Hindu-Muslim dialogue

It reminds me of my College Professor Ramachandran and my weaver friend Fakhru Bhai; a Hindu and a Muslim respectively and I used to discuss and understand the wisdom of each aspect of religion.

As a Muslim I see great efforts on the part of Muslims to relate with Hindus, it is an effort; however, due to the complex plurality of Hindu belief system, it is much easier for a Hindu to relate with a Muslim than otherwise on a theological basis.

Muslims subtly condition themselves to relate with Hindus based on their reference to God, as one God. Although God is formless in both scriptures, subconsciously most humans give a form and insist on identifying with that One God, as though it is a physical being. Given that, the efforts of Syed Abdullah Tariq must be appreciated.

However, the common Hindus and Muslims, the ones who do not wear religious neon signs are comfortable with each other, just as they are with their own. The One God, No God or Many representations of God is not an issue to them and this is the grounding of an overwhelming majority of Muslims, Hindus or any one. Syed Abdullah Tariq will be more successful in getting the message to the majority and we need to encourage such efforts.

The idea of one God has become more of a political issue, where a few use that as the standard to judge one’s righteousness and mentally declare other practices as wrong or even sinful. We really need to review the intent or wisdom of the idea of one God. – It is a uniting element accepting the uniqueness of each creation, where we acknowledge the source of creation and cause of creation by one energy…. A conflict less system of co-existence for justice and peace.

In the long time interests of peace for every individual, each one of us have to put an effort. Any society that is built and sustained on justice takes out the fear and uncertainty from the minds of people and bring peace, allowing them to be productive and contributing members of the society.

Due to the terminal health of my wife, I have not been able to write much… but this one caught my attention. (http://mikeghouseforamerica.blogspot.com/2008/05/gods-grace-for-najma-ghouse.html )

We just had our Monthly interfaith (http://carrolltondiary.blogspot.com/2008/04/may-14-carrollton-interfaith-luncheon.html ) meeting at the Mosque in Carrollton, and It was such a joy to see every one respond positively to the inspiration from Jainism. The whole gathering repeated “Michami Dukadam” after me. During Tsunami, we were able to have a Bhajan in the Mosque in Richardson, which is a rare thing. These are positive improvements. God should be invoked with every name and every which way and it is happening.

I commend the efforts of Syed Abdullah Tariq. May more people participate in such efforts.

Mike Ghouse
www.MikeGhouse.net

An innovative approach to Hindu-Muslim dialogue
Posted May 16th, 2008 by Mudassir Rizwan

* Articles
* Indian Muslim

55 year-old Syed Abdullah Tariq runs an Islamic group
based in Rampur, a town in western Uttar Pradesh, that
focuses on dialogue with Hindus. An engineer by
training, he was one of the chief disciples of the
late Maulana Shams Naved Usmani, a noted Islamic
scholar who had also a deep knowledge of the Hindu
scriptures.

Tariq collected and published the thoughts and sayings
of Maulana Usmani in the form of several books in Urdu
and Hindi, the most well-known of these being 'Agar
Abhi Na Jagey To', later translated into English under
the title 'Now Or Never'. Maulana Usmani and Tariq
have been one of the pioneers of a particular Islamic
approach to dialogue with Hindus, one that is based on
the commonalities that they perceived in Islam and
Hinduism.

In a recent meeting in Rampur, Tariq related his own
story and his association with Maulana Usmani to
Yoginder Sikand, as follows:

Having finished my engineering degree from the Aligarh
Muslim University, I was not sure what I wanted to
take up as a career. In 1974, when I was in my early
twenties, I first met Maulana Shams Naved Usmani in
Rampur. I was really impressed by his teachings, his
enthusiasm for dialogue between Hindus and Muslims. I
decided to stay in his company and to take down
whatever he used to say to his disciples. Later, I had
these published in the form of several books.

Maulana Usmani, or Chacha Jan as I used to fondly call
him, was a very modest man, a Sufi. Originally from
Deoband, he was from the famous Usmani family which
had produced numerous well-known ulema, including
Maulana Shabbir Ahmad Usmani and Maulana Atiq
ur-Rahman Usmani. He did his Master's degree from
Lucknow University, taught History and Geography in a
small semi-government school in Rampur. His lifestyle
was austere. He lived in a small, two-room rented
house. I remember that he constantly had tears in his
eyes. People would come to him to ask him to do dua
for them, which he always did. Even at the height of
summer, he would use a fan only if a guest visited his
house. If he bought a fruit, he would keep a small
part of it for the lady who would come to clean his
house every day. Once, there was a dispute between two
of his relatives over some family-owned property in
Deoband. He told them to stop quarrelling and said
that they could take his share of the property if that
would satisfy him. His wife got a little upset about
this, but he sought to comfort her by composing a
poem, one line of which said, 'Oh, my life companion!
Our house is not in this world!'.

Chacha Jan did not receive a traditional education in
a madrasa, but since he came from a family of noted
ulema he learnt about Islam at home itself as a child.
Later, he learnt Sanskrit on his own. He then began
studying the various Hindu scriptures, and was
surprised to learn, or so he believed, that some of
the original Hindu texts, when shorn of later
accretions, also talk, as the Quran does, of
monotheism, oppose idolatry and polytheism and caste
inequality. This he felt might be a reconfirmation of
the Quran's announcement that God has sent messengers
to every community, and that they have all taught the
same primal and eternal religion or deen of al-Islam,
the surrender to the one God. This means, obviously,
that God must have also sent prophets to India, and it
is quite possible that some figures whom the Hindus
revere might actually have been such prophets,
although later a large number of corruptions and
accretions crept in and people began worshipping these
prophets as deities.

This was Maulana Usmani's basic contention. He argued
that the Sanskrit term sanatan dharm or 'Eternal
Religion', if understood in this manner as submission
to the one God, was the same as the deen al-qaim,
which again means 'Eternal Religion', which is what
Islam is. It was on the basis of this core similarity
that Maulana Sahib wanted Hindus and Muslims to come
together. He also claimed that the Prophet Muhammad
had been prophesied about in some of the Hindu
scriptures. This meant, he argued, that the Hindus, in
accordance with the teachings of these scriptures,
should recognize the Prophet, in addition to other
prophets of God, including those who had been sent to
India. At the same, he wanted Muslims to recognize the
validity of these scriptures insofar as they were of
divine origin and not corrupted by human hands. In
other words, what he was trying to advocate was that
Hindus and Muslims must come closer together based on
precisely what he believed their religious scriptures
said about each other's prophets and on their common
stress on the worship of the one God. This was the
crux of almost all the writings that have been
attributed to him, most of which I have compiled.

After Chacha Jan's sad demise some years ago we have
been trying to carry on with the Maulana's unique work
of inter-faith dialogue. I am often invited to address
inter-faith and dawah meetings in different parts of
India, often even by Hindu organizations. When I am in
Rampur, I and some young colleagues of mine, many of
them students and self-employed youth, meet on Fridays
in the house of Chachi Jan, the wife of the late
Maulana, where we together study a selected portion of
the Quran. After that, I generally deliver a lecture
to the Juma congregation in a mosque nearby, where I
try to discuss issues of contemporary concern, say
violence, women's right, education, the importance of
dawah and inter-faith dialogue and so on. Then, we
divide ourselves into groups and go to nearby
villages, where we meet with Hindus and Muslims and
discuss with them about religion, focusing on the
concept of tauhid, or, as it is called in Hindi and
Sanskrit, ekishwarvad, which, we point out, is common
to both Islam and what we think were the original
Hindu texts. We also talk about the predictions about
the Prophet Muhammad in some Hindu texts that Maulana
Saheb said he had discovered, and also about the
possibility that some key Hindu personages were
actually prophets of God. In this way, we are trying,
in our own very modest way, to bring Hindus and
Muslims to understand their commonalities and thereby
to come closer to each other.

To our Hindu brethren we try and convey that Islam is
not a radically new or alien religion. Rather, it is
the same religion of monotheistic submission that was
taught by all the prophets, starting from the first of
these, Hazrat Adam, whom some have identified as Shiva
in the Hindu tradition. Hence, we tell them, to
recognize the teachings of the Prophet, the core of
which is monotheism, is to actually fulfill the
teachings of their own original scriptures rather than
constituting a departure from or betrayal of them.
Some Hindus will readily recognize other religions
that had their roots in India, such as Sikhism,
Buddhism and Jainism, although their teachings might
differ, on some counts, considerably with Hinduism,
but refuse to recognize religions that are thought to
have their origins outside India. So, we tell them
that true religion is universal. It is not meant for
any one country or race alone, and we say that some
Muslim traditions have it that the first prophet of
God according to the Islam, Hazrat Adam, was actually
sent down to Sri Lanka, which is part of the imagined
Greater India.

