaaba.

What a surprise since no one, not even prophets, are supposed to be buried in mosques but in this case, the house of a maid is located next to Allah’s house! Hagar, the mother of Ismail is buried there. The Kaaba extends toward her grave.

There is a narrow passage between the wall (Hagar’s skirt) and the Kaaba. When circumambulating around Kaaba, Allah commanded that you must go around the wall and not through the passage.

Those who have submitted them selves to the oneness of Allah and those who have accepted His invitation for Hajj touch this skirt when circumambulating the Kaaba. The grave of a maid and a righteous mother is now a part of the Kaaba; it will be circumambulated by man forever!

Allah, the Almighty, in His great and glorious Divinity is all self-sufficient. He needs no one and nothing. Nevertheless, among all His countless and eternal creatures, He has chosen one, humankind, as the noblest of all of them.  and from among all slaves: a black maid!

The weakest and most humiliated one of His creatures was From among all humanity He has chosen: a woman, from among all women: a slave, given a place of dignity next to His own house.

The Unknown Soldier has been so chosen in the community of Islam!

The rituals of Hajj are a memory of Hagar. The word Higrah (migration) has its root in her name as does the word Mahajir (immigrant). “The ideal immigrant is the one who behaves like Hagar.” (Saying of Mohammad )

Higrah is what Hagar did. It is also a transition from wildness to civility and from denying the truth to accepting the Ultimate Truth.

In Hagar’s mother- tong her name means “the city”. Even the name of this Ethiopian slave is symbolic of civilization. Furthermore, any migration like hers is a move toward civilization!

Hagar’s grave is in the midst of man’s circumambulation of Kaaba. You, the mohajir (immigrant), who has detached himself from everything and accepted Allah’s invitation to go to Hajj, you will  devote your circumambulation of the Kaaba to Allah and at the same time you will be paying homage to the grave of a African maid.

It is difficult to realize. But for those who think they live in freedom and defend humanism, the significance of these incidents transgresses the scope of their understanding!

Adapted from a section of the book “Hajj” by Dr. Ali Shariati. Translated by Dr. Ali A. Behzadnia

Imam Suhaib Webb, left, talks with an attendee at a Chicago festival last year. Webb's time in the Middle East convinced him that not all religious practices there make sense for U.S. Muslims. (Chris Salata / Chicago Tribune)

