This is nearly three hours documentation.
Hamza Yusuf and Tariq Ramadan are two of the giant Muslim scholars in the world today.
The Rethinking Islamic Reform conference, originally held May 26, 2010, features two of the world's foremost Muslim intellectuals as they provide guidance in the ever polemical topic of reform in Islam.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qY17d4ZhY8M&feature=related
Showing posts with label Ijtihad. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ijtihad. Show all posts
Friday, January 6, 2012
Wednesday, January 4, 2012
Muslims and the Koran
Muslims and the Koran
In the beginning were the words
http://www.economist.com/node/21542162
Muslims revere the Koran. But its study is not taboo—and is in some quarters increasingly daring
Dec 31st 2011 | from the print edition
RELIGIONS invite stereotypes, holy texts even more so. Non-Muslims often see Islam as a faith followed by people who hew so closely to an unchanging set of words that they ignore awkward new facts sooner than contradict its message. For critics, this attachment to a text encourages extremists—like Boko Haram, a group that in December attacked Nigerian churches: hotheads can generally find a passage that seems to justify their violence.
Such passages abound in the Koran, just as they do in the founding texts of Christianity, Judaism and many other religions. There is also a long tradition of interpreting such verses in reassuring ways. For example, it is often stressed that the Koran’s injunction to “slay the unbeliever wherever you find him” relates to a specific historical context, in which the first Muslims were betrayed by a pagan group who had signed a truce.
But when it comes to parsing holy writ, there is one big difference between Islam and most other text-based faiths. Barring a brief interlude in the ninth and tenth centuries, and a few modern liberals, Muslims have mostly believed that the Koran is distinct from every other communication. As God’s final revelation to man, it belongs not to earthly, created things but to an eternal realm. That is a bigger claim than other faiths usually make for their holy writings.
The Koran may be interpreted but from a believer’s viewpoint, nothing in it can be set aside. Yet, at least in the calm, superficially courteous world of Western academia, debating the precise text of the Koran is increasingly common—as at a conference hosted by the School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS), part of the University of London, in November. One organiser was Muhammad Abdel Haleem, an Egyptian-born professor who has translated the Koran into stylish modern English, drawing acclaim from many, but grumbles from purists. Other contributors included a professor from Turkey, and a scholar based in Iran. But most were non-Muslims who study the text as they would any other written material—as prose whose evolution can be traced by comparing versions. New techniques, such as the use of digital photography, help compare variations and solve puzzles. All participants implicitly accepted the idea that methods used to analyse Homer, say, or German myths might elucidate the Koran.
In much of the Islamic world, even the agenda of such a meeting would be controversial. What can be debated in most Muslim countries differs hugely from what is discussed in the West. Staff at a London-based Islamic research body, the Institute for Ismaili Studies, have ranged from radicals like Mohammed Arkoun, a leader of the French deconstructionist school, to traditional Sunni or Sufi scholars. They follow the trail of al-Suyuti, a 15th-century Egyptian who accepted the existence of slightly different versions of the Koran.
Such diversity under a single roof would be impossible now in Karachi or in Cairo, the bastion of Islamic scholarship. There, the interpretation of Islam and its history is strictly a task for believers. Non-Muslim offerings would be called “orientalism”, based on colonial arrogance. Muslims in such places who take a different view face not only academic ostracism but physical danger. Egypt’s leading advocate of a liberal reading of the Koran—Nasr Abu Zayd, who died in 2010—was denounced as an apostate, forcibly divorced from his wife and had to spend his later life abroad. The rise of Islamism in Egypt offers no prospect of a friendlier climate.
Meanwhile, scholars in Europe, stimulated by the manuscripts in great European libraries, are working hard to find out how and when the Koran’s written form was standardised. In America more effort has gone into relating the Koran to what is known from other sources about political and social history. Patricia Crone, of America’s Institute for Advanced Study, once argued that Islam originated in a revolt by Semites against Byzantine and Persian power. She has revised her views, but copies of her 1977 book “Hagarism” change hands for hundreds of dollars.
A burst of new Koranic scholarship erupted at SOAS in the 1980s. These days, it is one of several British campuses where scholars say they find it hard to get funding for work that threatens orthodoxy—a change they ascribe to the influence of conservative Saudi donors. But in France, the home of literary theory, and Germany, the fatherland of textual analysis, free-ranging study of the Koran continues. If you want to argue that partial versions of Hebrew and Christian stories are visible in the Koran, or that its historical portions are inaccurate, nobody will stop you.
Most Muslim children are told that they need know only one thing about the Koran’s origin: that it was revealed over a period of 23 years by the angel Gabriel to Muhammad. But Islam has more to say than that. A well-known narrative tells how the fourth ruler of the Muslims, Caliph Uthman, realised that several variants of God’s revelation were circulating, and established a single version, ordering the destruction of all the others. Non-Muslim scholars, too, see signs of a conscious, but not wholly successful, effort to settle on a definitive form. The continuing variations are not all trivial. Dots over a single letter can change the tense or person of a verb, notes Keith Small, an American participant in the SOAS event. His book, “Textual Criticism and Qur’an Manuscripts”, says efforts to standardise went on for four centuries after Uthman.
Before the beginning
Excitement surrounds the study of some Koranic material found in Yemen in 1972. Early analysis of images of these folios suggests some may precede the first big standardisation. This study is being undertaken in Germany, not Yemen. But in the light of the Uthman story, the survival of divergent early material (which escaped the standardisers’ efforts) need not be unbearably shocking. After all, Islamic tradition also credits Muhammad with accepting at least seven oral versions of the Koran, albeit differing only a little.
Turkey and Iran stand out as mainly Muslim countries where, in academia at least, it is possible to talk about the Koran’s textual origins. Turkey’s secular constitution helps to safeguard free inquiry. Ankara University and Istanbul University still reflect the rationalist ethos of a secular republic; the Islamist tone of Turkey’s present government affects newer campuses.
If Iran is a little more open than most Arab countries, that is because of Shia Islam’s stress on theology, and the interpretation of texts, as a continuous enterprise. A Paris-based Shia writer, Mohammad Ali Amir-Moezzi, has caused a stir recently by arguing that the Sunni/Shia split was really over the text of the Koran.
Most Shias would say this overstates the schism. On core beliefs Iran’s Shia clergy remain united: they agree that the text they now have is exactly what Muhammad was told. Such tenacity is a reminder that if people expect Islam to change into something like liberal Christianity—treating scripture as a useful but fallible aid to belief—they are wrong. As Mustafa Akyol, a Turkish writer, says: “If you say the Koran is a human text, then you cease to be Muslim.” Over hadiths, sayings about Muhammad’s life, there is flexibility; some can be weeded out as unsound or outdated. But nothing in the Koran can be dismissed.
Yet some attitudes can shift, Mr Akyol adds. His book, “Islam without Extremes”, cites slavery as an issue where the Koran’s words can be reread. The text favours freeing slaves, but does not demand the abolition of the practice. “Does that mean God condones slavery, or that God spoke within the norms of the seventh century which are open to change?” he asks, noting that several Muslim theologians have said the latter. As it happens Christians have made similar points, picking over the words of Saint Paul. Islam, like Christianity, offers rigidity for those who yearn for it. But it leaves room for nuance too.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Eid-al-Adha - What is a sacrifice
WARNING: If you do not believe in Ijtihad, please do not read the following. If you are binary Muslim who sees everything in terms of Halaal/Haraam, the following notes are not for you.
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/11/eid-al-adha-what-is-sacrifice.html
Dr. Lalani thinks aloud, but makes a valid point about Sacrifice.
We should be open to his idea, and as Muslims we should debate it and see the merits and alternatives for the same. It does not mean giving up eating the meat, it simply means finding the alternatives for the present day massive animal slaughter on the day of Eid.
The idea of sacrifice he has explained - of giving up things that are dear to one is meaningful. I request the Muslims who are free to think to propose a full idea on how to handle the symbolic sacrifice Muslims make on the day of Eid-al-Adha.
Two articles below talk about the the 300,000 animals being sacrficed by Hindus in Nepal and on Thanksgiving Day, we probably would slaughter more than 20 Million turkeys, that is one turkey for every 15 Americans.
That is our food..... think from a survival point of view...
Look at this way, the wheat we grind to flour and eat kills the future of wheaties from that seed of wheat we kill. The veggies we eat have life that we shorten. If we do not kill the wheat, it keeps growing and reseeding....
Every veggie has life too. We are part of it and animals are part of it. If no one kills the animals and veggies, and no animal eats other animal... there will be a huge problem.
Religions were wise to go along with the system of nature... we are each others sustenance.
Sounds bad, but what are the choices? Why show prejudice towards Veggies and not towards animals? No matter what you eat, you are killing the continuance of the life of that item.
Mike Ghouse
http://www.worldmuslimcongress.com/
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~
I am a Muslim, and not just a MINO (Muslim in Name Only) and I admit I could do better in practice of my religion.
There is one Islamic ritual with which I have a great deal of trouble and that is Kurbani. I have never slaughtered an animal myself but I have seen a goat being dragged to the spot of sacrifice on Eid-alAdha and I have seen how desperately the goat struggles and resists. It is quite obvious that the animal knows what is in store for it (it is uncanny). And I have seen its throat being cut and its being exsanguinated and a painful death superveing slowly and inexorably.
I hold Prophets Ibrahim and Mohammad (praise be on them both) in highest reverence and I am not a vegetarian (although I wish I could have been). I also do not question God's commandment to Ibrahim to show his devotion to Allah by going through with the sacrifice of his only son at that time, (this must have been before the birth of Isaac, PBUH).
However, could it be that God's Commandment to sacrifice was for to him to give whatever it was that was most dear or his very valuable possession. In those days, livestock was a measure of wealth and meat was not pletiful so that protein deficiency must have been endemic, especially among the poor (the majority). Alll those facts pointed to a living animal as logical possesiion fit for sacrifice.
I performed Umra in December of 1993 and read an 'official' piece of Saudi government literature provided to the pilgrims (including Hajj). It clearly stated that money donation can emphatically substitute for animal sacrifice and that meat was allowed to Muslims but not mandated by our great faith.
I am a physician (now retired) and I have no doubt that dairy products (esp cheese) and eggs (unfertilized) can definitely furnish all the protein a human needs and in fact even those may not be indispensable (lentils and legumes have plenty of the so called first class proteins).
Jews used to practice Qurbani following the example of Abrham/Ibrahim (PBUH) until the destruction in 570 b.c. of the First Temple and - perhaps - until the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD but they seem to have completely given up the practice since the diaspora. And still, we include them - and Christians - among the believers. Europeans used to sacrifice animals to Jupiter and Apollo and Minerva etc. but quit that practice when Christianity replaced idol-worshipping, polytheistic Homeric religion ( 'Hellenism'). Could we at least heed the kernel of their argument against performing anuimal sacrifice without becoming vegetarians?
Astaghfirullah!