We tell them all this, and many people's minds have
been changed as a result, but still, I believe, that
in general people are impressed and influenced not so
much by speeches and sermons as by one's personal
example, and that is something that Chacha Jan used to
exemplify. So many Hindus who met him changed their
views about Islam and Muslims as a result of this
interaction. His approach was one of seeking to find
similarities, to point out our commonalities, rather
than play on and magnify our differences. I think this
is the right approach. I also believe that people who
go around condemning other religions or mocking them
in a bid to stress the claim of the superiority of
their religion actually do their own religion a
disservice because in this way others become alienated
from and hostile to them and their religion rather
than attracted to it. And I believe that Chacha Jan's
approach to dialogue with Hindus was quite in line
with what the Quran says when it advises us to address
others with good words, gently, with love.

In this regard, while talking about the need for
inter-faith dialogue between Muslims and Hindus, I
also want to stress that some ulema as well as radical
Islamists who insist that all non-Muslims are 'enemies
of Islam' and that we must not have any relations with
them or even that we should be stern towards them and
demean them are not just incorrect from the Quranic
point of view but are also insulting Islam. They take
one small verse in the Quran completely out of its
context to insist that Muslims must not befriend
people of other faiths. But this is wholly incorrect.
You must look at the particular context in which this
verse was revealed, who exactly the people referred to
here whom Muslims are told not to befriend were. You
must also examine all the verses in the Quran that
talk about people of other faiths. That would lead one
to the conclusion, which the Quran itself states
somewhere, that God does not forbid Muslims from
befriending those non-Muslims who have not persecuted
them on account of their faith. In other words, the
Quran insists we should relate to such people with
love and good intentions. That sort of relationship is
crucial for any meaningful inter-faith dialogue.

Islam is the religion taught by all the prophets, who
have been sent to all peoples in the world, as the
Quran itself says. It is, therefore, a truly universal
faith, not tied down to one particular ethnic or
cultural group. It is meant for all peoples, and so
when some Muslims erroneously conceive of it as
indelibly linked to a particular culture, dress,
cuisine or language I feel they are really negating
its universality. This naturally makes Islam appear
culturally alien to people who have a different sort
of culture. In turn, that makes our task of
inter-faith dialogue as well as telling others about
Islam particularly difficult.

In this regard I would like to cite a particular
Hadith report that has been attributed to the Prophet,
according to which he is reported as having said that
differences (ikhtilaf) were a blessing for his
community. Some ulema have wrongly interpreted this to
mean that the Prophet was here indicating intra-Muslim
sectarian differences. Not at all! Their petty
bickering on the basis of sectarian differences has
not proved to be a blessing at all, but, rather, a
curse. Perhaps one sort of difference that the Prophet
was referring to here was actually the diversity of
cultures, food styles, dress, languages and so on.
Unfortunately, some of our ulema think in quite the
opposite way. They want to stamp out this rich
cultural diversity, which is a real blessing actually,
and impose a single culture on everyone, at the same
time as they actively seek to promote sectarian
differences by incorrectly interpreting this Hadith
report.

Cultural diversity is a blessing ordained by God, and
without it the world would have been a very drab and
boring place indeed! So, in our inter-faith dialogue
work we must recognize the validity of those things in
others' cultures that do not transgress basic human
and Islamic norms. These things are actually quite
acceptable to Muslims, who can also adopt them without
fear of having diluted their faith thereby. Likewise
in the case of others adopting some aspects of the
culture associated with different Muslim groups.

If religion and culture are considered in this
expansive way, I am quite confident that we can
overcome numerous hurdles in the path to inter-faith
understanding. Further, this would also help is in our
task of telling others about our faith, which is
something that Chacha Jan devoted his life to.

___________________________________________________________________

For a detailed account of Maulana Usmani's views and
approach to inter-faith dialogue, see my essay titled
"An Islamic 'Hinduism'?: The Inter-Faith Dialogue
Project of Acharya Maulana Shams Naved 'Usmani",
available on
http://insaf.net/pipermail/insafny_insaf.net/2005-January/000846.html

Ahmadiyya Muslims, what next?

A few articles and comments below;
Ahmadiyya Muslims, what next?
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2008/04/ahmadiyya-muslims-what-next.html
.

The real issue is not about who is a Muslim, but it is about how the majorities treat their minorities.

Should the bad decisions of a few in the name of Islam, reflect on the Muslim community at large? Now, Indonesia is planning to ban the "heretical" Muslim sect, should that reflect on Islam? The least we can do is to speak up against the tyranny of one group of people against the other.

The easy option is to do nothing and let the world believe that it is Islam, and if we did that, we would lose our right to complain that it is not us, well it is us. The actions are not the work of a Looney brigade or some fringe groups; it is the government of Indonesia succumbing to please the few among them.

In the movie "A Bug's life", it just took one gutsy Flik to fend off the terrorizing grasshoppers, it takes two boys or two girls to stand up to the class room bully to end the tyranny. It would take a few passionate Muslims to speak out and persuade the establishment. I suggest every one to watch this movie to understand how our Neocons (extremist Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others - Jews claim Zionists are not extremists, and I take their word for it) work and how us, the silent majority should act.

The real question that we need to address is should we let a majority determine what one believes, wears or eats? Can the Majority in the United States do that? Can the majority in Indonesia do that? Should that work in India? Can the Sunni Majority in Saudi Arabia harass the Shia? Can the Shia Majority in Iran harass the Sunnis? We have to catch up with our own integrity. Those who were a majority elsewhere are a minority somewhere else.

God is about justice and he wants us to live in peace and harmony, after all, each one of us is his creation, and he will not discriminate any one of us. Qur’aan - 49:13 “O men! Behold, we have created you all out of a male and a female, and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you might come to know one another. Verily, the noblest of you in the sight of God is the one who is most deeply conscious of Him. Behold, God is all-knowing, all-aware.”

A majority of Muslims understand that Islam is a religion of peace, a religion of freedom and justice, and a religion that does not force people to behave. Indeed, if we start looking at ourselves, Alhamdu Lillah, Praise the Lord, the majority of us get along with all and live a life of peace and co-existence.

Every now and then, a "few" among us cross that line, when we let Governments, in the name of Islam start judging people's faith; we are making a gross error defying the very God we purport to follow. Don’t practicing Muslims recite this at least 50 times a day? Qur’aan, Sura “1:4 Lord of the Day of Judgment!” And “1:5 you alone do we worship; and unto Thee alone do we turn for aid.”

Is it up to God or the Government of Indonesia? When we object the Neocons to pre-empt God and bring the Armageddon as soon as possible and justify their ruthlessness in the name of God, then we must object any one taking over God’s decisions in the name of Islam.

When Hazrat Bakr was agreed upon to be the Caliph, the consensus was with him and the few who disagreed dropped their opposition and followed the leader in the same manner as Republicans and democrats who fight within until a candidate is nominated, then every one rallies around the selected one.

The problem with us or any majority of people is we do not give our consensus; we do not exercise our rights and by default give others, the right to govern us.

Not the Pakistani people, but the dictator in-charge, to appease a few, enacted the laws declaring Ahmadiyya group of people as non-Muslims, but then the Pakistani people start believing and legitimizing it. Americans are no different, if the President thinks Russia is evil, we jump with him and when he turns around and befriends China, and in a heartbeat we change our minds too. If he declares Islam is the danger… thank God, Americans are getting away from blindly following government and exercising independent judgment.

It is time for Muslims to stand up and speak out.

Remember the Good Samaritan American women during 9/11? They wore Hijab to show solidarity with Muslim women, the time is coming, when a whole mass of population will declare themselves Muslim to show solidarity with the Ahmadiyya, what are you going to do?

What prevents one from incorporating their group with the name Muslim or Islam? There are a lot of websites with the words Muslim and Islam, but they are actually anti-Islam. What are you going to do about it?

It is time for Muslims to wake up and act righteous and speak out.

Would you join me in writing to the Indonesian government to consider this ill-adivised proposal?

# # # Additional appeal #1:

I am a Muslim, a Sunni if it makes a difference in building goodwill.

I do not believe in getting pushed into a box. I realize that it will take a while for all of us to get to that point. On the other hand there is nothing wrong in accepting the diversity among us, it is not the difference, it is our attitude towards the difference that needs to be evaluated.

First of all, please note that our forum or any other forum must values every opinion, I believe God has created us all equal, what we make out of it is our effort and God knows everything we do.

This is the reason you will find legitimate criticism of issues (not individuals) is published on this forum. As a publisher and moderator of this group, I can simply delete the criticism leveled against me every now and then, but I don’t. You should not be surprised that Brother Iftekhar Alvis’s criticism is published here, as Muslims we have to engage in dialogue, listen to different point of views and not be judgmental, we have to respectfully disagree, but not deny each others’ point of view. We cannot expect the good things to happen, if we do not pave the way for a dialogue and debate.