At the pulpit of an inner-city Chicago mosque, the tall blond imam begins preaching in his customary fashion, touching on the Los Angeles Lakers victory the night before, his own gang involvement as a teenager, a TV soap opera and then the Day of Judgment.
“Yesterday we watched the best of seven…. Unfortunately we forget the big final; it’s like that show ‘One Life to Live,’ ” Imam Suhaib Webb says as sleepy boys and young men come to attention in the back rows. “There’s no overtime, bro.” The sermon is typical of Webb, a charismatic Oklahoma-born convert to Islam with a growing following among American Muslims, especially the young. He sprinkles his public addresses with as many pop culture references as Koranic verses and sayings from the prophet. He says it helps him connect with his mainly U.S.-born flock.
“Are we going to reach them with an Arab message or with a Pakistani message? Or are we going to reach them with an American message?” asks Webb, 38, of Santa Clara. He is a resident scholar and educator with the Bay Area chapter of the nonprofit Muslim American Society, but reaches others in lectures and through his popular website, which he calls a “virtual mosque.”
Webb is at the forefront of a movement to create an American-style Islam, one that is true to the Koran and Islamic law but that reflects this country’s customs and culture. Known for his laid-back style, he has helped promote the idea that Islam is open to a modern American interpretation. At times, his approach seems almost sacrilegious.
Although the call to prayer at a mosque is always issued by a man, Webb once joked about it being made by one of his favorite female R&B artists: “If Mary J. Blige made the call to prayer, I’d go to the mosque; I’d be in the front row.”
At a Muslim conference in Long Beach last year, he suggested that mosques adopt a “don’t ask, don’t tell” policy toward gays. Afterward, he was accosted by a local imam who accused him of poisoning Muslim youth. “I told him, ‘Quite frankly, you’re going to be irrelevant in 10 years,’ ” Webb says.
He is fluent in Arabic, the language of the Koran, and studied for six years at one of the world’s leading Islamic institutes, Egypt’s Al-Azhar University. His time in the Middle East convinced him that not all religious practices there make sense for Muslims here.
As recently as a decade ago, U.S. congregations readily accepted immigrant imams who had arrived straight from Islamic universities, often with a traditional approach to preaching. Many spoke little English and were unable to communicate with non-Arab congregants or connect easily with youth.
But increasingly, U.S. Muslims expect their religious leaders to play a broader, more pastoral role, says Hossam Aljabri, executive director of the Muslim American Society, a national religious and education group. “Communities want imams who can come in and go beyond leading the prayer and reading Koran. They want them to fill the social role of counseling and dealing with neighbors.”
Religious scholars say the faith’s basic tenets would not change but much of the law that governs Islam may be interpreted differently in various communities.
Webb believes, for example, that barriers between men and women in U.S. mosques are not necessary, although they continue to be used in many traditional congregations. Unlike some imams, he does not object to music and believes Muslims here should be free to celebrate such secular holidays as Mother’s Day and Thanksgiving.
But given the ethnic diversity of U.S. Muslims, finding a consensus for a single American Islam could be difficult. Some favor major reforms that would alter the faith’s core beliefs. Others oppose any change.
In 2007, Webb stopped teaching at SunniPath, an online academy of traditional Islamic education, tussling verbally in the process with a few of its scholars, who are critical of what they term “modernist Islam.”
“Modernists are doing a disservice to Islam…. They validate things that are slack in Islamic practice,” Sheikh Nuh Keller, a teacher at the academy, said at the time. “We say to the modernists, nothing needs to be modernized.”
Although Webb has spent much of his time in Egypt in recent years, his U.S. following has grown. His website, where he posts writings on such topics as relationships, personal development and Islamic studies, gets more than 10,000 visitors a day, and sparks extended conversations.
In November, one reader asked if it was OK for Muslims to celebrate Thanksgiving. Webb’s response that the holiday was allowed upset some who thought that could lead to more questionable practices.
“Soon it will be [permissible] for me to take that ‘Santa Claus’ gig at the mall…….or it is already????” asked one commenter, Ahmed.
Others appeared to appreciate Webb’s effort to balance Muslim teachings with life in the West. http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-american-imam-20110527,0,5640663.story

A Muslim Foodbank... because some people can't eat

by Abarahim Appel

September 30, 2011

from www.altmuslim.com

It was announced recently that 40,000 Bank of America employees are being laid off. My heart feels broken over the news. It seems like every time there is a chance that we as a country can pull together and work through this, something else knocks us back down a couple of notches.

The economic news is compounded by the fact that before these layoffs, 15 percent of our country was already in poverty. That is 46.2 million people. It is the highest number in 52 years. Also, statistics are showing that 2 million more Americans slipped into “deep poverty”, defined as making a mere $11,000 a year. And while 7 percent of the United States currently lives in this statistic; the 15 percent above that line live in “normal” poverty, while close to 10 percent of the country is without any work at all.

Studies also showed this week that in my own beautiful California, the poverty rate rose for the fourth straight year. 16.3 percent of the state is in poverty, the highest in the nation. Across the country, Mexican-Americans and African-Americans have been hit the hardest by this economic downturn. Forbes magazine calls this time in history “the great African-American depression.” Today The African-American community has a staggering 1 out of 5 people unemployed.

I remember when I converted to Islam, just after 9/11. We talked often, back then, about how the majority of Muslims in the US were African-American. We wanted America to see the hypocrisy of the War on Terror. But the recession is now starting to show our hypocrisies.

To be clear, African-Americans and Mexican-Americans are part of their own American history. But we as American Muslims need to decide if we are one ummah or not. I remember a popular Muslim t-shirt that proclaimed Malcolm X’s defense of equality for Palestinians. I have not seen anything recently about Malcolm’s life work of equality for the oppressed, especially considering that the non Afro-Muslim community is especially affluent. The result is racism, as well as economic prejudices fighting for more influence within the community’s thoughts.

Perhaps now we need to talk about how our Muslim community carries some guilt in being greedy and not caring about the poor. Not just the really poor, but even the poor who work for you. And lets talk about the poor who visit your Masjid, the one you donated to help build. The one you pay hundreds of dollars to send your kids to. Now you may not want to hear it. You may now be looking to find the article blasting Mubarak and his corruption. But this is our corruption. We are making our American Muslim identity now. And how we relate to ethics, society and the poor will create more of our identity than will almost anything else we do as a community.