Inayat Lalani
~~~~~~~~~~
'World's biggest animal sacrifice' in Nepal
By Claire Cozens
Agence France-Presse
KATHMANDU, Nepal—Thousands of Hindu devotees have flocked to a village in Nepal ahead of the planned sacrifice of more than 300,000 animals in a ceremony condemned by animal rights activists, including French actress Brigitte Bardot.
Priests are preparing for the slaughter of more than 15,000 buffaloes and 300,000 birds, goats, and sheep during the event, which starts Tuesday and is thought to be the biggest ritual sacrifice anywhere in the world.
Every five years, the village of Bariyapur, near Nepal's southern border with India, hosts this religious festival dedicated to Gadhimai, the Hindu goddess of power.
"Thousands of people from Nepal and India have already begun arriving and preparations for the festival are in full swing," Mangal Chaudhary Tharu, the main priest at the Gadhimai temple, told AFP.
He said visitor numbers were expected to be higher this year because it is the first such ceremony since the end of Nepal's conflict in 2006 and he vowed to go ahead with the sacrifice despite the protests.
Tharu, the fourth generation of his family to serve as a priest at the temple, said he expected more than a million people to attend, over half from India, where many states have banned animal slaughter for religious purposes.
Nepal's government has refused to put a stop to what it says is a centuries-old religious tradition, and has pledged 4.5 million rupees (60,000 dollars) in funding.
"People have deep faith in the goddess and they believe that sacrificing animals will bring them good luck and prosperity for their families," said Tharu.
"I don't think the mood will be spoiled by the animal rights campaigners. They have the right to raise their concerns and we have the right to continue with our age-old tradition."
Armed police have been deployed to keep the peace and authorities have banned alcohol during the festival, which begins with the ritual sacrifice of two wild rats, a rooster, a pig, a goat, and a lamb.
The meat is distributed to the devotees and to local people, while contractors bid for the animal hides—making the slaughter a lucrative venture for the local community.
But the ceremony has been strongly opposed by animal rights campaigners, who are demanding an end to what they say is senseless cruelty.
The cause is supported by the well-known Indian animal rights activist Maneka Gandhi and by Bardot, a veteran campaigner who this month wrote to Nepal's president urging him to put a stop to the festival.
"Thousands of terrified buffaloes will have their heads cut off by drunken devotees," she wrote.
"Honorable president, I have dedicated my life to protect animals and the best gift I could receive for this lifelong struggle would be the announcement of the stopping of ritual sacrifice."
Pramada Shah, director of pressure group Animal Nepal, says the campaign has won strong support both in Nepal and abroad, although she accepts it faces an uphill struggle in this deeply conservative, majority-Hindu nation.
"In a country like Nepal it is very difficult to raise these issues," she told AFP.
"The idea of animal rights is very new here and people are so used to sacrifices, even well-educated people are resistant to change. There is a lot of work to be done here, but slowly, progress is being made."
She says attitudes toward ritual slaughter are beginning to change in Nepal, a view shared by cultural expert Chunda Bajracharya.
"Belief in these ancient rituals is deep rooted in our society," said Bajracharya, professor of cultural studies at Kathmandu's Tribhuvan University.
"But there is evidence that animal sacrifices are becoming less popular, especially in urban areas, where people are instead choosing to 'sacrifice' eggs or coconuts.
"Mindsets are gradually changing."
Shared by Hasni Essa
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Op-Ed Contributor
Animal, Vegetable, Miserable
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/opinion/22steiner.html?_r=1&th=&emc=th&adxnnlx=1258906532-O4jMyLUNdeeDH51oBuwxrA&pagewanted=all
Karen Barbour
Related
Times Topics: VeganismLATELY more people have begun to express an interest in where the meat they eat comes from and how it was raised. Were the animals humanely treated? Did they have a good quality of life before the death that turned them into someone’s dinner?
Some of these questions, which reach a fever pitch in the days leading up to Thanksgiving, pertain to the ways in which animals are treated. (Did your turkey get to live outdoors?) Others focus on the question of how eating the animals in question will affect the consumer’s health and well-being. (Was it given hormones and antibiotics?)
None of these questions, however, make any consideration of whether it is wrong to kill animals for human consumption. And even when people ask this question, they almost always find a variety of resourceful answers that purport to justify the killing and consumption of animals in the name of human welfare. Strict ethical vegans, of which I am one, are customarily excoriated for equating our society’s treatment of animals with mass murder. Can anyone seriously consider animal suffering even remotely comparable to human suffering? Those who answer with a resounding no typically argue in one of two ways.
Some suggest that human beings but not animals are made in God’s image and hence stand in much closer proximity to the divine than any non-human animal; according to this line of thought, animals were made expressly for the sake of humans and may be used without scruple to satisfy their needs and desires. There is ample support in the Bible and in the writings of Christian thinkers like Augustine and Thomas Aquinas for this pointedly anthropocentric way of devaluing animals.
Others argue that the human capacity for abstract thought makes us capable of suffering that both qualitatively and quantitatively exceeds the suffering of any non-human animal. Philosophers like Jeremy Bentham, who is famous for having based moral status not on linguistic or rational capacities but rather on the capacity to suffer, argue that because animals are incapable of abstract thought, they are imprisoned in an eternal present, have no sense of the extended future and hence cannot be said to have an interest in continued existence.
The most penetrating and iconoclastic response to this sort of reasoning came from the writer Isaac Bashevis Singer in his story “The Letter Writer,” in which he called the slaughter of animals the “eternal Treblinka.”
The story depicts an encounter between a man and a mouse. The man, Herman Gombiner, contemplates his place in the cosmic scheme of things and concludes that there is an essential connection between his own existence as “a child of God” and the “holy creature” scuffling about on the floor in front of him.
Surely, he reflects, the mouse has some capacity for thought; Gombiner even thinks that the mouse has the capacity to share love and gratitude with him. Not merely a means for the satisfaction of human desires, nor a mere nuisance to be exterminated, this tiny creature possesses the same dignity that any conscious being possesses. In the face of that inherent dignity, Gombiner concludes, the human practice of delivering animals to the table in the form of food is abhorrent and inexcusable.
Many of the people who denounce the ways in which we treat animals in the course of raising them for human consumption never stop to think about this profound contradiction. Instead, they make impassioned calls for more “humanely” raised meat. Many people soothe their consciences by purchasing only free-range fowl and eggs, blissfully ignorant that “free range” has very little if any practical significance. Chickens may be labeled free-range even if they’ve never been outside or seen a speck of daylight in their entire lives. And that Thanksgiving turkey? Even if it is raised “free range,” it still lives a life of pain and confinement that ends with the butcher’s knife.
How can intelligent people who purport to be deeply concerned with animal welfare and respectful of life turn a blind eye to such practices? And how can people continue to eat meat when they become aware that nearly 53 billion land animals are slaughtered every year for human consumption? The simple answer is that most people just don’t care about the lives or fortunes of animals. If they did care, they would learn as much as possible about the ways in which our society systematically abuses animals, and they would make what is at once a very simple and a very difficult choice: to forswear the consumption of animal products of all kinds.
The easy part of this consists in seeing clearly what ethics requires and then just plain doing it. The difficult part: You just haven’t lived until you’ve tried to function as a strict vegan in a meat-crazed society.
What were once the most straightforward activities become a constant ordeal. You might think that it’s as simple as just removing meat, eggs and dairy products from your diet, but it goes a lot deeper than that.
To be a really strict vegan is to strive to avoid all animal products, and this includes materials like leather, silk and wool, as well as a panoply of cosmetics and medications. The more you dig, the more you learn about products you would never stop to think might contain or involve animal products in their production — like wine and beer (isinglass, a kind of gelatin derived from fish bladders, is often used to “fine,” or purify, these beverages), refined sugar (bone char is sometimes used to bleach it) or Band-Aids (animal products in the adhesive). Just last week I was told that those little comfort strips on most razor blades contain animal fat.
To go down this road is to stare headlong into an abyss that, to paraphrase Nietzsche, will ultimately stare back at you.
The challenges faced by a vegan don’t end with the nuts and bolts of material existence. You face quite a few social difficulties as well, perhaps the chief one being how one should feel about spending time with people who are not vegans.
Is it O.K. to eat dinner with people who are eating meat? What do you say when a dining companion says, “I’m really a vegetarian — I don’t eat red meat at home.” (I’ve heard it lots of times, always without any prompting from me.) What do you do when someone starts to grill you (so to speak) about your vegan ethics during dinner? (Wise vegans always defer until food isn’t around.) Or when someone starts to lodge accusations to the effect that you consider yourself morally superior to others, or that it is ridiculous to worry so much about animals when there is so much human suffering in the world? (Smile politely and ask them to pass the seitan.)
Let me be candid: By and large, meat-eaters are a self-righteous bunch. The number of vegans I know personally is ... five. And I have been a vegan for almost 15 years, having been a vegetarian for almost 15 before that.
Five. I have lost more friends than this over arguments about animal ethics. One lapidary conclusion to be drawn here is that people take deadly seriously the prerogative to use animals as sources of satisfaction. Not only for food, but as beasts of burden, as raw materials and as sources of captive entertainment — which is the way animals are used in zoos, circuses and the like.
These uses of animals are so institutionalized, so normalized, in our society that it is difficult to find the critical distance needed to see them as the horrors that they are: so many forms of subjection, servitude and — in the case of killing animals for human consumption and other purposes — outright murder.
People who are ethical vegans believe that differences in intelligence between human and non-human animals have no moral significance whatsoever. The fact that my cat can’t appreciate Schubert’s late symphonies and can’t perform syllogistic logic does not mean that I am entitled to use him as an organic toy, as if I were somehow not only morally superior to him but virtually entitled to treat him as a commodity with minuscule market value.
We have been trained by a history of thinking of which we are scarcely aware to view non-human animals as resources we are entitled to employ in whatever ways we see fit in order to satisfy our needs and desires. Yes, there are animal welfare laws. But these laws have been formulated by, and are enforced by, people who proceed from the proposition that animals are fundamentally inferior to human beings. At best, these laws make living conditions for animals marginally better than they would be otherwise — right up to the point when we send them to the slaughterhouse.
Think about that when you’re picking out your free-range turkey, which has absolutely nothing to be thankful for on Thanksgiving. All it ever had was a short and miserable life, thanks to us intelligent, compassionate humans.
Gary Steiner, a professor of philosophy at Bucknell University, is the author of “Animals and the Moral Community: Mental Life, Moral Status and Kinship.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Click and comment: http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/11/eid-al-adha-what-is-sacrifice.html#comments
~~~~~
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/11/eid-al-adha-what-is-sacrifice.html
Dr. Lalani thinks aloud, but makes a valid point about Sacrifice.
We should be open to his idea, and as Muslims we should debate it and see the merits and alternatives for the same. It does not mean giving up eating the meat, it simply means finding the alternatives for the present day massive animal slaughter on the day of Eid.
The idea of sacrifice he has explained - of giving up things that are dear to one is meaningful. I request the Muslims who are free to think to propose a full idea on how to handle the symbolic sacrifice Muslims make on the day of Eid-al-Adha.