Several Imams, scholars and heads of organizations have expressed the need for the Muslim community to put our difference aside and come together for the common good of Muslims and the world. What is good for us has got to be good for others for it to sustain.

Ahmadiyya no doubt differ from the Sunni thought, but Sunnis also differ from Shia in the interpretation of Ahl-e-bait. But we have lived all along for over 14 centuries. Some of us have issues with the newer group in the family of Muslims and are eager to deny them a sense of belonging based on hearsay, fact or fiction. Politically they are not comfortable either as some of us are not. But most of us would like to embrace every one who calls himself/herself a Muslim, just as we boast that Prophet Essa, Musa, Ibrahim and others were Muslims because they believe in a God and the accountability day.

Islam is about Justice and when we deny some one the same rights as we have, then we cannot call it Justice. Our moral standing and Eemaan (faith) will be strong when we truly believe that Justice is not for our own kind, but for every human being, Muslim or not.

We have to take a position and embrace every Muslim and not do the hair splitting. If you give the Danda (stick) to orthodox Wahhabi, Shia, Sunni, Ismaili, Bohra, Ahmadiyya, Kurd or other group to lash out, they would declare every one to be a non-Muslim other than themselves and perhaps give each one of us at least one lash. Isn’t this the reason we have Islam where a rich or poor, Alim (scholar) or Jahil (ignorant) can stand in the same line in presence of God Almighty as equals? After all, if we die, each one of us will be buried on equal terms. Only Allah knows and he reserves the right to judge one’s Emaan, and one’s Niyyah and not any one else. This is our God given freedom.

If we need to have the moral strength, we have to consider dropping the barriers for greater good. We have to work for it, we have to do the Jihaad within, we have to fight the "desire" to compel others to be like us, isn’t this Jihad a legitimate Jihaad?

There is quite a lot of raw, civil and good expressions included in the comments sections http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2008/04/ahmadiyya-muslims-what-next.html .

Jazak Allah Khair
Mike Ghouse

# # # Additional appeal #2:

I am not an Ahmadiyya, but as a Muslim, I will stand up for their right to practice their version of the faith as it works for them. We do not have to subscribe to their version, nor do we have to become obsessed in judging their Eeman (faith). You and I do not own ISLAM, Islam is not anyone' property to claim exclusive rights to it. Just as you subscribe to it, others do too, let every one subscribe in their own way. If God wanted us to be a homogenous beings, he would have made us Farishtas (angels), he wanted us to be unique.

May God bless you and cause you to become a part of the mainstream Islam, where every one is honored with their differences and accept every one as a Muslim, as long as they believe in God and his prophet and the day of judgment.

# # # Additional appeal #3:

I am speaking from a Majoritarianism V. Minoriatarianism perspective. The civility of a group is determined by how it treats its weak, its children, its women, it older folks.

A few of us claim that Islam has been around from Ibrahim's time and our explanation is that Islam means submission to the will of God, hence Musa was Muslim, and Essa was a Muslim. Yet, we do not want the same definition to be used by others.

Shahadah is the door that opens every one to be called a Muslim. In fact, that is the first thing required of any one to be a Muslim. As Muslims we have to strive for Justice - and Justice is negation of oppression.

Learning about others is critical and I have been to the Ahmadiyya Mosque, and at least the Qur'aan I picked from the Mehraab (book shelf), walking around the Masjid was the same, as I glance through many of the Sarah's. www.Alislam.org is their website.

Sunnis declaring Shia as non Muslim and vice-versa (Mecca's Mufti) is an endless loop. We have to leave the judgment to Allah and accept the diversity within Islam. Our fight should be focused on dismantling the false propaganda against Muslims – The Ahmadiyya are doing a good job in sharing about Islam, and I have been in their company a few times in the interfaith meetings. I did not hear anything contrary, at least in the public.

Alhamdu Lillah, Indonesian government is not going to pass the laws. However, this issue will not go away. The politics in us has to manufacture an enemy, and for a few among us, Ahmadiyya are the easy prey. We don't need to eat from the same plate, but let's do our jihad against this hostility.

A few of my friends suggest me not to take up these issues, I disagree, God has DNA'd each one of us to do a few things in life. Some of us are volunteers and serve others and some don't. Some day more and more Muslims will see the wisdom of Sura Hujurat, verse 49.

My role model is Prophet Muhammad, and I would like to emulate as much as I can, as most of the Muslims do. One of his roles was to speak up and stand up for justice, it did not matter to him if Khadija and Ali were the only two followers, then later on with 313 followers he stood up against the ooo's. He stood his ground despite the persecution. There is a lot we can learn from this.

.

# # # Additional appeal #4:

.

In the previous posting a clarification was made that we have the right to judge one's deviant social behavior as to theft, fornication, cheating etc, where as one's faith, an inner matter will be judged by God on the Day of Judgment, only God knows and is aware of our intentions.

To me Prophet Muhammad was the last prophet. Ahmadiyya interpretation works for them, as they believe in it. Neither Shia, Sunni, Ahmadi, Wahhabi have to accept each other’s point of view, we do differ on different issues. Each set has its own peculiarities that the others do not share, that is given, and we have to live with it, as we cannot compel any one to believe what he or she does not.

The choices are: i) compel them to change their belief ii) deny them their right to believe in Islam in their own way iii) and deny them the right to call themselves Muslims. This assumes that we don't need to consult and that when consulted and if the majority agrees to impose all the three choices, we have to go by the majority. None of this can be good for all times.

What if the whole nation of Indonesia becomes Ahmadiyya or powerful, can they reverse the above choices made by Sunni Muslims? Would that be legitimate? The Criminal Ferdinand has done that in 1492, Criminal Hitler has done that around 1940, in both instances the world stood by doing nothing.

Most Muslims believe that Islam is for all times, it is big enough to accommodate and live with the whole diverse universe without conflicts and without compelling others to be subservient, and letting every one who he or she is remain who they want to be. God's model of diversity is impeccable with the matter, the Sun, the planets, and the whole universe obeys God, meaning they do what they were created for. He wants us to know each other and the best among us is the one who is best in conduct, Allah is aware.

Mohammed Irtaza quotes Qur'aan below “those who take heed and lead a righteous life, will have nothing to fear, nor will they grieve.”

I am grateful to almighty that I am not obligated to any one but God. I do not fear any one but God. Thanks God I do not intend to please anyone at the cost of pleasing the creator. Speak the truth as I know and understand. Thanks God again, no Imam, no Muslim scholar, No Muslim has ever pushed me to compromise, we debate, we argue, but no one has ever compelled me. The Public should know that Muslims debate and discuss issues, and they agree and disagree. They are as democratic as anyone can get. For every three Muslims, we can find five opinions.

My sincere request to my Muslim brothers and sisters is to resist the temptations to deny Ahmadiyya to call themselves Muslims. In the long haul, it is the good thing do for Muslims and all. Let people live the way they want to, that is God's intention. God would have made the whole world Christians, Muslims, Hindus or Jews, he could have done that, but like his cosmos is diverse, he expects us to be different and maintain that uniqueness. He wants us to learn about each other so we can live in Harmony. Quraan, 49:17

http://www.foundationforpluralism.com/WorldMuslimCongress/Articles/Mission-Statement.asp

Jazak Allah Khair
# # #

Mike Ghouse is a Speaker, Thinker, Writer and a Moderator. He is a frequent guest on talk radio and local television network discussing Pluralism, politics, Islam, Religion, Terrorism, India and civic issues. He is the founder of the World Muslim Congress, a group committed to building bridges and nurturing a world of co-existence. He also heads the foundation for pluralism, an organization committed to studying religious pluralism and pluralistic governance. His personal website is http://www.mikeghouse.net/ and his writings are on the above websites as well as several of the ancillary Blogs listed on the sites.

# # # # #

http://thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/4/18/worldupdates/2008-04-18T131929Z_01_NOOTR_RTRMDNC_0_-331086-1&sec=Worldupdates

Indonesia plans to ban "heretical" Muslim sect
JAKARTA (Reuters) - Indonesia is drafting a decree that will ban a Muslim sect that has been branded heretical by most Muslims, an official said on Friday.
The Ahmadiyya sect views itself as Muslim but it has been branded a heretical group by the Indonesian Ulemas Council, the secular country's highest Muslim authority, which has issued a fatwa, or edict, against it.
A team with officials from two government ministries and the attorney general's office has recommended the government ban the sect because its teachings deviate from the central tenets of Islam, said the team's deputy head Wisnu Subroto.
He said the religious affairs ministry, the home affairs ministry and the attorney general's office were drafting a joint decree that would require Ahmadiyya followers to return to mainstream Islam.