We as a community have ignored the growing sections of Muslim greed. I have heard more Muslims talk about kicking out black people from their homes in Detroit, then serving the poor. We often forgive, or look the other way. Maybe we are seduced by the beautiful masjid that these same rich donors helped build. We think “anything for Dawah.” But I feel Islam is being corrupted by the “bling”. We praise the Saudis more than we praise Abdul Sattar Edhi who devotes his whole life to the poor, and without any support from an “Islamic state.” We have lost track of what is really Islamicly important: being a source of comfort to the oppressed. Not just in Palestine, but the orphans, homeless and the poor nearest you.

Let me pray Jummah in a shack if it means we have more resources for the poor, the sick, the hurt the unemployed, the addict. Let us stop building beautiful walls and start building a more beautiful Ummah.

We speak of the Sunnah, but follow only what makes us powerful and comfortable. What ever happened to the part of the sunnah where prophet Muhammad gave away everything. Ate little so others could eat? Is it more convenient to have beards on men and cloth on females heads then to follow a life’s passion of improvement and service? But the poverty and service is the sunnah.

Let us instead work to be a humble and one with those ignored and devoured by their own economy. That would be sunnah.

Abrahim Appel is a writer currently covering Mexico and Mexico City for the California paper, Mundo Latino World. He studied Ethnic studies and Journalism at Cal State Fullerton, in Southern California. He spends too much on hookah to be a scholar of Islam, but believes his opinions are still valid.

By Laurna Strikwerda

Altmuslim, 10 July 2011

How would you respond if someone tried to kill you because of who you are? I know what my own responses would be: anger, fear, rage. For Rais Bhuiyan, the answer was different: forgiveness. When I first heard Rais’ story, I could hardly believe it. A Muslim victim of a post-9/11 hate crime was fighting to save the life of his attacker. And one of the reasons that Bhuiyan was targeted – his faith tradition – is also the motivation for trying to save his attacker’s life.
Ten days after the September 11 attacks in 2001, Bhuiyan, an immigrant from Bangladesh, was working at a gas station in Dallas when a man walked in with a gun. Thinking the store was being robbed, Bhuiyan opened the cash register. Instead, the man asked him where he was from. “Excuse me?” Bhuiyan responded. Mark Stroman, a white supremacist who was targeting men who appeared to him to be Middle Eastern, then shot Bhuiyan in the face.
Stroman is scheduled to be executed by the state of Texas on 20 July for the murder of Vasudev Patel, an Indian immigrant killed on 4 October 2001; evidence was also presented at trial that Stroman shot and killed Waqar Hasan, a Pakistani immigrant. And Rais Bhuiyan is fighting to save Stroman’s life.
I had the chance to speak with Bhuiyan briefly after learning about his campaign through Amnesty International.
Talking about his current campaign to convince the parole board to overturn the death penalty in Stroman’s case, it was clear that his faith was the primary motivating factor. In 2009, Bhuiyan completed the haj, the pilgrimage to Mecca, where he saw an amazingly diverse group come together to pray and worship. He recalled growing up as a young man in Bangladesh in a religious family, where his family prayed five times a day and his grandfather would visit every Thursday to read the Qur’an and tell his family stories from Muslim tradition, especially about the Prophet Muhammad.
One of the stories that impacted Bhuiyan the most was that of Muhammad’s visit to Ta’if, a valley near Mecca, to spread the message of Islam. The people of Ta’if reacted cruelly, forcing him to leave. In the version of the story that Bhuiyan learned growing up, the angel Gabriel appeared with the angel of the mountains, who said to Muhammad, “If you like, I shall cause mountains surrounding Al-Ta’if, to fall on them, and crush them into pieces.” But Muhammad declined, saying that the children of those who had been responsible for casting him out might someday embrace the message he had come to spread.
The message of forgiveness and redemption at the heart of this story rings powerfully true today in the lives of Mark Stroman and Rais Bhuiyan. When Stroman learned about Bhuiyan’s work for his case, he broke down in tears. If Stroman is not executed, Bhuiyan says, “I believe he will be able to reach out to others. If he can touch one life, that would be a success. If he is gone, we lose the opportunity to educate others.”
This faith in the future, and in the belief that we can positively impact the lives of others by sharing our stories, is a powerful anecdote to the fear that has gripped our country in the years since 9/11 – fear that has sometimes sparked violence. What is at the root of Stroman’s crime, Bhuiyan believes, is hate. And he believes that the antidote to this hatred is education and compassion, not further violence. Despite what has happened to him, Bhuiyan believes that the United States is “still a beautiful country.”
After hearing Bhuiyan’s story, I realised I had gained a deeper understanding of forgiveness and compassion, some of the highest principles of my own faith tradition as well as his. His story should compel us to look at our country and its future.
Will we choose fear? Or will we choose to reach out to those who are different from us, to hear their stories, to begin to dismantle our fears and choose instead to have faith in our future?