Two articles below talk about the the 300,000 animals being sacrficed by Hindus in Nepal and on Thanksgiving Day, we probably would slaughter more than 20 Million turkeys, that is one turkey for every 15 Americans.
That is our food..... think from a survival point of view...
Look at this way, the wheat we grind to flour and eat kills the future of wheaties from that seed of wheat we kill. The veggies we eat have life that we shorten. If we do not kill the wheat, it keeps growing and reseeding....
Every veggie has life too. We are part of it and animals are part of it. If no one kills the animals and veggies, and no animal eats other animal... there will be a huge problem.
Religions were wise to go along with the system of nature... we are each others sustenance.
Sounds bad, but what are the choices? Why show prejudice towards Veggies and not towards animals? No matter what you eat, you are killing the continuance of the life of that item.
Mike Ghouse
http://www.worldmuslimcongress.com/
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~
I am a Muslim, and not just a MINO (Muslim in Name Only) and I admit I could do better in practice of my religion.
There is one Islamic ritual with which I have a great deal of trouble and that is Kurbani. I have never slaughtered an animal myself but I have seen a goat being dragged to the spot of sacrifice on Eid-alAdha and I have seen how desperately the goat struggles and resists. It is quite obvious that the animal knows what is in store for it (it is uncanny). And I have seen its throat being cut and its being exsanguinated and a painful death superveing slowly and inexorably.
I hold Prophets Ibrahim and Mohammad (praise be on them both) in highest reverence and I am not a vegetarian (although I wish I could have been). I also do not question God's commandment to Ibrahim to show his devotion to Allah by going through with the sacrifice of his only son at that time, (this must have been before the birth of Isaac, PBUH).
However, could it be that God's Commandment to sacrifice was for to him to give whatever it was that was most dear or his very valuable possession. In those days, livestock was a measure of wealth and meat was not pletiful so that protein deficiency must have been endemic, especially among the poor (the majority). Alll those facts pointed to a living animal as logical possesiion fit for sacrifice.
I performed Umra in December of 1993 and read an 'official' piece of Saudi government literature provided to the pilgrims (including Hajj). It clearly stated that money donation can emphatically substitute for animal sacrifice and that meat was allowed to Muslims but not mandated by our great faith.
I am a physician (now retired) and I have no doubt that dairy products (esp cheese) and eggs (unfertilized) can definitely furnish all the protein a human needs and in fact even those may not be indispensable (lentils and legumes have plenty of the so called first class proteins).
Jews used to practice Qurbani following the example of Abrham/Ibrahim (PBUH) until the destruction in 570 b.c. of the First Temple and - perhaps - until the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 AD but they seem to have completely given up the practice since the diaspora. And still, we include them - and Christians - among the believers. Europeans used to sacrifice animals to Jupiter and Apollo and Minerva etc. but quit that practice when Christianity replaced idol-worshipping, polytheistic Homeric religion ( 'Hellenism'). Could we at least heed the kernel of their argument against performing anuimal sacrifice without becoming vegetarians?
Astaghfirullah!
Inayat Lalani
~~~~~~~~~~
'World's biggest animal sacrifice' in Nepal
By Claire Cozens
Agence France-Presse
KATHMANDU, Nepal—Thousands of Hindu devotees have flocked to a village in Nepal ahead of the planned sacrifice of more than 300,000 animals in a ceremony condemned by animal rights activists, including French actress Brigitte Bardot.
Priests are preparing for the slaughter of more than 15,000 buffaloes and 300,000 birds, goats, and sheep during the event, which starts Tuesday and is thought to be the biggest ritual sacrifice anywhere in the world.
Every five years, the village of Bariyapur, near Nepal's southern border with India, hosts this religious festival dedicated to Gadhimai, the Hindu goddess of power.
"Thousands of people from Nepal and India have already begun arriving and preparations for the festival are in full swing," Mangal Chaudhary Tharu, the main priest at the Gadhimai temple, told AFP.
He said visitor numbers were expected to be higher this year because it is the first such ceremony since the end of Nepal's conflict in 2006 and he vowed to go ahead with the sacrifice despite the protests.
Tharu, the fourth generation of his family to serve as a priest at the temple, said he expected more than a million people to attend, over half from India, where many states have banned animal slaughter for religious purposes.
Nepal's government has refused to put a stop to what it says is a centuries-old religious tradition, and has pledged 4.5 million rupees (60,000 dollars) in funding.
"People have deep faith in the goddess and they believe that sacrificing animals will bring them good luck and prosperity for their families," said Tharu.
"I don't think the mood will be spoiled by the animal rights campaigners. They have the right to raise their concerns and we have the right to continue with our age-old tradition."
Armed police have been deployed to keep the peace and authorities have banned alcohol during the festival, which begins with the ritual sacrifice of two wild rats, a rooster, a pig, a goat, and a lamb.
The meat is distributed to the devotees and to local people, while contractors bid for the animal hides—making the slaughter a lucrative venture for the local community.
But the ceremony has been strongly opposed by animal rights campaigners, who are demanding an end to what they say is senseless cruelty.
The cause is supported by the well-known Indian animal rights activist Maneka Gandhi and by Bardot, a veteran campaigner who this month wrote to Nepal's president urging him to put a stop to the festival.
"Thousands of terrified buffaloes will have their heads cut off by drunken devotees," she wrote.
"Honorable president, I have dedicated my life to protect animals and the best gift I could receive for this lifelong struggle would be the announcement of the stopping of ritual sacrifice."
Pramada Shah, director of pressure group Animal Nepal, says the campaign has won strong support both in Nepal and abroad, although she accepts it faces an uphill struggle in this deeply conservative, majority-Hindu nation.
"In a country like Nepal it is very difficult to raise these issues," she told AFP.
"The idea of animal rights is very new here and people are so used to sacrifices, even well-educated people are resistant to change. There is a lot of work to be done here, but slowly, progress is being made."
She says attitudes toward ritual slaughter are beginning to change in Nepal, a view shared by cultural expert Chunda Bajracharya.
"Belief in these ancient rituals is deep rooted in our society," said Bajracharya, professor of cultural studies at Kathmandu's Tribhuvan University.
"But there is evidence that animal sacrifices are becoming less popular, especially in urban areas, where people are instead choosing to 'sacrifice' eggs or coconuts.
"Mindsets are gradually changing."
Shared by Hasni Essa
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Op-Ed Contributor
Animal, Vegetable, Miserable
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/22/opinion/22steiner.html?_r=1&th=&emc=th&adxnnlx=1258906532-O4jMyLUNdeeDH51oBuwxrA&pagewanted=all
Karen Barbour
Related
Times Topics: VeganismLATELY more people have begun to express an interest in where the meat they eat comes from and how it was raised. Were the animals humanely treated? Did they have a good quality of life before the death that turned them into someone’s dinner?
Some of these questions, which reach a fever pitch in the days leading up to Thanksgiving, pertain to the ways in which animals are treated. (Did your turkey get to live outdoors?) Others focus on the question of how eating the animals in question will affect the consumer’s health and well-being. (Was it given hormones and antibiotics?)
None of these questions, however, make any consideration of whether it is wrong to kill animals for human consumption. And even when people ask this question, they almost always find a variety of resourceful answers that purport to justify the killing and consumption of animals in the name of human welfare. Strict ethical vegans, of which I am one, are customarily excoriated for equating our society’s treatment of animals with mass murder. Can anyone seriously consider animal suffering even remotely comparable to human suffering? Those who answer with a resounding no typically argue in one of two ways.
Some suggest that human beings but not animals are made in God’s image and hence stand in much closer proximity to the divine than any non-human animal; according to this line of thought, animals were made expressly for the sake of humans and may be used without scruple to satisfy their needs and desires. There is ample support in the Bible and in the writings of Christian thinkers like Augustine and Thomas Aquinas for this pointedly anthropocentric way of devaluing animals.
Others argue that the human capacity for abstract thought makes us capable of suffering that both qualitatively and quantitatively exceeds the suffering of any non-human animal. Philosophers like Jeremy Bentham, who is famous for having based moral status not on linguistic or rational capacities but rather on the capacity to suffer, argue that because animals are incapable of abstract thought, they are imprisoned in an eternal present, have no sense of the extended future and hence cannot be said to have an interest in continued existence.
The most penetrating and iconoclastic response to this sort of reasoning came from the writer Isaac Bashevis Singer in his story “The Letter Writer,” in which he called the slaughter of animals the “eternal Treblinka.”
The story depicts an encounter between a man and a mouse. The man, Herman Gombiner, contemplates his place in the cosmic scheme of things and concludes that there is an essential connection between his own existence as “a child of God” and the “holy creature” scuffling about on the floor in front of him.
Surely, he reflects, the mouse has some capacity for thought; Gombiner even thinks that the mouse has the capacity to share love and gratitude with him. Not merely a means for the satisfaction of human desires, nor a mere nuisance to be exterminated, this tiny creature possesses the same dignity that any conscious being possesses. In the face of that inherent dignity, Gombiner concludes, the human practice of delivering animals to the table in the form of food is abhorrent and inexcusable.
Many of the people who denounce the ways in which we treat animals in the course of raising them for human consumption never stop to think about this profound contradiction. Instead, they make impassioned calls for more “humanely” raised meat. Many people soothe their consciences by purchasing only free-range fowl and eggs, blissfully ignorant that “free range” has very little if any practical significance. Chickens may be labeled free-range even if they’ve never been outside or seen a speck of daylight in their entire lives. And that Thanksgiving turkey? Even if it is raised “free range,” it still lives a life of pain and confinement that ends with the butcher’s knife.
How can intelligent people who purport to be deeply concerned with animal welfare and respectful of life turn a blind eye to such practices? And how can people continue to eat meat when they become aware that nearly 53 billion land animals are slaughtered every year for human consumption? The simple answer is that most people just don’t care about the lives or fortunes of animals. If they did care, they would learn as much as possible about the ways in which our society systematically abuses animals, and they would make what is at once a very simple and a very difficult choice: to forswear the consumption of animal products of all kinds.
The easy part of this consists in seeing clearly what ethics requires and then just plain doing it. The difficult part: You just haven’t lived until you’ve tried to function as a strict vegan in a meat-crazed society.
What were once the most straightforward activities become a constant ordeal. You might think that it’s as simple as just removing meat, eggs and dairy products from your diet, but it goes a lot deeper than that.
To be a really strict vegan is to strive to avoid all animal products, and this includes materials like leather, silk and wool, as well as a panoply of cosmetics and medications. The more you dig, the more you learn about products you would never stop to think might contain or involve animal products in their production — like wine and beer (isinglass, a kind of gelatin derived from fish bladders, is often used to “fine,” or purify, these beverages), refined sugar (bone char is sometimes used to bleach it) or Band-Aids (animal products in the adhesive). Just last week I was told that those little comfort strips on most razor blades contain animal fat.
To go down this road is to stare headlong into an abyss that, to paraphrase Nietzsche, will ultimately stare back at you.
The challenges faced by a vegan don’t end with the nuts and bolts of material existence. You face quite a few social difficulties as well, perhaps the chief one being how one should feel about spending time with people who are not vegans.