"The content is a strong warning to Ahmadiyya followers to not deviate from the core teachings," Subroto told Reuters.

He added that the draft was expected to be completed later this month.
Mainstream Muslims reject Ahmadiyya's claim of the prophethood of its founder, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, who died in 1908 in India. Most Muslims believe that Mohammad is the last of the Prophets.

Some of the sect's other teachings are also considered deviant by both Sunni and Shia, the two major branches of Islam, and some Muslim countries do not accept the Ahmadiyya’s as Muslim.
In the past, Islamic radicals have damaged mosques and other facilities belonging to Ahmadiyya’s in Indonesia.

The Indonesian Muslim Forum (FUI), a group of some 50 Muslim organisations, on Friday urged President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono to disband Ahmadiyya and seize all its assets.
Indonesia is the world's most populous Muslim nation, but groups branded as deviant or heretical periodically spring up.

Around 85 percent of Indonesia's 226 million people are Muslims. Most of them are moderates who tolerate other beliefs.

#####

Bully pulpit
Apr 24th 2008 BANGKOK
From The Economist print edition

Religious freedom is put at risk by political expediency
http://www.economist.com/world/asia/displaystory.cfm?story_id=11090607

SEVERAL thousand hardline Muslims protested outside President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's palace in Jakarta on April 20th demanding that he ban Ahmadiyah, an unorthodox but moderate Muslim sect founded in 19th-century India that claims around 200,000 members across Indonesia. At an earlier meeting of one of the groups involved, a leader was filmed chanting “Kill Ahmadiyah! Kill! Kill! Kill!” Far from having these extremists arrested for inciting violence, Mr Yudhoyono was this week considering pandering to them by issuing a decree to restrict Ahmadiyah's freedom of worship. One group of advisers has urged him to do so, while others were counselling against a move that would violate constitutional guarantees of religious freedom.

Reuters

“X” marks the spotThe proposed ban has its roots in Mr Yudhoyono's tender treatment of the Indonesian Ulemas Council (MUI), a semi-official group of Muslim clerics that was created during the authoritarian regime of Suharto (1966-98). The president nodded his approval as the MUI issued fatwas against “deviant” sects. On April 23rd Abdul Salam, a self-proclaimed prophet who leads another unorthodox group, al-Qiyadah al-Islamiah, was jailed for four years for blasphemy. MUI's fatwas have also given vigilante groups an excuse to attack sects' members and their homes and mosques. In Ahmadiyah's case the fatwas have also prompted another Suharto-era creature, the Co-ordinating Board for Monitoring Mystical Beliefs in Society, to launch an inquisition.

In January the board said it had decided not to call for a ban because Ahmadiyah's leaders in Indonesia had issued a statement affirming that Muhammad was the last prophet, rather than Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, the Indian mystic who founded the group. But this month the board declared that since Ahmadiyah had gone back on this pledge to “correct” its beliefs, a ban was now in order. Government officials then said that a decree against Ahmadiyah, though not necessarily an outright ban, was being prepared. Last weekend, police forced Ahmadiyah to cut short its annual congress in Bali.

As elsewhere, there are differences among Indonesia's Ahmadis over the meaning of their founder's claims to prophethood. However, under Article 29 of Indonesia's constitution—“The state guarantees all persons the freedom of worship, each according to his own religion or belief”—their beliefs are their own affair.

Unfortunately, it is not that simple. The constitution's guarantee of religious freedom is immediately preceded by an apparently contradictory affirmation that “the state shall be based upon the belief in the one and only God.” Indonesian law requires citizens to belong to one of six officially approved religions even though three are not monotheistic: Buddhists and Confucianists have no god; Hindus have lots of them. Now that Indonesia is a democracy, the constitutional guarantee of freedom of worship might be thought to trump all other arguments. But the mess has yet to be cleared up by the courts.

Yet Mr Yudhoyono's government can do the right thing when pushed. After the Bali bombings in 2002 it rounded up most leaders of Jemaah Islamiah (JI), the jihadist group responsible. Three of the bombers were sentenced to death and face execution shortly. Two more JI leaders, arrested last year, were sentenced to jail terms this week. However, while it is contemplating banning peaceable Ahmadiyah, the government has been reluctant to prohibit JI despite its atrocious violence. It may do so now that the courts, in this week's sentences, have at last labelled JI a terrorist group. There have also been no moves to ban the local chapter of Hizb-ut-Tahrir, a radical group that, although it does not preach violence, does call for the downfall of the Indonesian state and its replacement with a caliphate.

Mr Yudhoyono may believe that he is avoiding conflict by appeasing the country's vociferous but unrepresentative radical Islamist fringe. His liberal critics retort that the state has a duty to protect minorities, rather than sacrifice them to some supposed public good. In any case, suppressing Ahmadiyah and al-Qiyadah al-Islamiah would be more likely to damage Indonesia's stability and unity than letting their members worship freely. The country's many Hindus, Christians and members of other faiths would surely be asking themselves: “Are we next?”

Some Ahmadiyah members have called for help from the United Nations' Human Rights Commission. The outside world—which has so far seen Mr Yudhoyono as a democrat, a reformist and a leader of moderate Islam—might indeed make it clear to him that giving in to the bullies and repressing a peaceable religion would have unfortunate consequences.

# # #

Torching of Ahmadiyya Mosque in Indonesia a Disgrace
http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/torching_of_ahmadiyya_mosque_in_indonesia_a_disgrace/0016171
by Robert Salaam

I feel that I have to truly speak out against the crime against Jammat Ahmadiyya that was brought to my attention. I posted the wonderful commentary by Mike Ghouse entitled “Ahmadiyya Muslims What Next” and he was absolutely right.

With all due respect, my Indonesian Muslim brothers and sisters must be loosing their minds. In truth the entire Muslim world is loosing their mind, especially as it relates to this MUSLIM community. Yes, I said Muslim community. How in the world can you call yourself a Muslim and want to ban another group that says they are Muslim too? So what if you don’t agree with their practice or even their theology. The one thing that should bind us all is our belief in One God, Allah (swt) and our belief in the Prophet (saw). Any person or group that upholds that is a Muslim.

This is where hypocrisy comes in. Muslims are so quick to fight against one another over matters of variance in practice, but are so slow to embrace one another based on our commonality. We will readily engage in interfaith with other religions, accept others with open arms, let them speak in our Masjids, etc. But God forbid we do that with other Muslims who think or practice other than ourselves.

We love to bash the West and complain about how we are minorities and are denied equal rights, yet in our so-called Muslim countries we refuse to do that ourselves? Why complain about something you won’t readily do yourselves?

This is why I understand why non-Muslims look at us with such strange looks. Look at us, we are backward and confused when we can’t realize the obvious. Muslims by definition are supposed to be the example of what the world should be. I must say, if we define Muslim by the actions of those in Indonesia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and every other “Muslim” nation that bans this group or any other group, then I would rather be an apostate.

You can’t even be a Muslim acting the way they are acting. A Muslim is supposed to be one in which his/her neighbors feel safe. How in the hell can these “Muslims” call themselves such when not even fellow Muslims can feel safe in their presence?

How in the world can you say you are Islamically justified in banning a group that says there is no God, but Allah? What kind of Muslim are you?

I am not Ahmadiyya, however, you can judge a tree by the fruit it bears. This Jammat in all my experiences have been one of the most tolerant, welcoming, and peaceful community I have had the privilege to get to know. I have Ahmadiyya friends, I have attended their functions, and I can tell you through my Sunni eyes, that if they are not Muslim, then I truly don’t know what Islam is and I should go back to being a Christian!

I know many of these brothers and sisters, I can tell you with resolute honesty that to me, they are as if we had the same parents. I love these brothers and sisters, surely we disagree on matters of Fiqh, but so do my wife and I! Some of us in our arrogance and lack of faith in Allah (swt) would rather swat at gnats. We bring the chastisement of Allah (swt) on ourselves.

So what they say the Messiah has come back? What does that have to do with Shahaddah, Salah, Zawm, Zakat, and Hajj? Do they teach against those things? Do they even pray differently? Many of us are so foolish that we would readily have the good Rev. Dr. such and such address us in the Masjid or non-Muslim Mayoral candidate whomever, but don’t let it be someone who calls themselves a Muslim that practices or believes a little different from us. Don’t even let them in our households, bar them from burying their dead, and of all things bar them from the Holy House of all Muslims!

I condemn these detestable, hypocritical, and un-Islamic acts done against this community. I pray Allah (swt) is swift in His chastisement against any Muslim or so-called Muslim state that wants to or has banned any Muslim or group that prays to Him.