Laurna Strikwerda is a programme coordinator with the Muslim-Western dialogue programme at the international conflict transformation organisation Search for Common Ground. This article was written for the Common Ground News Service (CGNews).

In the latest development to this story Mark Stroman was eventually executed on 20 July 2011.

http://www.altmuslim.com/a/a/a/4368

from: The Guardian, Monday 17th October 2011

Half of all hospitals are failing to meet basic standards in care for the elderly. The Care Quality Commission’s recent findings are, shockingly, no shock to anyone. As a letter to the Guardian the following day pointed out, these were exactly the findings of a report commissioned by the secretary of state for health in 1998. Thirteen years later, nothing has changed. Outraged reports accumulate on the shelf, gathering dust.

Extraordinary advances in medical technology continue, but we make painfully little progress – even some signs of deterioration – in something much cheaper, and surely much easier in healthcare: the quality of relationships. As the commission’s chair ruefullycommented, “kindness and compassion cost nothing”.

Inevitably, the report prompted soul-searching in the days afterwards; many members of the public described very painful stories of the care their elderly parents received in their last years.

Joan Bakewell, interviewed on Radio 4′s Today programme, pondered the impact of the decline of religion, asking who now teaches kindness as she learned it in Sunday school.

It’s an interesting point, but sadly not one I suspect that stands up to scrutiny. Religious institutions have been revealed to have a patchy – and that is being charitable – record on kindness. No, I think there is something very important at stake here that is not about secularisation but about marketisation – how all our patterns of thought are now modelled on the transactions of the market.

“What do I get out of this relationship?” is now regarded as a perfectly legitimate question, as if relationships are simply a kind of investment portfolio. The language of trade, finance and commerce has infiltrated how we understand our lovers, our friends, our neighbours and those for whom we work. Social capital, social skills – this is using the language of the market to describe relationships and the values and the inspiration that sustain them.

Much of this marketisation has neatly reinforced individualism’s aspirations to freedom and autonomy. But there is a problem. It’s blindingly obvious and yet ignored: it doesn’t give a full account of human experience. There are large chunks of our lives when we are either being cared for or we are caring for others. Caring for others cannot be totted up according to a calculus of cost and returns.

Dependency – others on us or us on others – is a central part of life. It is not something to be ashamed of and avoided at all costs. Care cannot always be easily shoehorned into the gaps in a busy life of consuming and working. This is why ultimately this cultural pattern of marketisation is so cruel: it makes shameful what is an inescapable part of human experience. It denigrates and belittles the qualities needed to care, such as patience and gentleness. Worst of all, marketisation ensures that everyone arrives at the challenge of being a carer with an almighty shock, and often a sense of “Why did no one warn me?”.

That’s what having children felt like for me. I felt I had been ambushed by something for which I was totally unprepared emotionally: the 24/7 dependence of a child and how that compromised all my aspirations to independence and achievement.

Now, it feels my age group is being ambushed again; we are all wondering and worrying about how one cares for elderly parents, how one deals with their dying and deaths. Their needs are often far more unpredictable than, but just as emotionally fraught as, the first experience of parenthood.

All of this hits women particularly hard because their socialisation for centuries has been bound up with expectations to care; only in the past few decades have some of those assumptions been unpicked.

But in their place, marketisation’s model of care is to buy it at the lowest possible cost. It says everything about our culture that caring is paid so badly and requires minimal training.