Is it O.K. to eat dinner with people who are eating meat? What do you say when a dining companion says, “I’m really a vegetarian — I don’t eat red meat at home.” (I’ve heard it lots of times, always without any prompting from me.) What do you do when someone starts to grill you (so to speak) about your vegan ethics during dinner? (Wise vegans always defer until food isn’t around.) Or when someone starts to lodge accusations to the effect that you consider yourself morally superior to others, or that it is ridiculous to worry so much about animals when there is so much human suffering in the world? (Smile politely and ask them to pass the seitan.)
Let me be candid: By and large, meat-eaters are a self-righteous bunch. The number of vegans I know personally is ... five. And I have been a vegan for almost 15 years, having been a vegetarian for almost 15 before that.
Five. I have lost more friends than this over arguments about animal ethics. One lapidary conclusion to be drawn here is that people take deadly seriously the prerogative to use animals as sources of satisfaction. Not only for food, but as beasts of burden, as raw materials and as sources of captive entertainment — which is the way animals are used in zoos, circuses and the like.
These uses of animals are so institutionalized, so normalized, in our society that it is difficult to find the critical distance needed to see them as the horrors that they are: so many forms of subjection, servitude and — in the case of killing animals for human consumption and other purposes — outright murder.
People who are ethical vegans believe that differences in intelligence between human and non-human animals have no moral significance whatsoever. The fact that my cat can’t appreciate Schubert’s late symphonies and can’t perform syllogistic logic does not mean that I am entitled to use him as an organic toy, as if I were somehow not only morally superior to him but virtually entitled to treat him as a commodity with minuscule market value.
We have been trained by a history of thinking of which we are scarcely aware to view non-human animals as resources we are entitled to employ in whatever ways we see fit in order to satisfy our needs and desires. Yes, there are animal welfare laws. But these laws have been formulated by, and are enforced by, people who proceed from the proposition that animals are fundamentally inferior to human beings. At best, these laws make living conditions for animals marginally better than they would be otherwise — right up to the point when we send them to the slaughterhouse.
Think about that when you’re picking out your free-range turkey, which has absolutely nothing to be thankful for on Thanksgiving. All it ever had was a short and miserable life, thanks to us intelligent, compassionate humans.
Gary Steiner, a professor of philosophy at Bucknell University, is the author of “Animals and the Moral Community: Mental Life, Moral Status and Kinship.”
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Click and comment: http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/11/eid-al-adha-what-is-sacrifice.html#comments
~~~~~
Tuesday, October 13, 2009
Chandra Muzaffar on Pluralism & Ijtihad
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/10/chandra-muzaffar-on-pluralism-ijtihad.html
I subscribe to Dr. Muzaffar’s views and have taken up the initiative to bring about a new dimension in our understanding of Islam in the context of the ever universalizing world. A few abstracts followed by the interview. Mike Ghouse
"The fixation of many Muslims with fiqh, with the externalities of religion in terms of rituals or with Arabic linguistic terms and culture, completely negates what I regard as Islam’s inherent universality."
Sadly, this project has not gone very far, although in the recent past people like Abul Kalam Azad and Iqbal in India, and Malik Bennabi in North Africa, did argue along these lines, even though they may not have termed this as ijtihad as such, perhaps because,
Given the traditionalist ulema’s understanding of what qualifies a person to be called a mujtahid, these people (Abul Kalam Azad, Iqbal, Malik Bennabi) would have been automatically disqualified by them.
We have also tried to promote intra-Muslim dialogue, between progressive Islamic scholars and the traditional, or ‘orthodox’, groups, but here, too, we have failed. One reason for this is that the latter are simply not open to dialogue with the former, whom they consider as having deviated from what they regard as true Islam.
#
Chandra Muzaffar on Pluralism & Ijtihad
By Yogi Sikand.
Chandra Muzaffar is Malaysia’s best-known public intellectual. He has written widely on questions related to Islam, inter-faith relations and liberation theology, issues that he discusses in this interview with Yoginder Sikand.
Q: Much of your writing focuses on a critique of capitalism and consumerism, or what you very aptly term as ‘moneytheism’, which you contrast with the monotheism of Islam. How do you see Muslim scholars dealing with these issues?
A: Unfortunately, what is in some circles called ‘Islamic Economics’ has not sufficiently critiqued capitalism and the consumerist ethos. In fact, many of those associated with the ‘Islamic Economics’ project have simply tried to apply a so-called ‘Islamic’ gloss on capitalism. If at all those associated with the ‘Islamic Economics’ project critique consumerism, which is such a deeply-rooted phenomenon globally, including in predominantly Muslim countries, it is only at a very general level, in the form of statements to the effect that it is incompatible with Islam, or appeals for balance, restraint and moderation. But this does not go along with any rigorous analysis of economic structures that generate consumerism in the first place. I don’t know of any well-known writers associated with the ‘Islamic Economics’ project who have done this in a sufficient manner. Rather, their focus tends to be more on the technical aspects, such as the ban on interest, interest-free banking and discussions about disallowing the production of things considered to be haraam.
I think one reason why these scholars have not sufficiently critiqued consumerism and capitalism is that they tend not to discuss issues that are not already written about in the fiqh tradition. Then, the references in the Quran that could be interpreted as condemning consumerism are of a general sort, and are not, in most cases, specific, and so these scholars have not gone beyond these generalities. Further, many of these scholars lack sufficient sensitivity to class issues, and so their project ultimately tends to work in favour of the powers that be, the ruling classes, their formulations being easily co-opted into the existing capitalist framework. A good instance of this is what are fashionably called ‘Islamic banks’.
Q: Another major concern in your writings relates to the concept of ijtihad, which you use to argue the case for reformulating traditional Muslim understandings on a host of issues. How do you envisage ijtihad in relation to vital issues of contemporary import, such as gender relations or relations between Muslims and others?
A: Generally, ijtihad, if at all it is discussed by Muslim scholars, is in the context of the nitty-gritty of fiqh formulations, but, personally, I think it should also apply to a whole range of other issues, including our world-views, the way we understand our religion and its relation to other faiths, inter-faith relations, issues of gender, and so on. Sadly, this project has not gone very far, although in the recent past people like Abul Kalam Azad and Iqbal in India, and Malik Bennabi in North Africa, did argue along these lines, even though they may not have termed this as ijtihad as such, perhaps because, given the traditionalist ulema’s understanding of what qualifies a person to be called a mujtahid, these people would have been automatically disqualified by them.
Q: A major issue that ‘progressive’ and ‘modernist’ Muslim scholars are today focusing on is the need to go beyond traditional fiqh formulations, and, indeed, the very tendency to understand every issue in terms of the fiqh tradition. How do you relate to this?
A: Personally, I feel that we need to emancipate ourselves from the traditional fiqh methodology. The moment you view something from the traditional fiqh point of view, or look at it as a ‘Muslim’ issue, rather than one of universal human significance, you limit your own understanding, transforming it into something narrowly communal, which, as a Muslim, I see as going against the fundamental universality of Islam. The fixation of many Muslims with fiqh, with the externalities of religion in terms of rituals or with Arabic linguistic terms and culture, completely negates what I regard as Islam’s inherent universality.
Frankly, I am increasingly despondent about the marked tendency to see and interpret things from a narrow ‘Muslim’ or so-called ‘Islamic’ point of view, and this applies to new fads such as ‘Islamic Economics’ or ‘Islamic food’ or whatever. If one is looking for solutions to problems through traditional understandings of religion—any religion for that matter—at the end of the day, if one’s mindset is not universal, the quest is utterly futile. I think one of the most basic tasks before us today is to evolve universal understandings of spirituality that go beyond, and transcend, religion and communal barriers, as traditionally conceived. Sadly, we are in a situation where religion, in the sense of labels, language, dogmas and rituals, seems to be of more practical importance than God. That is to say, even if we may not recognize it, we worship our own particular religions in place of God. This is precisely what many Muslims tend to do with their exclusivity, their narrow approach to fiqh, their obsession with rituals and laws which they imagine to be the shariah, and, indeed, what amounts to the very idolization of the shariah.
Q: You have been at the forefront of seeking to promote inter-religious dialogue between Muslims and others, in Malaysia as well as internationally. How do you reflect on your experiences in this regard?
A: In Malaysia we have tried to do this sort of thing, but the problems are daunting and we have not been very successful. We have also tried to promote intra-Muslim dialogue, between progressive Islamic scholars and the traditional, or ‘orthodox’, groups, but here, too, we have failed. One reason for this is that the latter are simply not open to dialogue with the former, whom they consider as having deviated from what they regard as true Islam. If at all they are interested in any sort of dialogue, it is simply in order to impose their own perspectives on others. This can hardly be called dialogue, in the true sense of the term. They are simply too-closed minded, whereas dialogue presupposes that dialogue partners should be open-minded and amenable to listening to other views. Otherwise, there is no point in even attempting to dialogue.
As for inter-faith dialogue, I, as a Muslim, believe that there is much that Muslims need to set in order before they can genuinely dialogue with people of other faiths. Certain deep-rooted, traditionally-held notions, shared by millions of Muslims, must be recognized as being gravely inimical to genuine inter-faith dialogue, such as common assumptions about terms such as kafir and jihad, the alleged ‘impurity’ of non-Muslims, the notion of Muslim supremacism and the belief that all non-Muslims are ‘enemies of God’ or are doomed to perdition in hell. We need to revise our understandings of these issues if we are at all to be able to proceed with the task of inter-religious dialogue and solidarity. Many of these understandings emerged after the demise of the Prophet, at a time of Muslim political expansionism. These were later reinforced in the face of Muslim political losses and traumas in the wake of the Mongol onslaught, the Crusades, and, then, European colonialism, and, now, Western, particularly American, imperialism. We need to re-evaluate our views on these matters, and bring them in line with proper Quranic understandings, which I believe to be just and egalitarian.
Chandra Muzaffar can be contacted on cmuzaffar@gmail.com
Yoginder Sikand works with the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Social Policy at the National Law School, Bangalore.
If you wish to comment:
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/10/chandra-muzaffar-on-pluralism-ijtihad.html#comments
I subscribe to Dr. Muzaffar’s views and have taken up the initiative to bring about a new dimension in our understanding of Islam in the context of the ever universalizing world. A few abstracts followed by the interview. Mike Ghouse
"The fixation of many Muslims with fiqh, with the externalities of religion in terms of rituals or with Arabic linguistic terms and culture, completely negates what I regard as Islam’s inherent universality."
Sadly, this project has not gone very far, although in the recent past people like Abul Kalam Azad and Iqbal in India, and Malik Bennabi in North Africa, did argue along these lines, even though they may not have termed this as ijtihad as such, perhaps because,
Given the traditionalist ulema’s understanding of what qualifies a person to be called a mujtahid, these people (Abul Kalam Azad, Iqbal, Malik Bennabi) would have been automatically disqualified by them.
We have also tried to promote intra-Muslim dialogue, between progressive Islamic scholars and the traditional, or ‘orthodox’, groups, but here, too, we have failed. One reason for this is that the latter are simply not open to dialogue with the former, whom they consider as having deviated from what they regard as true Islam.