How dare you brothers and sisters that do this. In this time where Muslims should be gathering and supporting one another, you want to continue the divide. Instead of being the defender and protector of the oppressed, you now want to be the oppressor. Allah (swt) loves NOT the oppressor.

I sincerely tell you that you seal your fate and you will be brought to ruin as most “Muslim” nations like Pakistan, until you submit and unite.

I ask all Muslims who truly believe, to oppose these actions as well as those well recorded elsewhere. All Muslim lands should belong to any who believe in Allah (swt), His messenger (saw), and the last day. Any who oppose that, should be done away with. They should not be supported in any manner as they have left the fold of Islam and have become a persecutor of fellow Muslims which is Haram.

I ask that we rally around the Ahmadiyya Community the latest and perpetual victim of “Muslim” violence, ignorance, and hypocrisy. I ask that all Muslims get it together and aid one another. It doesn’t matter if you pray with your arms folded, pray with your arms at your sides, pray with your hands on your heart, etc. It doesn’t matter if you expect the Messiah to come with Imam Mahdi, expect Jesus (as) to descend from the clouds, or believe that he came 100 years ago already. It doesn’t matter if you prayer toward the Holy House in Islamabad, Cairo, Jakarta, Paris, London, Dakar, or Washington DC. Muslims we have to unite and be brothers and protectors of one another!

Oh Allah (swt), I ask that you guide our hearts and our minds. I ask that you turn us nearer to you and forgive our transgressions. I ask that you renew in us the spirit of true brother and sister hood. I ask that you remind us that all are brothers who seek you and follow the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw). Oh Allah (swt), I ask that you turn back the Shaitan who is winning over those who say they serve you in Indonesia, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and everywhere where your name is uttered. We seek refuge in you from Shaitan the accursed and ask that you deafen our ears to his whispers. Oh Allah (swt) protect the Muslim oppressed, especially those oppressed by other Muslims, such as Jammat Ahmaddiya. Oh Allah (swt) bless and strengthen them and all Muslims of conscience who speak out against such atrocities. Oh Allah (swt) remind us to follow your perfected Deen and grant us your Mercy, for you are the Most Merciful, Compassionate, Dispenser of Grace. It is to You Alone that we submit.

Ameen

Visit Robert Salaam’s site at http://salaamsblog.wordpress.com/

Saudi, no respect for others?

Saudi Arabia rejects pact to respect religions.

(ANSAmed) - NAPLES, MARCH 20 - A resolution calling for the enactment of an international pact to forbid religions from being defamed or insulted as well as their symbols, leaders and prophets has been voted out by the Saudi Shoura (Consultative Council). A total of 77 members opposed the recommendation while 33 voted in favour, online newspaper Gulf News reports. According to the opponents, such a pact would force people to recognise religions, which advocate idol worship, and that "would be unacceptable." The rejected resolution stated that "the Ministry of Foreign Affairs shall work in coordination with Arab and Islamic groups and others at the United Nations to draft an international pact for respecting religions, their symbols and leaders." "This recommendation is creating 'much ado'", said Khaleel Al Khaleel, a member of the Shoura.

The recommendation would create a dangerous precedent that may produce a negative impact on Muslims rather than followers of other religions, he added. "Some consider Buddhism and Qadianism as religions. Can we make it obligatory for Muslims to respect these faiths and avoid criticising them?," he asked. Mohammad Al Quwaihes, who presented the resolution, told reporters that he had not expected that his move would be defeated in such a way as the overwhelming majority of members were in favour of introducing the resolution for deliberations. (ANSAmed).

http://www.ansamed.info/en/news/ME03.YAM14401.html

Mike Ghouse : The Shoura council of Saudi Arabia is utterly selfish group of people, they do not care about Islam or Muslims. They want to live in an Island where no one but them live. Let them call it a Saudi Law and not paint Islam on their canvas. Respecting other religions does not mean that you worship, accepting other faiths simply means that you acknowledge their God given life.

They will paint it as Allah's will, no, it is not. Allah wills calls for all of us to get along with all. Qur'an, Al-Hujurat, Surah 49:13: "O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. Lo! the noblest of you, in the sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Lo! Allah is Knower, Aware."

To you is your faith as mine is to me.

Melbourne Call for Papers

Dear list members

Please note that the deadline for receiving abstracts for the following workshop has been extended till 31 March 2008.

Associate Professor Samer Akkach
Founding Director, Centre for Asian and Middle Eastern Architecture (CAMEA)
The University of Adelaide, SA 5005, AUSTRALIA

Islam and Enlightenment

A two-day workshop organised jointly by the Centre for Asian and Middle Eastern Architecture (CAMEA), The University of Adelaide, and the School of Historical Studies, The University of Melbourne.

University of Melbourne, 25-26 September 2008

Traditional scholarship mapped the Enlightenment as a uniquely European experience, but recent scholarship has revealed the eighteenth century as a period of axial change across the world. The relativisation of cultural systems, the unseating of religious certainty, the development of civic publics, and the rapid advance of technological innovation marked the leading European societies of this period. But these developments unfolded within, and were in many ways dependent upon a context of global trade and exchange. Expanding interest in non-European ideas, religions and techniques, the increase in mobility, and ultimately the colonization of societies outside Europe, brought ever greater contact. Nowhere was this more evident than in relation to the Muslim world which overlapped with Europe at its borders and in many areas into which Europeans were moving. The great empires of Islam dominated much of the world at the beginning of the century, and Europeans often built upon long-established Muslim trading networks.

What was the nature of the exchange between these two worlds in transformation? What did the Enlightenment mean to Muslims of the period, and what did Islam mean to the Enlightenment? This workshop will map out directions for developing this rich area of study. Possible topics might include (but are not limited to):

- Muslim travellers in Europe and European travellers in the Muslim world
- The role of intermediary groups and minorities
- Cultural, intellectual and technical borrowings
- Global trade and consumption
- Exchange in mixed and border societies
- Print culture and the public sphere
- The coffee house and secular urban culture
- Leisure gardens and the culture of urban recreation
- Postal systems and the culture of correspondence
- Gender issues in transforming urbanity
- Philosophical challenges and continuities
- Religious challenges and continuities
- Shared and parallel modernities

For further information or to submit your 250 word proposal and one-page CV, please contact:

Samer Akkach: samer.akkach@adelaide.edu.au
Ian Coller: icoller@unimelb.edu.au

Deadlines

31 March 2008 Short abstract: 250-word abstract together with one-page CV
16 May 2008 Extended abstract (900-1000 word summary)
25 Sep. 2008 Full papers to be collected and reviewed for post-workshop publication

URL: http://www.historical-studies.unimelb.edu.au/events/islamandenlightenment.html

Prophet Muhammad’s Images

To be a Muslim is to be a peace maker; one who constantly seeks to mitigate conflicts and nurtures goodwill for co-existence and world peace - God wants his creation to be in peace and harmony, and that is the chief purpose of Islam; peace. http://www.worldmuslimcongress.com/

Prophet Muhammad’s (pbuh) Images
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2008/02/prophet-muhammads-images.html

I am pleased to append the following two articles for the purpose of understanding the conflict about Prophet Muhammad’s images. Please free to forward and post it on your website of Blog.

1. Why Islam Should Tolerate Images – by B.R. Gowani
2. Wikipedia, Prophet Muhammad, and Muslims – by Sheila Musaji

Much has been written on the subject, a few things are worth reiterating;

1. Arrogance is the root cause of all evil, and the anecdote is humility through prayers.
2. Arrogance breeds a sense of immortality in mortal beings
3. Arrogance causes one to treat the other less than full and creates conflict.
4. Arrogance and spirituality are inversely proportional
5. Arrogance is the first kill in all religions – through the prayers.

Prophet Muhammad is one of the arrogance busters of the world and lived the example of his teachings. Unlike the Kings and heads of state that lived a vainglorious life by putting their pictures or busts in every public space and feel egged one, the prophet who was the head of the state, fountain-head of religion and the society, did the very opposite of it. He asked people not to do that. He wanted people to focus on God the creator and not Man the mortal, over a period of time he did not want people to convert Muhammad to become a God like figure. That is one of the greatest lessons in humility he taught us. I salute him for teaching us that humility. Ya Nabi Salaam Alaikum.

Thank God, Muslims have listened to him and they worship no one but God. His teachings are safe and we need to sense the humility it brings to us, humility is the step from which co-existence is reached.

Mr. Gowani has made a thoughtless comparision,"The Hindu deities are personalized and so are friendly as opposed to the Islamic God who comes out as some stern authoritarian dictator like Yahweh, the God of the Torah, i.e., the Old Testament."