Compare how the two forms of care have been treated over the past 20 years: there has been a gradual and grudging reluctance to make the adjustments necessary to care for children (increased leave and part-time working), while the care of the elderly in an ageing society has been doggedly postponed – we simply don’t want to think about it.

Care for children fits into a marketised understanding of relationship: we talk of “investing” in our children. The state sees children as important because of their future worth to the economy as labour. But in this marketised mindset, the elderly have no economic value; they are perceived as a burden. The only values ascribed to the elderly are found – as recently celebrated in some grey power list – in silver-haired celebrities still working such as David Attenborough.

That’s a harsh form of exceptionalism in a culture of implicit contempt for the elderly’s frailty, dependence and intense vulnerability. What we have lost is the perception of the value of human experience beyond the busyness of the peak years of life; something captured by Milton in the final line of On His Blindness, “they also serve who only stand and wait”.

As the numbers of elderly increase and their last years are dominated by chronic ill health, their care will become ever more demanding in terms of resources and time. But tackling the policy implications is dependent on challenging these deeply ingrained cultural attitudes.

There is another set of reasons why we don’t find it easy to talk about the care of the elderly: many of them are in the final years of their lives. They are living very intimately with death. And that is the one big taboo of our age. We are the opposite of the Victorians: we are very open about our fascination with sex and very closed about death.

So, many of the elderly end up in hospitals – many with conditions for which there is no cure – and face only a protracted decline. A health system fixated on cure and prevention struggles inadequately with the process of dying, with the needs for kindness and comfort rather than for complex medical intervention, and with dying’s enormous repercussions for relationships. A fifth of all NHS beds are taken up by end-of-life care at huge cost, yet surveys show that hospital is often the last place where the frail and dying want to be. It is also where people are often most dissatisfied: more than half of all complaints to the NHS are about end-of-life care.

What we have lost is any concept of honouring the elders, respect for their frailty, and recognition that supporting their final years before death is important for all of us – that death is a part of what makes all of our lives meaningful.

This is what Steve Jobs so bravely articulated in his remarkablespeech to Stanford graduates in 2005 when he put death centre-stage. First, he referred to death as “useful”, and then he went on to remind his audience about something that these young adults were probably reluctant to acknowledge on the day of graduation: that they would all age and die. It is the one universal human experience. And, finally, he claimed that death “is very likely the single best invention of life. It’s life’s change agent.” Coming from an inventor fascinated by change, there could be no higher praise. It’s the kind of insight which challenges the cultural blindness which is crippling our capacity for compassion.

Translated by Webb Translators

Principle 1: Have a sincere, unwavering intention.  Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said, “each person will be rewarded for what he intended” (Muslim). This calls for determination in the heart to continuously act or to abstain from something only for God’s sake. A sign of having sincere intentions is that one does not change his resolve for fleeting reasons; what is done for God, the Truth, should not be forsaken to please His creation.

Principle 2: Work purely for God, (the One) without partners or associates. Prophet Muhammad ﷺ said: “worship God as though you see Him, but if you do not see Him (know that) He sees you” (Muslim). A sign of working purely for God is to not accept anything except the truth, and to see everything else besides the truth as vain and fleeting. As the prophet ﷺ said, “Let the slave of the dinar perish” (Bukhari). One should also beware of falling into doubtful matters. As Prophet Muhammad ﷺ: “Leave what is doubtful for what is not doubtful” (Tirmidhi and Nasa’i).

Principle 3: Align one’s desires with the guidelines and rulings of the Shari`ah (Islamic law). Be patient in times of hardship and difficulty, when struggling with personal desires, and in avoiding sinful acts and pleasures. Whoever practices this regularly reaches a state whereby he is in his sleep as if he were awake [worshipping], in his mixing with people as if he were in seclusion, in his fulfillment as if he were hungry, in his pride as if he were humiliated, and in talking to others as if he were silent.

Principle 4: Base one’s actions on following [the prophet’s way and scholarly opinions], and not on innovation. This prevents the following of one’s own desires and becoming proud of one’s own opinion. Surely, a person who takes himself as his own ruler will not succeed.

Principe 5: Have high ambitions, and do not procrastinate. It is said: “do not leave today’s work until tomorrow,” because actions are built on each another; and whoever is content with a lower [status] will be deprived of a higher one.