#
Chandra Muzaffar on Pluralism & Ijtihad
By Yogi Sikand.
Chandra Muzaffar is Malaysia’s best-known public intellectual. He has written widely on questions related to Islam, inter-faith relations and liberation theology, issues that he discusses in this interview with Yoginder Sikand.
Q: Much of your writing focuses on a critique of capitalism and consumerism, or what you very aptly term as ‘moneytheism’, which you contrast with the monotheism of Islam. How do you see Muslim scholars dealing with these issues?
A: Unfortunately, what is in some circles called ‘Islamic Economics’ has not sufficiently critiqued capitalism and the consumerist ethos. In fact, many of those associated with the ‘Islamic Economics’ project have simply tried to apply a so-called ‘Islamic’ gloss on capitalism. If at all those associated with the ‘Islamic Economics’ project critique consumerism, which is such a deeply-rooted phenomenon globally, including in predominantly Muslim countries, it is only at a very general level, in the form of statements to the effect that it is incompatible with Islam, or appeals for balance, restraint and moderation. But this does not go along with any rigorous analysis of economic structures that generate consumerism in the first place. I don’t know of any well-known writers associated with the ‘Islamic Economics’ project who have done this in a sufficient manner. Rather, their focus tends to be more on the technical aspects, such as the ban on interest, interest-free banking and discussions about disallowing the production of things considered to be haraam.
I think one reason why these scholars have not sufficiently critiqued consumerism and capitalism is that they tend not to discuss issues that are not already written about in the fiqh tradition. Then, the references in the Quran that could be interpreted as condemning consumerism are of a general sort, and are not, in most cases, specific, and so these scholars have not gone beyond these generalities. Further, many of these scholars lack sufficient sensitivity to class issues, and so their project ultimately tends to work in favour of the powers that be, the ruling classes, their formulations being easily co-opted into the existing capitalist framework. A good instance of this is what are fashionably called ‘Islamic banks’.
Q: Another major concern in your writings relates to the concept of ijtihad, which you use to argue the case for reformulating traditional Muslim understandings on a host of issues. How do you envisage ijtihad in relation to vital issues of contemporary import, such as gender relations or relations between Muslims and others?
A: Generally, ijtihad, if at all it is discussed by Muslim scholars, is in the context of the nitty-gritty of fiqh formulations, but, personally, I think it should also apply to a whole range of other issues, including our world-views, the way we understand our religion and its relation to other faiths, inter-faith relations, issues of gender, and so on. Sadly, this project has not gone very far, although in the recent past people like Abul Kalam Azad and Iqbal in India, and Malik Bennabi in North Africa, did argue along these lines, even though they may not have termed this as ijtihad as such, perhaps because, given the traditionalist ulema’s understanding of what qualifies a person to be called a mujtahid, these people would have been automatically disqualified by them.
Q: A major issue that ‘progressive’ and ‘modernist’ Muslim scholars are today focusing on is the need to go beyond traditional fiqh formulations, and, indeed, the very tendency to understand every issue in terms of the fiqh tradition. How do you relate to this?
A: Personally, I feel that we need to emancipate ourselves from the traditional fiqh methodology. The moment you view something from the traditional fiqh point of view, or look at it as a ‘Muslim’ issue, rather than one of universal human significance, you limit your own understanding, transforming it into something narrowly communal, which, as a Muslim, I see as going against the fundamental universality of Islam. The fixation of many Muslims with fiqh, with the externalities of religion in terms of rituals or with Arabic linguistic terms and culture, completely negates what I regard as Islam’s inherent universality.
Frankly, I am increasingly despondent about the marked tendency to see and interpret things from a narrow ‘Muslim’ or so-called ‘Islamic’ point of view, and this applies to new fads such as ‘Islamic Economics’ or ‘Islamic food’ or whatever. If one is looking for solutions to problems through traditional understandings of religion—any religion for that matter—at the end of the day, if one’s mindset is not universal, the quest is utterly futile. I think one of the most basic tasks before us today is to evolve universal understandings of spirituality that go beyond, and transcend, religion and communal barriers, as traditionally conceived. Sadly, we are in a situation where religion, in the sense of labels, language, dogmas and rituals, seems to be of more practical importance than God. That is to say, even if we may not recognize it, we worship our own particular religions in place of God. This is precisely what many Muslims tend to do with their exclusivity, their narrow approach to fiqh, their obsession with rituals and laws which they imagine to be the shariah, and, indeed, what amounts to the very idolization of the shariah.
Q: You have been at the forefront of seeking to promote inter-religious dialogue between Muslims and others, in Malaysia as well as internationally. How do you reflect on your experiences in this regard?
A: In Malaysia we have tried to do this sort of thing, but the problems are daunting and we have not been very successful. We have also tried to promote intra-Muslim dialogue, between progressive Islamic scholars and the traditional, or ‘orthodox’, groups, but here, too, we have failed. One reason for this is that the latter are simply not open to dialogue with the former, whom they consider as having deviated from what they regard as true Islam. If at all they are interested in any sort of dialogue, it is simply in order to impose their own perspectives on others. This can hardly be called dialogue, in the true sense of the term. They are simply too-closed minded, whereas dialogue presupposes that dialogue partners should be open-minded and amenable to listening to other views. Otherwise, there is no point in even attempting to dialogue.
As for inter-faith dialogue, I, as a Muslim, believe that there is much that Muslims need to set in order before they can genuinely dialogue with people of other faiths. Certain deep-rooted, traditionally-held notions, shared by millions of Muslims, must be recognized as being gravely inimical to genuine inter-faith dialogue, such as common assumptions about terms such as kafir and jihad, the alleged ‘impurity’ of non-Muslims, the notion of Muslim supremacism and the belief that all non-Muslims are ‘enemies of God’ or are doomed to perdition in hell. We need to revise our understandings of these issues if we are at all to be able to proceed with the task of inter-religious dialogue and solidarity. Many of these understandings emerged after the demise of the Prophet, at a time of Muslim political expansionism. These were later reinforced in the face of Muslim political losses and traumas in the wake of the Mongol onslaught, the Crusades, and, then, European colonialism, and, now, Western, particularly American, imperialism. We need to re-evaluate our views on these matters, and bring them in line with proper Quranic understandings, which I believe to be just and egalitarian.
Chandra Muzaffar can be contacted on cmuzaffar@gmail.com
Yoginder Sikand works with the Centre for the Study of Social Exclusion and Inclusive Social Policy at the National Law School, Bangalore.
If you wish to comment:
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/10/chandra-muzaffar-on-pluralism-ijtihad.html#comments
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
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?
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 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.
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
# # #
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/
Saturday, April 5, 2008
33 Tips to Personal Jihad
http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2008/04/33-tips-to-personal-jihad.html
This piece is everything I have written in the last five years, indeed, I must thank the writer for summarizing it so well. This is who a Muslim is, and this is what makes one a Muslim! Thanks to 
Ahumanb for sharing this article. I have expressed similar sentiments over the years on the World Muslim Congress forum. Subhan Allah, I ask you, the reader to recognize articles like this and rate them. Highest rating would be Alhamdu Lillah.
Please look at these two symbols and write to me which one should be adopted - I will go by the votes for each symbol, the one on the left is Calligraphic, and the other is Geometric, both represent the phrase "Alhamdu Lillah" Praise the Lord. - Send the email to wmcArchives@gmail.com
Over the years I have been working on the definition of the world Muslim " To be a Muslim is to be a peace maker, one who constantly seeks to mitigate conflicts and nurtures goodwill for peaceful co-existence, God wants us to live in peace and harmony with his creation; life and matter. That is the purpose of religion".
Mike Ghouse
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
This piece is everything I have written in the last five years, indeed, I must thank the writer for summarizing it so well. This is who a Muslim is, and this is what makes one a Muslim! Thanks to 
Ahumanb for sharing this article. I have expressed similar sentiments over the years on the World Muslim Congress forum. Subhan Allah, I ask you, the reader to recognize articles like this and rate them. Highest rating would be Alhamdu Lillah.Please look at these two symbols and write to me which one should be adopted - I will go by the votes for each symbol, the one on the left is Calligraphic, and the other is Geometric, both represent the phrase "Alhamdu Lillah" Praise the Lord. - Send the email to wmcArchives@gmail.com
Over the years I have been working on the definition of the world Muslim " To be a Muslim is to be a peace maker, one who constantly seeks to mitigate conflicts and nurtures goodwill for peaceful co-existence, God wants us to live in peace and harmony with his creation; life and matter. That is the purpose of religion".
Mike Ghouse
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
33 Tips to Launch Your Personal Jihad Against Racism and Nationalism
By Abdul Malik Mujahid
Alhamdu lillah, all Masjids in the world are open to all people. Muslims pray shoulder to shoulder with no regard to any national, ethnic, class or color differences. Islamic egalitarianism still gains converts from the untouchables of India to Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali in America. However, this dominant reality is sometimes marred by individual behavior, which is contrary to the ideals of Islam.
Some Muslims fall for the age-old trick of Satan and start playing the silly inferiority/superiority game. Some stereotype others and tolerate prejudice against other human beings, despite the fact that all human beings are equal, from the same man and woman. (Quran 49:13)
How should we save ourselves from falling into this trap? How should we help others stay above the killing fields of racism and nationalism? What can we do now to become a better human being? Here are some tips on how we can launch our personal Jihad against this disease.
The Prophet said: If one of you sees something evil he should change it with his hand. If he cannot, he should speak out against it, and if he cannot do even that he should at least detest it in his heart, this being the weakest form of faith (Sahih of Muslim).
1. Knowledge is power
Do we know what the Quran and Sunnah say about racism? The Quran established individual character as the criteria of success, not color, tribal or economic status of a person. The Prophet preached and established these ideals in the peace sanctuary of Madinah and Islamic society which he developed.
Let our parents, children, Islamic schools, and Imams learn and teach the ideals of Islam.
2. Ask the only One who can really help
We can get rid of racial and prejudicial attitudes within ourselves with the help of God.
Make sincere and focused Dua for those people and groups who remain oppressed, subject to humiliation, subject to difficult behavior. After all, Dua increases love between people (Hadith).
Also make Dua for yourself and others to gain an appreciation of others. Pray together with your family for those friends in the Masjid or at your job who are from other groups. And remember that dua without actions is nothing.
3. Hate the hatred
The Prophet never hated anyone. He neither hated Makkah nor the Makkans who tortured him, starved him and his people and killed his companions, may Allah be pleased with them. He continued to pray even for his worst enemies like Abu Jahl.
4. Make sincere Tawbah (repentance to God)
If we have hurt someone through our tongue or attitude, we need to seek God's forgiveness. It is also important to seek the personal forgiveness of that persons as well if s/he is within reach as an Islamic pre-requisite to seek God's forgiveness. There has to be a personal acknowledgment of wrongdoing and a commitment to change. This is done by turning to God and seeking His Forgiveness for looking down on other beings due to a false belief in someone's inferiority.