Every religion presents all aspects of God, God is myriad of qualities, one has to read the whole page (or book) to grasp them all, however, one should never forget the dominant ultimate aspects; Grace and Kindness. God shows his wrath to those who kill other humans, his creation; If there is no punishment, what holds the individual from making a habit of killing? What will happen to the ensuing chaos? In Hinduism God is creator, destroyer and sustainer and Mr. Gowani elected not to give the whole picture. God is most certainly compassionate and kind, and that is highlighted more often than the stern aspect of God.

When someone else wants to identify the prophet through an image or a picture, how can we stop him or her? If they do in a remote Island, we cannot prevent it either. The advice prophet gave to worship no one but God was for Muslims, let’s follow that as individual Muslims. If others refrain out of courtesy that is welcome, but never should be push any one to do it. There shall be no compulsion; Islam is about choices and freedom.

Mike Ghouse
http://www.worldmuslimcongress.com/
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/

Why Islam should tolerate images
By B. R. GOWANI

http://www.counterpunch.org/gowani01212008.html
Every now and then one hears that Muslim "sentiments" are hurt because a picture or a cartoon of Mohammad (the Prophet and founder of Islam) was published. There are instances, such as in Denmark, Sweden, etc. where the cartoons, the one where Mohammad is wearing a bomb as a turban, were printed with no other intent but to malign Mohammad and Islam, and to hurt Muslim feelings. <1> Other times, the pictures are included as part of the articles without any ill intent.
As a consequence, the wretched and ignorant people in Muslim countries are incited by the corrupt and authoritarian leaders (the same leaders who if caught by those people wouldn't see another day) for their own political motives. Riots and chaos ensues. Lives get extinguished.

Who are the Losers?
Dozens of internet websites are replete with hundreds of recent and old cartoons and pictures of Mohammad, many of them are hundreds of years old and have originated in both Europe and Muslim countries. Several of them are of good quality and pleasing to the eyes. Others are extremely nasty, hate-invoking, and illogical.
Then there is this Iranian lady, Oranous Qasemi, who sells paintings of young Mohammad on internet. The Microsoft video game "Age of Empires II" has Mohammad in the segment "Saracens" or Arabs. One of the lawgivers (along with Hammurabi, Confucius, Charlemagne, Salon, Moses) on a bas-relief sculpture, on the US Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. is Mohammad. He is shown holding a Koran in the left hand and a sword in the right.
The real losers of this intolerance are the Muslim artists who would like to try their artistic skills in portraying their God, Prophet, and other members of Mohammad's family but cannot do it for fear of government reprisals and the wrath of the Islamic fundamentalists. Perhaps, few of them would do it in an unflattering manner but many of the Muslims, I am sure, would paint and draw pictures which could make Islam, like other religions, more understandable to its followers and outsiders.

"Mohammad, Messenger of God"
And when someone makes such an attempt, she/he is bogged down under so many restrictions that the final product looks ridiculous.
The case in point is Moustapha Akkad's 1976 film, "Mohammad, Messenger of God," about the Prophet of Islam.
The film was shot not in Mohammad's hometowns of Mecca and Medina, but in Libya!
It was not released in Mohammad's motherland, the kingdom of Saudi Arabia!! <2>
It was about Mohammad but without Mohammad!!!
Many other Muslim countries banned the movie but allowed it to be released after Ayatollah Ruholla Khomeini permitted it to be shown in Iran. (Akkad's aim in making the movie was to improve the image of Islam. It is sad though that he himself got killed in 2005, along with his daughter, in a terrorist bomb blast in a hotel in Jordan. The Islamists were behind the blasts. Akkad also produced eight "Halloween" movies.)

Images are Necessary

Many philosophers, intellectuals, and those with similar bent who believe in some supreme power are capable to fulfill their belief without resorting to any kind of image of goddesses, gods, or God, in an idol or other form. One can fathom their contentment with an abstract image of a deity. Many of those may even be critical, not wrongly so, of the religious spectacles which have become a regular nuisance, and which often ends up in rioting in many countries.
However, most of the people, whether educated or otherwise, are not that advanced in their understanding of the supreme deity they believe in and so cannot shun images and idols as part of their believing or religious rituals. It's a natural tendency. Doesn't it happens that when the loved ones are not around, most of the human beings try to find some solace in pictures, paintings, audios, and videos? So in the same manner, when the prayers are offered most of the people would like to have some object/s in front of them to look at and find the image they have created or perceived in their minds of the deities they believe in.
For believers the whole Universe is God's creation and yet they assign a certain place as God's house and give it a name of mandir, masjid, gurudwara, synagogue, church, etc. Why? It is precisely because they don't see God everywhere but only in the places assigned and that's why they go over there-of course, there are social, political, economical, and other reasons, too. Because if it was otherwise that they could feel the presence of God everywhere, then the mullahs or the clerics would have allowed poet (Mirza Asadullah) Ghalib (1796-1869) to drink in a place of worship, heeding his complain:
O imam, let me drink in the mosque
Or show me the place where God isn't
The Shia branch of Islam is not that rigid about pictures and paintings of Mohammad and his family members. However, it can't be said that most of the Sunnis, except the puritans and Wahhabis, are absolutely devoid of object worshipping. They do have their objects which they revere while praying or paying respect. Take, for example, Koran or the names of Allah and Mohammad or the Koranic verses written in calligraphic form on walls, papers, and clothes. Muslims touch them reverently, or kiss them or embrace them to their bosoms not because they see some aesthetic beauty in them; but rather it's the Godly attributes which they feel in them. In mosques and shrines, the Koranic verses are in simple or calligraphic form all around. Not that the believers are incapable of appreciating the artwork, but basically their aim is different, whereas the non-religious, atheists, agnostics, and some artistic minded Muslims would only check if they find them beautiful.
(The dargahs or shrines of sufi teachers in South Asia are not only visited by Muslims but also Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and others. And the persons entombed in the shrines are invoked for help.)

Total Freedom Would Benefit Islam
Hinduism has been around for over twice the time Islam has been and is the third largest religion after Christianity and Islam. The Hindu deities are personalized and so are friendly as opposed to the Islamic God who comes out as some stern authoritarian dictator like Yahweh, the God of the Torah, i.e., the Old Testament.
As technology advances and becomes easy for people, through internet and other means, they explore these outlets to creatively put out their religious ideas for others to experience.
Last year in September, the Cartoon Network in India released four animated films on Lord Krishna. Then there is Virgin Comics, of Richard Branson of Virgin Airlines, which produces comics based on Hindu mythology; associated with him are Gotham Chopra and filmmaker Shekhar Kapoor.
In the west, movies, TV programs, and plays such as "Benhur," Ten Commandments," "Moses," "Jesus Christ Superstar," and uncountable others have been produced.
Islam needs to be relaxed; it's long overdue. It shouldn't worry about losing to other religions. In this market of religions, if it loses few followers, it can gain a few, too. Either Islam can permit more freedom to its adherents by relaxing many of the obviously irrational restrictions and flourish like other religions, or carry on the US style rough and tough attitude and keep people within its fold with a danda <3>.
German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900) declared God as a dead entity in 1880s; nevertheless, the religions are going to stay for a long time to come-because the system built by the ruling classes and the merger of religious, business, and political interests and their exploiting of the people to the maximum leaves those people no other option but to be at the mercy of goddesses, gods, and God for solace and comfort. Or to quote Karl Marx:
"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."
And so it's unthinkable that Islam would like to leave the field so soon.
B. R. Gowani can be reached at brgowani@hotmail.com
Notes:
<1> In 2005, the same Danish newspaper had refused to print cartons of Lord Jesus Christ. The excuse from its Sunday editor Jens Kaiser was: "I don't think Jyllands-Posten's readers will enjoy the drawings. As a matter of fact, I think that they will provoke an outcry. Therefore, I will not use them."
<2> The Saudi rulers treat Mecca and Medina, the holy cities for Muslims, as their private property. In the US, the film's release was postponed because a Muslim group took 22 workers of a Jewish organization B'nai Brith as hostages. A reporter was shot dead and few people were beaten and shot. It was released in 1977 as "The Message."
<3> The US could have managed the Taliban menace through non-violent means. Instead it opted for the only thing it knows best- annihilation through war. This has created more "terrorists," more mess, and more instability in the Middle East and the surrounding regions.


Wikipedia & Prophet Muhammad's images

Wikipedia, Prophet Muhammad, and Muslims in need of Islam 101
by Sheila Musaji

http://www.theamericanmuslim.org/tam.php/features/articles/wikipedia_prophet_muhammad_and_muslims_in_need_of_islam_101/0015653

The most recent non-issue being turned into a major incident by the thoughtless reaction of some Muslims is the Wikipedia entry on Prophet Muhammad. This wikipedia entry contains some paintings showing images of the Prophet from very old Islamic texts. Images also available to anyone who owns copies of the books in question, or who visits a museum or online academic archive of images.