Principle 6: Be aware of one’s incapability and insignificance. This is not referring to laziness in worship or lack of productivity in work. It is about realizing that one is not capable of doing any action without support from God, the Most Capable, and Most Generous. This awareness is also manifested in viewing other people with respect and reverence, for people are means and helpers of one another on the path to God, the Exalted and Most Bountiful.

Principle 7: Have fear and hope, and do not be sure that your good deeds are accepted until you have witnessed this [on the day of Judgment]. One should have hope not because of the good deeds themselves, but because God Himself is the Most Benevolent and Generous.

Principle 8: Be consistent in one’s wird (regular litany of worship), for the one without a wird does not have additional source of support from God.  With a wird, the soul opens up in public and private; it becomes more mindful of the rights of others; it increases in loving and hating for others what it loves or hates for itself.  Also, having that wird makes one work more for God in order to please Him, just as a person would love that God does for him what he finds pleasing.

Principle 9: Be constantly observant of your actions and do not stray away from the remembrance of God even the blink of an eye. For the one who is always observant of his heart for the sake of God, and does not let other than God enter his heart besides, is one who has truly found God, experienced His Benevolence, and has reached ‘ilm al-yaqeen (certain knowledge). This is manifested in seeing God as the Enabler or Mover of everything that remains still or in motion around us. One’s mindfulness then increases from there until he recognizes that God is the Sustainer of everything, so His interaction with the creation is characterized by the best of manners. (Exemplifying this), the Prophet ﷺ said: “My Lord taught me good manners, and He gave me the best of manners.”

Principle 10: Know what one should be occupied with, both internally and externally for whoever thinks that he is not in need of obeying [God and His messenger] is a broke man who is in opposition to God’s words: “…Say ‘If you love Allah, then follow me, Allah will love you’ ”(Qur’an 3:31).  This is the foundation upon which have been built castles like no other.

http://www.suhaibwebb.com/personaldvlpt/character/excerpts-from-imam-ghazali%E2%80%99s-ten-principles-for-those-seeking-the-path-of-allah/

The Muslim Day is part of a nation-wide effort to serve more than 20,000 homeless and people in need in 15 cities throughout the United States

MINNEAPOLIS – Serving their community, Muslims in north Minneapolis are extending a helping hand to the needy and vulerable Americans in a new bid to develop a better understanding of their faith.

“Coining it the ‘Day of Dignity’ really says a lot and sums up what we’re trying to do — is be of service to the community,” Makram El-Amin, the Imam at Masjid An-Nur mosque in North Minneapolis, told KARE II website.

Standing ready for help, several local Muslim organizations, along with Masjid An-Nur, helped put on the event.

The Muslim program, Day of Dignity, which went nationwide seven years ago, aims at serving homeless and vulnerable Americans, whether Muslim or not.

It is part of a nation-wide effort to serve more than 20,000 homeless and people in need in 15 cities throughout the United States.

People receive health screenings, free food, and a variety of goods depending on their particular city.

In Minneapolis, about one thousand men, women and children came to the event for free food, clothing, entertainment, bathing supplies and medical, job and housing advice.

“It’s really is giving back to the community, what they say to us often this is what they need,” said Kamillah El-Amin, one of the local organizers.

Well-known hip hop artist Brother Ali was among the event’s featured entertainment.

Though there are no official statistics, the US is believed to be home to 7-8 million Muslim.

Bridge Differences

By serving the poor and the needy, Muslim residents are sending a message of hope and unity to bridge differences.

“It really is an expression of our faith tradition, which I think we share in common with other faith traditions — to really be of service to humanity, to mankind and the fundamental belief that everyone should be able to live a dignified life,” Makram El-Amin said.

Reaping the fruits of these events, the outreach was regarded as a way to help people to better understand Islam.

For Nell Davis, a mother of five, it was a profound opportunity to get ends meet for her family and other needy people in the community.

“[We've] had to overcome a lot, so this is a big help,” Davis said.

Since the 9/11 attacks, US Muslims have complained of discrimination and stereotypes because of their Islamic attires or identities.

Despite the frenzy, they seized the opportunity to introduce a true message of Islam, through activism.

Extending new bridges into the community, new groups were established, such as American Muslim Voice, founded by Samina Sundas of Palo Alto.

There is also the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), which was founded to help Muslims engage with their neighbors in civic life.