5. Watching Our Tongue
The Prophet said: Whoever can give me a guarantee for what is between his two jaws and between his two legs, I can assure him Paradise (Sahih of Bukhari).
Keeping this in mind, effort should be made to curb useless talk, which can lead to worse things like backbiting and slander of individuals and groups of people.
Defining backbiting, the Prophet said that backbiting is anything that you say about someone in his absence that may displease him. When he was asked by one of the Companions, ‘even if he is as I describe him?' he responded by saying, If he is as you describe him then you are guilty of backbiting, otherwise you are guilty of slander (which is worse than backbiting) (Sahih of Muslim).
To add emphasis to how awful slander is, consider that the Prophet said it is worse than adultery because if a person commits adultery, Allah can forgive him if he repents. But a slanderer will not be forgiven until the person he had been speaking about forgives him (Baihaqi).
6. No ethnic jokes please
Ethnic jokes are not innocent humor. They carry the virus of bigotry most of the time. Think about how hurt we feel when some comedians depict Muslims as terrorist.
Consider this verse of the Quran: "O you who believe! Let not a group scoff at another group, it may be that the latter are better than the former; nor let (some) women scoff at other women, it may be that the latter are better than the former, nor defame one another, nor insult one another by nicknames. How bad is it, to insult one's brother after having Faith. And whosoever does not repent, then such are indeed wrong doers" (Quran 49:11).
Such silly and hurtful jest clearly goes against the type of manners Allah and His Prophet expect from us. It's a sin in Islam to ridicule or laugh at any beings, and if they are a group, the sin is stronger.
7. Don't call people, Kalla, Gora, Desi, Chapta, Abd or Rafeeq
Muslims disliked being called Moslems, Moor, or Mohammaden. We insist that since we write our name Muslims that's how everyone should spell our name. So let's call other people with the names they like for themselves. Fair enough?
Alhamdu lillah most Muslims don't do this. But once in a while we hear names, which we need to challenge. The Urdu term "Kalla" is used by some for African-Americans. While it literally means "black", the way it is used most of the time is demeaning. The same is true for the Urdu term Chapta or Peela, which refers to the color, and features of South East Asian people. Gora in Urdu for Caucasians falls in the same category although it also just means a white person, but is used to convey historical distrust and betrayl of the white colonial lords. Desi on the other hand is mostly used to describe stereiotypical images of South Asians "curry smelling" Indians and "pakis." It is often used as a term of self hate in the second generation.
Similarly some Arabs use the term Abd to describe black people, despite the fact the Prophet catogarically prohibited use of this term. Another term Zingy is used for the same people in the demeaning way. Some Arabs use the term Rafeeq (literally comrade) for Pakistanis in demeaning way similar to how the "N word" is used in the west. Ibn al Khinzeeer (son of a pig), a reference to whoever you are angry with amongst some Arabs and specially towards Jews is not only unworthy of the followers of Prophet Muhammad, it is a direct violation of his command not to insult one another's parents (Sahih of Bukhari and Muslim).
Even the Islamic term Kafir has to be use with care. Not every non-believer is a Kafir. This Quranic term, regarding those who rejected Allah's guidance after recognizing it to be the truth, should not become a term of hate.
8. Challenge the offensive, names, jokes and comments
If someone uses a hurtful name in our presence, we might simply say, "Don't call him/her that. Call him/her by his/her name." If you are the victim, simply say "That kind of joke offends me," or say "You don't like to be called bad names and neither do I".
We should feel comfortable in pointing out unfairness. It is very rewarding in the eyes of Allah, since by challenging this we are following three of Allah's commands:
- Stand up against injustice
- Discourage the evil
- Don't call people with bad nicknames
- It's part of a Muslim's duty to enjoin the good and forbid the evil. Let's do it with wisdom and patience. Be polite but firm.
9. Do not generalize
If you observe something wrong in some persons' behavior, don't generalize it to their ethnic group. Attribute it to those persons not their group. For example, I have heard several times that Arabs in Chicago run liquor stores. While it is true that there may be 100 or so Arabs who have this type of Haram business, they are a small minority among hundreds and thousands of Arabs living in Chicago. Without condoning what they are doing, we must see that there are Muslims of other nationalities who are also involved in Haram businesses.
10. Defend the abused group
Note unique and special qualities in other people. Show the positive points of an ethnic group that is being made fun of. Whether it's the hospitality of the Arabs, the respect for elders in Indo-Pakistani culture, the resilience of African-Americans, for instance, point out the positive to those who don't want to see the other side of the coin.
If you're still tongue-tied, consider this Hadith: the Prophet said: If a man's Muslim brother is slandered in his presence, and he is capable of defending him, and does so, Allah will defend him in this world and in the next. But if he fails to defend him, Allah will destroy him in this world and in the next.
11. Speak everyone's language
What do you do when there are say, three people, one of whom speaks your native language and the other doesn't?
Too often, many of us do the wrong thing.
It creates suspicion and discomfort if you speak a language in front of others who may not understand it. Use a common language understandable to all. So if Br. Muneer and you both understand Arabic, but Sr. Yasmeen doesn't, speak in English instead, so she doesn't feel left out. If you observe this behavior tell them it's unfair. If you are the one who is doing the wrong thing, then don't defend it by saying, "you should learn our language".
The Prophet said: When three people are together, two should not talk secretly, leaving the third alone since this may grieve him. (Sahiah of Bukhari & Muslim).
12. Read about others
Read about people to gain positive insights into other cultures. Read what they have written about themselves. Read about, for instance, what African-Americans have contributed to America. Even better, read an autobiography like that of Malcolm X, which recounts the personal experience and struggles of one Muslim African-American. Much of what he has to say is also a reflection of the experience of other African-Americans.
13. Share your joy
Have you invited people other than your cultural group at an occasion of happiness in your family?
Whether it's Eid, a wedding or the Aqiqa of a newborn baby, expand your next guest list to include those of different backgrounds. Sharing joy is a great way for people of all ethno-cultural groups to bond.
14. Share your sorrow
Have you visited a sick colleague, class fellow or a neighbor of another ethnic group? Have you been to the funeral of other people?
Relationships are not only built on the good times, but on the hard ones as well. Visit the sick, attend funerals, and console those who need it, and don't reserve your sympathy to those of the same skin color or country.
15. The way to a man's heart is through his stomach
Have you learned to cook the food of other cultures? Have you shared your food with them?
I know people who have become Muslim because of the hospitality of Muslims. Food is a great way to bring people together, and to get to know others. Share food with neighbors. Food is power. Use it!
16. Smiling is a charity
Who do you smile at? Do you limit your grins to groups you know, especially your ethno-cultural group?
Smiling is charity (Sahiah of Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi), not just for your people. Expand your smile "directory" to include all. Smile opens close hearts.
17. Salam is for everyone
Quran demands that we greet others better than the way they have greeted us. (Quran 4:86).
After Juma do you say Salam and meet only those people you know or do you initiate a Salam to those from another ethnic group?
Consider this Hadith: The Prophet said: Those who are nearest to Allah are those who are the first to give a greeting (Sahiah of Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi).
Saying Salam is also a great way to increase your love for a fellow Muslim, no matter where they are from. Consider this Hadith: the Prophet said: You will not enter Heaven until you believe, and you will not believe until you love each other. Let me guide you to something which will cause you to love each other: spreading the greetings of peace (Assalamu alaikum) (Sahiah of Muslim).
18. Hug someone today
Have you ever experienced a hug by a Muslim you never knew? What a feeling. This one just for the sake of Allah. Try it on a Muslim in your masjid and then introduce yourself to him. He is your brother. Isn't he?
19. Beyond Salam
Alhamdu lillah, we see a lot of faces of different ethnic groups in masjids, but have we gone beyond Salam with them?
Have we invited this brother or sister to our home this year? Let's take the initiative to go beyond the Salam and invite a fellow human being of a different background over to our place. Don't wait for a specific occasion. Just invite them over for dinner, lunch, or a game of basketball.
20. A Masjid tour of other neighborhoods
While in a number of cities in America and South Africa, Masjids tend to become ethnically homogeneous due to the population patterns of the city; we can try to overcome this isolation.
Let's visit other neighborhoods and pray in a Masjid there. So if you're an Urdu speaking person, visit the predominantly Arab mosque. If you're an Arab visit the mostly African-American mosque. If you're Turkish, visit the mostly Bengali mosque.
Let's defy the neighborhood divisions which we did not create. Let's take our Sunday school children on field trips to different neighborhoods and Masjids. Providing opportunities for interaction with people of diverse groups instills understanding.
Studies show that children playing and working together toward common goals develop positive attitudes about one another.
21. Do your duty, but a little differently
Who do you usually give your Zakat to?
Is it just to your ethnic group or do you use it as one of the categories-to win over hearts? Plan to give your next Zakat to a community or individuals who are not of your ethno-cultural background. This will be a practical way to give of yourself to those who are your brothers and sisters, and those who are in need.
22. Strangers should find an open Masjid door
How are you at welcoming strangers in your Masjid?
Do you move forward in welcoming, guiding and introducing them to others or do you allow a stranger to remain a stranger while you busily chat with your own cultural group? Open your heart and arms to the new brother or sister who may have come to the Masjid with great difficulty. Welcome their choice and don't let them regret visiting your mosque.
The security staff at Masjids need to have sensitivity training as well.
23. Watch those expressions and attitudes
Did you see that twist of the mouth, or the raise of that eyebrow?
Sometimes, it's not just words, but facial expressions that also indicate ethno-racial degradation and intolerance. It's not enough for us to just avoid verbal jabs. Language is not just about words; it's about body language too.
24. Defend yourself
If you are the target of ethno-racial humor, slurs or attacks defend yourself.
- First seek refuge in Allah from Satan Following the Prophet's advice, if you are angry, remain silent, sit down, move away or make wudu.
- If you feel your security is being threatened seek any help available.
- If you are attacked defend yourself if you are capable of it.
- Document and pursue the case with local police, the department of human resources and anti-hate groups.
God tolerates a person who is being wronged to respond in the same coin but He prefers us to be better: "The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof, but whoever forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah. Verily, He likes not the Zalimun (oppressors)" (Quran 42:40).
An ex-Marine member of the white supremacist movement the Ku Klux Klan became Muslim due partly to the polite and confident response of a Muslim doctor to his racist remarks calling him a "dog eater".
This is an example of following Allah's instructions that ask us to respond to evil with something which is better.
25. Stand up for justice
Take an active stand against injustices like profiling and discrimination in the workplace or at schools. Speak out against someone or a group being paid less because of their national background.
"O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even though it is against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, be he rich or poor, Allah is a better Protector to both (than you) are. So follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you may avoid justice, and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well-Acquainted with what you do" (Quran 4:135).
26. Work with other anti-racism groups
Volunteer time to organizations and groups which are working for an anti-racism agenda or for social justice. All the prophets were sent to help people take a stand for establishing justice (Quran 57:25). Working for a common cause brings people closer. Islam encourages cooperation with non Muslims for the common good of humanity (Quran 5:2).