Some Muslims have demanded removal of the pictures. Put together petitions to “cleanse” wikipedia of the pictures. Muslim blogs are posting requests to complain to wikipedia and sign petitions. Non Muslim blogs see this as an attempt at censorship.

Islamonline published an article expressing the opinion that the pictures should be removed and also referred to the Jylland posten Danish cartoons incident as if this could be considered in the same category.

There is more than one petition online. One which only has 178 signatures reads: “To: Wikipedia Authorities. The Wikipedia has shown the picture of our Holy Prophet Muhammad (Peace be upon him) in their article on Muhammad. It is highly deplorable act and i request you all to order the Wikipedia to remove this picture which is fueling religious hatred. Who ever has placed this picture is a true terrorist as he is trying to incite more then 1 billion Muslims of the world.”
The main petition mentioned in Blogs, articles, and even emails going out, now has over 116,443 signatures. This petition states: “In Islam picture of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and other Humans are not allowed. But Wikipedia editors are showing illustrations with face illustrated and face is veiled or white washed. But still they are offensive to Muslims. I request all brothers and sisters to sign this petitions so we can tell Wikipedia to respect the religion and remove the illustrations.”
The number of signatures on this site disturbs me as the number of signatures for truly important issues like endorsing The Common Word statement, or The Amman Statement, A Pax on Both Our Houses: A Multireligious Call & campaign for US-Iran Peacemeking, or even the National Interfaith Statement Against Domestic Violence have received very few signatures in comparison.
Even the NYT has noted the flap, and the NYT article notes that the Muslim petition site was informed that Wikipedia readers could set their personal viewer so that images are not shown on any page. “The site considered but rejected a compromise that would allow visitors to choose whether to view the page with images.” Since Wikipedia is not an “Islamic” site, this seems like a perfectly reasonable adjustment to the sensibilities of some readers.
Wikipedia has refused to delete the pictures and has released a statement as to why they are not removing the pictures. This statement seems perfectly reasonable to me as a Muslim.

And, of course, as such things go, someone has posted a petition to fight Islamic pressure to censure Wikipedia. Once again, some Muslims who have a particular point of view express themseves in such a way that non-Muslims see this as “the” Islamic position on a particular issue, and not one of many possible positions. It’s not Islamic pressure it’s Muslim pressure by some Muslims.
I truly don’t understand why with all the serious problems we face in the world, anyone would make an issue about the Wikipedia entry on the Prophet Muhammad. This is especially true since the article is well balanced and may cause many non-Muslims to read more about Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), and since the pictures are from Muslim texts and the article includes the disclaimer:

“Figurative depictions of Muhammad were a significant part of late medieval Islamic art; however, such depictions were generally limited to secular contexts and to the elite classes who could afford fine art.[19] Depictions of Muhammad were common during the Ottoman Empire, when the taboo on portraying him was less strong, although his face was often left blank.[20] This article includes two images of artworks created by Persian Muslim artists which depict the uncovered face of Muhammad. The images are used respectfully in a historical context to illustrate two episodes from the life of Muhammad.”
Those who are making a mountain out of a mole-hill not only don’t understand Islam, but don’t understand wikipedia. Wikipedia is an online free-content encyclopedia that anyone can edit. It is a collaborative effort in which anyone can participate.

Making an issue about something like this is pointless, and just gives the Islamophobes something else to make fun of. Although, it may be hoped that since there are so many sites around the world commenting on this incident and referring to the wikipedia page (28,000 hits when I googled this topic) that in spite of the thoughtlessness of those creating this issue, in the end many more people will have a chance to learn something about the Prophet (pubh).

Come on!

There have been a lot of non-controversies turned into controversies by foolish Muslims. A few that come immediately to mind are the Opus cartoon, the Sudanese teddy bear incident, the Minnesota cab drivers who refused to carry blind passengers with guide dogs, the Malaysian court decision that Christians can’t use the word “Allah”, the Apple store in New York - Apple Mecca incident.

We need to put on the brakes and install circuit breakers in the system to head off foolish and sometimes even violent responses, and turn even difficult situations into opportunities to benefit Islam and Muslims by reacting in positive ways and asking ourselves What Would Prophet Muhammad Do?.

Please write your comments to: WMCarchives@gmail.com
Please write the subject line as: Prophet Muhammad's images
----------------------------------------------------------------

The World Muslim Congress is driven by the Qur’aan, Al-Hujurat, Surah 49:13: "O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. The noblest of you, in sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Allah Knows and is Aware." Our Mission is to work for a world of co-existence through inclusiveness and participation. As a member of diverse family of faiths, our efforts will be directed towards justice and equity to attain peace for the humankind with a firm grounding in commonly held values. No one should have advantages at the cost of others. Such benefits are temporary and deleterious to lasting peace. We believe what is good for Muslims has got to be good for the world, and vice versa, to sustain it. Indeed we aspire to promote goodwill amongst people of different affiliations, regardless of their faith, gender, race, nationality, culture or any other uniqueness blessed by the creator. www.WorldMuslimCongress.com

What is Ibadat?

WHAT IS IBADAT? (worship/ Obligations)
By Zahid Jamil,Sydney, Australia

Moderator Mike Ghouse :: The “t” in the word Ibadat is used mainly by the Asian Muslims who comprise nearly 2/3rd’ of the Muslim population, excluding of course the Arab Nations some of them are in Asia as well. Ibada is loosely translated as devotion, dedication and commitment. Zahid, I have added some words in (parenthesis) for those who are not familiar with the British terms.

Zahid, the world Muslim Congress is indeed driven by Qur'an, Al-Hujurat, Surah 49:13: "O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. The noblest of you, in sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Allah Knows and is Aware." Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) defined a good deed as an unselfish act of doing things for others. It is assigned a higher values than the ritual prayers.

WHAT IS IBADAT?
By Zahid Jamil,Sydney, Australia

General concepts:

An average Muslim’s life is comprised of two principal dimensions:

1) To work towards living a better life in this world. This is often achieved by studying (education) during early years, if possible, followed by work to feed the family, build assets and acquire material needs.
2) To perform religious rituals based upon the pillars of Islam: offer salat/namaz, fast during Ramadan, pay Zakat and perform Hajj to secure the Hereafter.
Evidently, the first of these dimensions is considered essential solely for worldly reasons, while contrastingly the second sustains religious/spiritual reasons with the aim to secure a better place in the life after death.
Individuals to whom material wealth supersedes the significance of religious belief would focus more upon the first dimension, engaging in the attainment of success in their respective field. Subsequently they gain satisfaction through the enjoyment of conveniences in this world and the ability to provide comforts to their families. Due to highlighting the first dimension, the religious dimension is usually considered subsidiary. Among such Muslims, many also categorise themselves as practising Muslims and they gain satisfaction by offering rituals and observing basic tenets. Such Muslims pride themselves as being successful in both religious as well as worldly matters.
Conversely, one who tends to largely abide by the second dimension may consider worldly affairs subordinate and consequently believe that education and working to earn a living should be limited to fulfilling the needs, not comforts, of day to day living. Such an individual is content by only doing the minimum to earn worldly living. He/she gives lot more time to religious activities such as offering extra prayers, reciting Quran, spending extra time in mosque, attending Islamic lectures, going out in tableegh (missionary work), visiting the holy places more often and paying extra money in charity. While achieving the aforementioned, they unwaveringly trust that this will please Allah (SWT) and secure him/her a higher place in the Hereafter. Demonstrably, these two dimensions appear to be the antithesis of each other, and such contrasting individuals have distinguishable ways of living this life and achieving a rewarding position in the life hereafter.

Ibadat is commonly considered to be concerning only religion. In reality, however, even the actions pertaining to mundane affairs of this life, if performed within the parameters of Islamic teachings, are regarded as Ibadat.
Let us now analyse what ibadat comprises of. It is universally said that there are two types of Haqooqs (rights) incumbent on the human being:
- Haqooq al ibad: rights of other living beings as it is Allah’s creation and
- Haqooq ullah: rights of Allah by worshipping HIM usually through offering rituals such as Salat, fasting and hajj.
Haqooqul ibad are very often undermined, and ibadat is considered to be limited to deeds such as performing rituals or doing some charitable work. Any of us will in fact be harming the human kind if we do not do our best at our work

I wish to emphasize that all we do to earn a living relates to Haqooq-ul-ibad; and it is therefore the religious duty of all Muslims to perform at their best in their work and progress in life as much as possible by fair means. That is, most of the work we perform contributes to the benefit of fellow beings. A farmer grows food. The more effort he puts in, the better his produce will be for the consumption of human beings. An engineer builds houses, roads, plants, machinery which are utilized by human beings and it is important that all such things are built in best quality. All those involved such as designers, engineers, carpenters, builders, contractors, mechanists, technicians, labourers need to do the best work to ensure that their goods meet the specifications and do not fail when put in use. Collapse of a building or a bridge may kill many and so will be the case in the event of failure of a machinery. A doctor has to do his best to ensure the best treatment of his patients. A teacher has to ensure that each student gets maximum benefit from his/her teaching. A student has to put in his maximum effort and perform to his potential as to ensure that he is able to achieve the highest results when he/she enters the workforce. Better we will perform at our work, more beneficial it will be to the people utilizing the produce or service.
Hence it is clear that the better we perform at our work, the more beneficial it will be to the people utilizing our products or services. In fact, by not applying oneself to their maximum ability may lead to harmful consequences for greater mankind. By being lazy and slack, we will not be able to provide the services which we could have given by being sincere and diligent. By underperforming our duties at work, we will not only be able to justify what we are being paid but we will also be directly or indirectly harming our fellow human beings. However as most of the work we perform contributes to the human society, it is part of haqqoq-ul- Ibad.