27. Multi-ethnic Marriages
Some Fiqh books that dislike and discourage multi-ethnic marriages amongst Muslims are wrong because they conflict with the Sunnah of the Prophet and with the Quranic principle of all people being one.
For instance, the Fiqh manual Reliance of the Traveler, in a chapter on Kafa'a (compatibility), while recognizing that there should be no consideration of skin color in marriage, does mention that a match between a non-Arab man and an Arab woman is unsuitable (page 523).
I am not advising anyone to offer him or herself for a social experiment. But we must accept our children's choice with an open heart instead of resistance based on the false interpretation of compatibility (Kafa'a) offered by some Fiqh books.
28. Jihad with your taxes
Your personal jihad against racism must also include a collective effort against racism and nationalism. Your taxes are used to institute policies, some of which you may agree with and others that you may completely oppose. You can use your tax money to fight against racism by supporting policies or institutions that encourage respect for differences. We should support subsidies to human rights organizations dedicated to fighting racism, specifically.
29. Vote against racism
Support candidates who oppose racism and nationalism both within America and without. For example, former US president Bill Clinton strongly campaigned against the use of tobacco in America but ironically he also helped the US tobacco companies to achieve record profits by helping them sell and promote tobacco in the Third World. If tobacco is wrong for America, it is wrong for every other human being as well. Let's not tolerate "Cancer for other people."
30. Vote for multi-ethnicity in your Masjid
Make sure your Masjid in North America has a multi ethnic board and leadership. Follow the Prophet in engineering social change. He paired each Ansar and Muhajir as brothers as he started building the Islamic society of Madina.
31. Put money where your mouth is
There are a number of organizations dedicated to fighting racism in America at various levels. Support them by your donation. If you don't want to donate, establish your own organization against bigotry.
32. Raising race free children
Islam does not recognize race, but the society we live in does. Bridging this gap is the challenge of Muslim parenting.
- Choose to live in a multi-ethnic community. Children with multi-ethnic interaction grow up to be better human beings.
- Participate in your PTA with an antiracist agenda.
- Help your children feel good about themselves. Children who feel good about themselves are less likely to be prejudiced.
- Welcome children of all background in your home.
- Debrief them if they come home with a racial slur from the school.
33. Let's have a straight niyyah to please Allah
Let's make our intentions (niyyah) that we will strive to build human society based on the equality of all human beings as Allah has asked us to do. Insha Allah, He will reward us for each step we take to get ourselves, our community, and our society rid of racism and nationalism.
Conclusion
As Muslims who are dehumanized day and night by the media and opinion leaders, it is our duty to emerge as a better human being through this ordeal instead of engaging in the satanic game of counter dehumanization.
Whoever starts to look at others as lower beings first kills his own humanity. Prejudice, racism and nationalism are equal opportunity diseases. Muslims, Christians, Hindus and Jews, all have a choice of either using their teachings to rise up for the ideals of humanity or sink in the killing fields of nationalism.
Dehumanization of Native Americans contributed to their almost complete annihilation. Dehumanization of Africans as nations and individuals resulted in generational loss of life and heritage. Dehumanization of Jews and Gypsies is associated with the mass murder by Nazis. Dehumanization of Japanese Americans contributed to their being sent to internment camps in America. The dehumanization of Muslims in America after the 9/11 tragedy is responsible for the virtual internment camp Muslims in America live today and the tortures in Abu Gharib and abuse at Guantanamo Bay.
Unfortunately there is a demonization of America taking place in the world, which by and large does not know how a majority of Americans today feel about the historical wrongs done on their names. Even the strong American reaction to the Abu Gharib images did not slow down the harm neo-con policies are causing to American standing in the world.
Racism and nationalism are twin evils which have killed more people in last one hundred years than probably all the wars in last one thousand years including crusades and massacres of the infamous Genghis Khan.
Let's launch our personal Jihad against racism. May God be with you. Allahu Akbar.
http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30832
----------------------------
"Great minds have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
By Abdul Malik Mujahid
Alhamdu lillah, all Masjids in the world are open to all people. Muslims pray shoulder to shoulder with no regard to any national, ethnic, class or color differences. Islamic egalitarianism still gains converts from the untouchables of India to Malcolm X and Muhammad Ali in America. However, this dominant reality is sometimes marred by individual behavior, which is contrary to the ideals of Islam.
Some Muslims fall for the age-old trick of Satan and start playing the silly inferiority/superiority game. Some stereotype others and tolerate prejudice against other human beings, despite the fact that all human beings are equal, from the same man and woman. (Quran 49:13)
How should we save ourselves from falling into this trap? How should we help others stay above the killing fields of racism and nationalism? What can we do now to become a better human being? Here are some tips on how we can launch our personal Jihad against this disease.
The Prophet said: If one of you sees something evil he should change it with his hand. If he cannot, he should speak out against it, and if he cannot do even that he should at least detest it in his heart, this being the weakest form of faith (Sahih of Muslim).
1. Knowledge is power
Do we know what the Quran and Sunnah say about racism? The Quran established individual character as the criteria of success, not color, tribal or economic status of a person. The Prophet preached and established these ideals in the peace sanctuary of Madinah and Islamic society which he developed.
Let our parents, children, Islamic schools, and Imams learn and teach the ideals of Islam.
2. Ask the only One who can really help
We can get rid of racial and prejudicial attitudes within ourselves with the help of God.
Make sincere and focused Dua for those people and groups who remain oppressed, subject to humiliation, subject to difficult behavior. After all, Dua increases love between people (Hadith).
Also make Dua for yourself and others to gain an appreciation of others. Pray together with your family for those friends in the Masjid or at your job who are from other groups. And remember that dua without actions is nothing.
3. Hate the hatred
The Prophet never hated anyone. He neither hated Makkah nor the Makkans who tortured him, starved him and his people and killed his companions, may Allah be pleased with them. He continued to pray even for his worst enemies like Abu Jahl.
4. Make sincere Tawbah (repentance to God)
If we have hurt someone through our tongue or attitude, we need to seek God's forgiveness. It is also important to seek the personal forgiveness of that persons as well if s/he is within reach as an Islamic pre-requisite to seek God's forgiveness. There has to be a personal acknowledgment of wrongdoing and a commitment to change. This is done by turning to God and seeking His Forgiveness for looking down on other beings due to a false belief in someone's inferiority.
5. Watching Our Tongue
The Prophet said: Whoever can give me a guarantee for what is between his two jaws and between his two legs, I can assure him Paradise (Sahih of Bukhari).
Keeping this in mind, effort should be made to curb useless talk, which can lead to worse things like backbiting and slander of individuals and groups of people.
Defining backbiting, the Prophet said that backbiting is anything that you say about someone in his absence that may displease him. When he was asked by one of the Companions, ‘even if he is as I describe him?' he responded by saying, If he is as you describe him then you are guilty of backbiting, otherwise you are guilty of slander (which is worse than backbiting) (Sahih of Muslim).
To add emphasis to how awful slander is, consider that the Prophet said it is worse than adultery because if a person commits adultery, Allah can forgive him if he repents. But a slanderer will not be forgiven until the person he had been speaking about forgives him (Baihaqi).
6. No ethnic jokes please
Ethnic jokes are not innocent humor. They carry the virus of bigotry most of the time. Think about how hurt we feel when some comedians depict Muslims as terrorist.
Consider this verse of the Quran: "O you who believe! Let not a group scoff at another group, it may be that the latter are better than the former; nor let (some) women scoff at other women, it may be that the latter are better than the former, nor defame one another, nor insult one another by nicknames. How bad is it, to insult one's brother after having Faith. And whosoever does not repent, then such are indeed wrong doers" (Quran 49:11).
Such silly and hurtful jest clearly goes against the type of manners Allah and His Prophet expect from us. It's a sin in Islam to ridicule or laugh at any beings, and if they are a group, the sin is stronger.
7. Don't call people, Kalla, Gora, Desi, Chapta, Abd or Rafeeq
Muslims disliked being called Moslems, Moor, or Mohammaden. We insist that since we write our name Muslims that's how everyone should spell our name. So let's call other people with the names they like for themselves. Fair enough?
Alhamdu lillah most Muslims don't do this. But once in a while we hear names, which we need to challenge. The Urdu term "Kalla" is used by some for African-Americans. While it literally means "black", the way it is used most of the time is demeaning. The same is true for the Urdu term Chapta or Peela, which refers to the color, and features of South East Asian people. Gora in Urdu for Caucasians falls in the same category although it also just means a white person, but is used to convey historical distrust and betrayl of the white colonial lords. Desi on the other hand is mostly used to describe stereiotypical images of South Asians "curry smelling" Indians and "pakis." It is often used as a term of self hate in the second generation.
Similarly some Arabs use the term Abd to describe black people, despite the fact the Prophet catogarically prohibited use of this term. Another term Zingy is used for the same people in the demeaning way. Some Arabs use the term Rafeeq (literally comrade) for Pakistanis in demeaning way similar to how the "N word" is used in the west. Ibn al Khinzeeer (son of a pig), a reference to whoever you are angry with amongst some Arabs and specially towards Jews is not only unworthy of the followers of Prophet Muhammad, it is a direct violation of his command not to insult one another's parents (Sahih of Bukhari and Muslim).
Even the Islamic term Kafir has to be use with care. Not every non-believer is a Kafir. This Quranic term, regarding those who rejected Allah's guidance after recognizing it to be the truth, should not become a term of hate.
8. Challenge the offensive, names, jokes and comments
If someone uses a hurtful name in our presence, we might simply say, "Don't call him/her that. Call him/her by his/her name." If you are the victim, simply say "That kind of joke offends me," or say "You don't like to be called bad names and neither do I".
We should feel comfortable in pointing out unfairness. It is very rewarding in the eyes of Allah, since by challenging this we are following three of Allah's commands:
- Stand up against injustice
- Discourage the evil
- Don't call people with bad nicknames
- It's part of a Muslim's duty to enjoin the good and forbid the evil. Let's do it with wisdom and patience. Be polite but firm.
9. Do not generalize
If you observe something wrong in some persons' behavior, don't generalize it to their ethnic group. Attribute it to those persons not their group. For example, I have heard several times that Arabs in Chicago run liquor stores. While it is true that there may be 100 or so Arabs who have this type of Haram business, they are a small minority among hundreds and thousands of Arabs living in Chicago. Without condoning what they are doing, we must see that there are Muslims of other nationalities who are also involved in Haram businesses.
10. Defend the abused group
Note unique and special qualities in other people. Show the positive points of an ethnic group that is being made fun of. Whether it's the hospitality of the Arabs, the respect for elders in Indo-Pakistani culture, the resilience of African-Americans, for instance, point out the positive to those who don't want to see the other side of the coin.
If you're still tongue-tied, consider this Hadith: the Prophet said: If a man's Muslim brother is slandered in his presence, and he is capable of defending him, and does so, Allah will defend him in this world and in the next. But if he fails to defend him, Allah will destroy him in this world and in the next.
11. Speak everyone's language
What do you do when there are say, three people, one of whom speaks your native language and the other doesn't?
Too often, many of us do the wrong thing.
It creates suspicion and discomfort if you speak a language in front of others who may not understand it. Use a common language understandable to all. So if Br. Muneer and you both understand Arabic, but Sr. Yasmeen doesn't, speak in English instead, so she doesn't feel left out. If you observe this behavior tell them it's unfair. If you are the one who is doing the wrong thing, then don't defend it by saying, "you should learn our language".
The Prophet said: When three people are together, two should not talk secretly, leaving the third alone since this may grieve him. (Sahiah of Bukhari & Muslim).
12. Read about others
Read about people to gain positive insights into other cultures. Read what they have written about themselves. Read about, for instance, what African-Americans have contributed to America. Even better, read an autobiography like that of Malcolm X, which recounts the personal experience and struggles of one Muslim African-American. Much of what he has to say is also a reflection of the experience of other African-Americans.
13. Share your joy
Have you invited people other than your cultural group at an occasion of happiness in your family?
Whether it's Eid, a wedding or the Aqiqa of a newborn baby, expand your next guest list to include those of different backgrounds. Sharing joy is a great way for people of all ethno-cultural groups to bond.
14. Share your sorrow
Have you visited a sick colleague, class fellow or a neighbor of another ethnic group? Have you been to the funeral of other people?
Relationships are not only built on the good times, but on the hard ones as well. Visit the sick, attend funerals, and console those who need it, and don't reserve your sympathy to those of the same skin color or country.
15. The way to a man's heart is through his stomach
Have you learned to cook the food of other cultures? Have you shared your food with them?
I know people who have become Muslim because of the hospitality of Muslims. Food is a great way to bring people together, and to get to know others. Share food with neighbors. Food is power. Use it!
16. Smiling is a charity
Who do you smile at? Do you limit your grins to groups you know, especially your ethno-cultural group?
Smiling is charity (Sahiah of Abu Dawud and Tirmidhi), not just for your people. Expand your smile "directory" to include all. Smile opens close hearts.
17. Salam is for everyone
Quran demands that we greet others better than the way they have greeted us. (Quran 4:86).
After Juma do you say Salam and meet only those people you know or do you initiate a Salam to those from another ethnic group?
Consider this Hadith: The Prophet said: Those who are nearest to Allah are those who are the first to give a greeting (Sahiah of Abu Dawud, Tirmidhi).
Saying Salam is also a great way to increase your love for a fellow Muslim, no matter where they are from. Consider this Hadith: the Prophet said: You will not enter Heaven until you believe, and you will not believe until you love each other. Let me guide you to something which will cause you to love each other: spreading the greetings of peace (Assalamu alaikum) (Sahiah of Muslim).
18. Hug someone today
Have you ever experienced a hug by a Muslim you never knew? What a feeling. This one just for the sake of Allah. Try it on a Muslim in your masjid and then introduce yourself to him. He is your brother. Isn't he?
19. Beyond Salam
Alhamdu lillah, we see a lot of faces of different ethnic groups in masjids, but have we gone beyond Salam with them?
Have we invited this brother or sister to our home this year? Let's take the initiative to go beyond the Salam and invite a fellow human being of a different background over to our place. Don't wait for a specific occasion. Just invite them over for dinner, lunch, or a game of basketball.
20. A Masjid tour of other neighborhoods
While in a number of cities in America and South Africa, Masjids tend to become ethnically homogeneous due to the population patterns of the city; we can try to overcome this isolation.
Let's visit other neighborhoods and pray in a Masjid there. So if you're an Urdu speaking person, visit the predominantly Arab mosque. If you're an Arab visit the mostly African-American mosque. If you're Turkish, visit the mostly Bengali mosque.
Let's defy the neighborhood divisions which we did not create. Let's take our Sunday school children on field trips to different neighborhoods and Masjids. Providing opportunities for interaction with people of diverse groups instills understanding.
Studies show that children playing and working together toward common goals develop positive attitudes about one another.
21. Do your duty, but a little differently
Who do you usually give your Zakat to?
Is it just to your ethnic group or do you use it as one of the categories-to win over hearts? Plan to give your next Zakat to a community or individuals who are not of your ethno-cultural background. This will be a practical way to give of yourself to those who are your brothers and sisters, and those who are in need.
22. Strangers should find an open Masjid door
How are you at welcoming strangers in your Masjid?
Do you move forward in welcoming, guiding and introducing them to others or do you allow a stranger to remain a stranger while you busily chat with your own cultural group? Open your heart and arms to the new brother or sister who may have come to the Masjid with great difficulty. Welcome their choice and don't let them regret visiting your mosque.
The security staff at Masjids need to have sensitivity training as well.
23. Watch those expressions and attitudes
Did you see that twist of the mouth, or the raise of that eyebrow?
Sometimes, it's not just words, but facial expressions that also indicate ethno-racial degradation and intolerance. It's not enough for us to just avoid verbal jabs. Language is not just about words; it's about body language too.
24. Defend yourself
If you are the target of ethno-racial humor, slurs or attacks defend yourself.
- First seek refuge in Allah from Satan Following the Prophet's advice, if you are angry, remain silent, sit down, move away or make wudu.
- If you feel your security is being threatened seek any help available.
- If you are attacked defend yourself if you are capable of it.
- Document and pursue the case with local police, the department of human resources and anti-hate groups.
God tolerates a person who is being wronged to respond in the same coin but He prefers us to be better: "The recompense for an evil is an evil like thereof, but whoever forgives and makes reconciliation, his reward is due from Allah. Verily, He likes not the Zalimun (oppressors)" (Quran 42:40).
An ex-Marine member of the white supremacist movement the Ku Klux Klan became Muslim due partly to the polite and confident response of a Muslim doctor to his racist remarks calling him a "dog eater".
This is an example of following Allah's instructions that ask us to respond to evil with something which is better.
25. Stand up for justice
Take an active stand against injustices like profiling and discrimination in the workplace or at schools. Speak out against someone or a group being paid less because of their national background.
"O you who believe! Stand out firmly for justice, as witnesses to Allah, even though it is against yourselves, or your parents, or your kin, be he rich or poor, Allah is a better Protector to both (than you) are. So follow not the lusts (of your hearts), lest you may avoid justice, and if you distort your witness or refuse to give it, verily, Allah is Ever Well-Acquainted with what you do" (Quran 4:135).
26. Work with other anti-racism groups
Volunteer time to organizations and groups which are working for an anti-racism agenda or for social justice. All the prophets were sent to help people take a stand for establishing justice (Quran 57:25). Working for a common cause brings people closer. Islam encourages cooperation with non Muslims for the common good of humanity (Quran 5:2).
27. Multi-ethnic Marriages
Some Fiqh books that dislike and discourage multi-ethnic marriages amongst Muslims are wrong because they conflict with the Sunnah of the Prophet and with the Quranic principle of all people being one.
For instance, the Fiqh manual Reliance of the Traveler, in a chapter on Kafa'a (compatibility), while recognizing that there should be no consideration of skin color in marriage, does mention that a match between a non-Arab man and an Arab woman is unsuitable (page 523).
I am not advising anyone to offer him or herself for a social experiment. But we must accept our children's choice with an open heart instead of resistance based on the false interpretation of compatibility (Kafa'a) offered by some Fiqh books.
28. Jihad with your taxes
Your personal jihad against racism must also include a collective effort against racism and nationalism. Your taxes are used to institute policies, some of which you may agree with and others that you may completely oppose. You can use your tax money to fight against racism by supporting policies or institutions that encourage respect for differences. We should support subsidies to human rights organizations dedicated to fighting racism, specifically.
29. Vote against racism
Support candidates who oppose racism and nationalism both within America and without. For example, former US president Bill Clinton strongly campaigned against the use of tobacco in America but ironically he also helped the US tobacco companies to achieve record profits by helping them sell and promote tobacco in the Third World. If tobacco is wrong for America, it is wrong for every other human being as well. Let's not tolerate "Cancer for other people."
30. Vote for multi-ethnicity in your Masjid
Make sure your Masjid in North America has a multi ethnic board and leadership. Follow the Prophet in engineering social change. He paired each Ansar and Muhajir as brothers as he started building the Islamic society of Madina.
31. Put money where your mouth is
There are a number of organizations dedicated to fighting racism in America at various levels. Support them by your donation. If you don't want to donate, establish your own organization against bigotry.
32. Raising race free children
Islam does not recognize race, but the society we live in does. Bridging this gap is the challenge of Muslim parenting.
- Choose to live in a multi-ethnic community. Children with multi-ethnic interaction grow up to be better human beings.
- Participate in your PTA with an antiracist agenda.
- Help your children feel good about themselves. Children who feel good about themselves are less likely to be prejudiced.
- Welcome children of all background in your home.
- Debrief them if they come home with a racial slur from the school.
33. Let's have a straight niyyah to please Allah
Let's make our intentions (niyyah) that we will strive to build human society based on the equality of all human beings as Allah has asked us to do. Insha Allah, He will reward us for each step we take to get ourselves, our community, and our society rid of racism and nationalism.
Conclusion
As Muslims who are dehumanized day and night by the media and opinion leaders, it is our duty to emerge as a better human being through this ordeal instead of engaging in the satanic game of counter dehumanization.
Whoever starts to look at others as lower beings first kills his own humanity. Prejudice, racism and nationalism are equal opportunity diseases. Muslims, Christians, Hindus and Jews, all have a choice of either using their teachings to rise up for the ideals of humanity or sink in the killing fields of nationalism.
Dehumanization of Native Americans contributed to their almost complete annihilation. Dehumanization of Africans as nations and individuals resulted in generational loss of life and heritage. Dehumanization of Jews and Gypsies is associated with the mass murder by Nazis. Dehumanization of Japanese Americans contributed to their being sent to internment camps in America. The dehumanization of Muslims in America after the 9/11 tragedy is responsible for the virtual internment camp Muslims in America live today and the tortures in Abu Gharib and abuse at Guantanamo Bay.
Unfortunately there is a demonization of America taking place in the world, which by and large does not know how a majority of Americans today feel about the historical wrongs done on their names. Even the strong American reaction to the Abu Gharib images did not slow down the harm neo-con policies are causing to American standing in the world.
Racism and nationalism are twin evils which have killed more people in last one hundred years than probably all the wars in last one thousand years including crusades and massacres of the infamous Genghis Khan.
Let's launch our personal Jihad against racism. May God be with you. Allahu Akbar.
http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/showthread.php?t=30832
----------------------------
"Great minds have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." - Albert Einstein
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
MUSLIM SPEAKER
Email to: SpeakerMikeGhouse@gmail.com
Voice of Moderate Muslims
Voice of Moderate Muslims
SUCCESSFUL NAATIA MUSHAERA ON 2.21.14
Moderate Islam Speaker
Moderate Islam Speaker
CIVIL DIALOGUE
The people in Dallas are making an effort to understand and clean their own hearts first, when we are free from bias, it would be easy to share that with others. Islam teaches us in so many ways to "respect the otherness of others" and it is time we find simple practical ways of doing it.