If we fail in our duty towards fellow human beings, we may or may not be accountable in this world but we will definitely be accountable to them on the Day of Judgment. Allah SWT declares that while He may or may not pardon us for our duties towards Him, He will not interfere in the matters of His makhlooq. It is well known that on the Day of Judgment, human beings will not pardon one another. Thus the failure to perform in our duty which is always likely to cause some harm or suffering to Allah’s creation, will also become a major obstacle in our salvation in the Hereafter. It is therefore established that performing at our best in our worldly work is an important ibadah; any negligence on our part is not likely to go unpunished in the Hereafter. We will also be at disadvantage in this life by being inefficient. In short, we are likely to suffer both in this world and in the hereafter. Even if we do not receive expected worldly gains by putting our best effort, we will at least escape from the punishment in the hereafter.

Using unfair means to earn extra wealth, exploiting others (workers), working in haram industries such as gambling, liquor, pork, sex etc is certainly an act of sin. We must not overlook that it is even possible to commit sin in a noble profession. A doctor, who does not provide adequate care to his patients, exploits them by charging unreasonable fees and does not show mercy towards the needy makes an otherwise dignified profession corrupt. Such practices are common in the third world countries where leading hospitals and doctors let patients suffer or die if they are unable to pay the bills. A lawyer can make his profession noble if he acts only on behalf of just clients and refuse to take up cases for criminals or unjust clients. Work related evil practices such as bribe, adulteration, excess profiteering, absconding from duty are serious crimes, as they may wound the fabric of society.

The concept that we do work just enough to earn a living for ourself as part of being religious will only holds true if we do not indulge ourselves in petty deeds such as gossiping, politicking, backbiting, or by simply being lazy. An exception to underperforming in one’s field of work could be if he/she is involved in some noble/charitable task/project. Nevertheless, only a very small fraction of people abide by this exception and even such people need to be mindful that in so doing, they may be causing their direct dependents, for example their children and wife, some suffering. Such conditions may only be relaxed in times of emergency such as armed jihad against aggression; and those who give great sacrifices in fighting for the sake of Allah deserve highest reward.

Majority of us spend normal working lives and we will do justice only by working to our fullest potential, as in doing so we will be benefiting human kind. Hard work will also generate more money which will bring prosperity in our lives. This is justified as long as we do overindulge in luxuries, given our social surroundings. However, if we overspend in luxuries, or hoard the money, keep multiplying our wealth beyond our needs, then we will be questioned not for earning extra through our effort but for its use. The extra money should be spent in charity. Paying Zakat only may not relieve us from hellfire if after paying Zakat, we accumulate wealth beyond our needs. Thus while earning more money by putting effort to our best potential in our works is an act of ibadat, hoarding of money or overindulging in luxuries is a sin.

Many great personalities set high standards in generating wealth through their extraordinary skills and donating much of it in charity. In modern context, a prime example of this would be Warren Buffet, the second richest person in the world, who donated 85% of his wealth amounting to 44 billion dollars to charities. Bill Gates also runs huge charity projects as was the case with many shahbas/sahabis and many great Muslims in history. These great people first benefited humankind through scientific innovation, then by providing jobs and means of earning to millions around the world and finally the money generated in this process, they used to elevate the most deprived on the earth. Such people, if have faith in Allah, become true Momin.

Those who advise not to run after worldly achievements are wrong as in doing so, one happens to harm Makhlooq-e-khuda or gives less than what he/she can offer to the humanity. A momin will achieve maximum in this world but he will give away in charity the money which he does not need. The great scientists, researchers, inventors in various fields, if have faith in Allah SWT, are the best creatures as their effort bring immense benefits to the mankind. Industrialists may put such researches in use to the benefit of mankind which will be an act of Ibadat but if they manufacture harmful things, they commit an act of sin.

Also, It is our choice, in many instances, how we use many items in particular modern technology such as internet, televisions, radio etc as they can become a source of learning and spreading good or may be used to indulge in or spreading the evil.

Putting occupation aside, our direct dealings with fellow beings will also become a source of Ibadat or a sin. Encouraging hatred amongst people is regarded a great sin, while generating an atmosphere of compassion is an act of great sawab. Ordinary people indulge in fuelling disputes through backbiting amongst families and social circles. Political leaders, institutions, nations indulge in sparking social chaos, public disturbances and wars. All these people harm Allah’s Makhlooq and therefore commit great sins. On the other hand, people who work towards bringing people together, say by uniting spouses in dispute, family members, friends, social workers or community groups do great act of swab. Working for political, national and international bodies, NGOs which actively promote peace or work on different fronts to the benefit of underprivileged people is an act for which an extraordinary reward would be reserved by Allah (SWT). Demonstrating humility in day to day acts and serving our elderly and needy are also worthy acts of huqooq-ul-ibad. On a minor platform, the wastage of food by those who take it for granted is also an act of sin, as millions of people die of starvation. Not paying your share of taxes is also an act of sin as this money is to be utilized for building infrastructure and other nation building projects for the benefit of fellow beings.

While we claim to have reached the zenith of civilization, 1.3 billion people live on less than a dollar a day, 3 billion live on fewer than two dollars a day, over 1.3 billion have no access to clean water, 3 billion have no access to sanitation, 2 billion have no electricity. 4000 children die every day from diseases associated with access to unsafe drinking water. One child dies every 20 seconds from measles or other vaccine preventable diseases, one in twenty does not live to see their fifth birthday. The majority of these children die from preventable causes such as diarrhoea, malaria and acute malnutrition. Nearly a billion people (adults) entered 21st century unable to read a book.

Certainly such figures are of disgust. The irony is that those who claim to be the champions of religion seem to care least about their fellow creations of Allah (SWT).

Humbly bowing in front of Allah SWT and worshipping HIM will be rewarded only if our actions in life reflect our love for Allah. That love will be false if we do not love his creation. Praying in the middle of the night or during other hours of the day will certainly be rewarded if we remember his orders in real life. Every minute of our lives may be counted towards Ibadat and an act of sawab; alternatively it can be transformed into a sin, ultimately determining whether we enter the Gate to either Heaven or Hell. Prayers are meant to remind us that the lord to whom we promise faith will not be pleased unless we fulfil our duties towards His creation. The situation is analogous to that of a boss and his employee. If you are very faithful to your boss and are always available to serve him in order to please him but at his back, you harm your boss’s children, he will be extremely angry if he comes to know about it. He will punish you severely and will consider your show of faith to him nothing more than an act of hypocrisy.

So looking back at the two principle dimensions underlying a Muslim’s life, and by exploring the realms of society and the parameters of religion, it is evident that Ibadat is achieved by maintaining a fine balance between the two. It is by doing so that one can be satisfied with life, and attain Heaven in the life hereafter.
It is my belief that Muslims have lost the glory as they have lost some fundamental concepts of Ibadah. Ibadah also truly entails incorporating in our daily lives the attainment of knowledge and working for the betterment of human society.


------------------------------------------------------

The World Muslim Congress is driven by the Qur'an, Al-Hujurat, Surah 49:13: "O mankind! We have created you male and female, and have made you nations and tribes that ye may know one another. The noblest of you, in sight of Allah, is the best in conduct. Allah Knows and is Aware." Our Mission is to work for a world of co-existence through inclusiveness and participation. As a member of diverse family of faiths, our efforts will be directed towards justice and equity to attain peace for the humankind with a firm grounding in commonly held values. No one should have advantages at the cost of others. Such benefits are temporary and deleterious to lasting peace. We believe what is good for Muslims has got to be good for the world, and vice versa, to sustain it. Indeed we aspire to promote goodwill amongst people of different affiliations, regardless of their faith, gender, race, nationality, culture or any other uniqueness blessed by the creator. www.WorldMuslimCongress.com

Necon bait from Netherlands

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.