Showing posts with label Dallas Islam. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dallas Islam. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 29, 2011

A challenge to Muslims, are we fit to be Americans?

http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2011/03/my-challenge-to-muslims-are-we-fit-to.html
The answer is obvious, most of us are and those who aren’t need to catch up, it is your home, your nation and your permanent address, most likely you will be buried here, you can be rest assured that you grave will remain untouched for centuries.

We need to protect and defend the very culture that allowed us to be who we are and who we want to be. Other than democracies only the privileged achieve their dreams. America has welcomed us, embraced us and we need to do our part; to be participants and contributors towards the peace, security and prosperity of our nation.

A decade ago, I had challenged the “excuse producers” among us that the Jews control the media. I had said baloney to that and took upon the challenge to prove it otherwise. Thank God a bunch of us formed MRRP Muslim Rapid Response Team in February 2005 and fired of letters to the media and received the coverage, and at least the public got to hear a different point of view when accusations were leveled against the Mosque in Richardson including Imam Zia Kavakci.

I was told that the Indian Muslims can never be the Prime Minister of India, I said baloney to that and experimented forming Dallas Indians group with 1700 Members in it, literally every  “who is who” among Indians are a part of the group,  with about 25 Muslims in the group. As long as we are fair and represent all Indians, any Indian can be the Prime Minister of India; so far we do not have that caliber. Those who can are pulled down by the fanatics among us while the good ones simply watch and do nothing.

We assume that we will not be given a space in the conservative media, I said baloney to that and wrote articles in conservative magazines including the front page hate site where in I have called Spencer “misinformed” and he has published it under the title “One Islam”. Been on Sean Hannity, a tough battlefield where we will not be given the space. Over a period of one year and 20 appearance on his show and 16 on his nationally syndicated radio show, I have moved from being slaughtered (a few Muslims actually liked it) to being assertive to get my words as the last words.  I have told Hannity that he was wrong and have been aggressive with Brigitte Gabrielle, Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller and have called on them to tell the truth to the American People. Hannity does not agree with me but values my take on the issues.

Why am I writing this?

It is to encourage a few among us to spend the time in getting in to the media and changing the false perceptions about Islam and Muslims. We can co it, if we quit wasting time on things that don’t matter in the discussion groups.

I am writing this particularly to those who discount it as “self glorification” I am challenging your capabilities to get involved, why don’t you do it?  I know you can do it better than most of us, but you are not willing to do and instead spend time in back biting.

Thank God, over 1000 article have been published on Islam and Pluralism in papers such as Tehran Times, Arab News, Jakarta post… and of course several ones in the United States including Washington post, Huffington and few other including my home town paper, Dallas Morning News.

I have introduced a few aspects of Islam in most of the pieces I write; the articles are not about Islam, but about the society in general and have added the Islamic take on issues. I was told that non-Muslims have come to appreciate the little knowledge here and little there about Islam and aborbing the positive values of Islam one at at time, while a few Muslims have appreciated learning about the wisdom of other religions.  We are all part of the large familiy of religions and we must know each other (Q 49:13).

Here is a list of 25 ( of the 33) articles I have written along with others in Dallas Morning news in the last six months, please log in and respond to the notes, have your presence in every aspect of the society.   


  1. TEXAS FAITH: Did the King James Version of the Bible change the world?

  1. Texas Faith: Should women be required to have a sonogram before undergoing an abortion?

  1. TEXAS FAITH: What to make of Rep. Peter King's hearings into Muslim American radicalization?

  1. TEXAS FAITH: How do we keep the debt from limiting the future of younger Americans?

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Will Facebook kill the church?

  1. TEXAS FAITH: The Blessings and Burdens of Life Online
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/02/post-93.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Religious institutions and assimilating immigrants
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/02/texas-faith-religious-institut.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: How would you advise President Obama on dealing with leaders like Hosni Mubarak?

  1. TEXAS FAITH: What's the role of religious faith when there are no good choices?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/02/texas-faith-whats-the-role-of-2.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: What can religious groups do to help along the Mexican border?
     http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/01/texas-faith-what-can-religious.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Why do some religious affiliations produce more political leaders?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/01/texas-faith-why-do-some-religi.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: What do you do when you see someone showing signs of mental deterioration?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/01/texas-faith-what-do-you-do-whe.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Which religion stories merited more and better coverage?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2011/01/texas-faith-which-religion-sto.html

  1. Texas Faith: Why not worry about your theology?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/12/texas-faith-why-not-worry-abou.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: How should chaplains deal with Don't Ask, Don't Tell repeal?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/12/texas-faith-how-should-chaplai.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Was Oklahoma out of line with Sharia amendment?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/11/texas-faith-was-oklahoma-out-o.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: How do you view God?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/11/texas-faith-how-do-you-view-go.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Why does fear sell on the campaign trail?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/11/texas-faith-why-does-fear-sell.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Does firing Juan Williams improve our understanding of religious diversity?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/10/does-the-firing-of-juan-willia.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Should Christians (and other non-Hindus) beware of yoga?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/10/texas-faith-should-non-hindus.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Why do our faiths shape some political views, but not others?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/10/texas-faith-why-do-our-faiths.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Why is there such a lack of religious knowledge?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/10/texas-faith-pew-forum-study-on.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Why do we pray for Christopher Hitchens?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/09/texas-faith-why-do-we-pray-for.html

  1. TEXAS FAITH: Should faithful focus on charity or justice?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/09/texas-faith-should-faithful-fo.html

  1. Texas Faith: What religion stories should the media focus on?
    http://religionblog.dallasnews.com/archives/2010/09/texas-faith-the-media-and-reli.html
Mike Ghouse, President of America Together foundation is committed to building cohesive societies and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day, and is available to speak at your place of worship, work or in seminars and conferences.

Through the Foundation for Pluralism, Mike champions the idea of co-existence through respecting and accepting the otherness of other, and is committed to nurturing the pluralistic ideals embedded in Islam through the World Muslim Congress.  He is a speaker thinker and a writer on the topics of pluralism, cohesive societies, Islam, interfaith, India and Peace. His work is reflected in 4 website's and 27 Blogs at http://www.mikeghouse.net/

Thursday, February 24, 2011

Muslims Condemn Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari

It is a serious issue for the society that we give credence to idiots like Khalid Ali-M Aldawsari who acts like he was inspired by religion.

He writes in his dairy, "You who created mankind. Grant me martyrdom for your sake and make jihad easy for me only in your path," according to court records.
Religion inspires one to be a good human and not a criminal. Quraan forbids killing and forbids suicide.

As Muslims we condemn this mind set and as Americans we should not be granting the religious shield to these criminals.    

This man Aldawsari is going to make the life difficult for Saudi Nationals going to schools in the USA. Should the Saudi Embassy keep track of her Citizens?  Should we require foreign embassies to monitor their own? The second part is he is also going to make life difficult for Muslim students and finally, he is a crackpot, do we need to blame his nationality and his religion for his acts?

Breaking story at: 
http://www.aolnews.com/2011/02/24/saudi-student-in-texas-charged-with-plotting-terrorist-attack/?icid=main%7Chtmlws-bv-w%7Cdl2%7Csec1_lnk3%7C203180

Thursday, July 1, 2010

Burqa Ban – Hannity, Gabrielle and Ghouse on Fox TV

On Hannity Show June 29, 2010
Mike Ghouse live from Nashville, Tennessee. Of course we could not get all the talking points in to the show, but you can read it.Let's do some serious critical thinking. French commies now want to tell their people what they eat, believe, pray and WEAR? How dumb!


Saturday, May 8, 2010

Sacramento's Pakistani Americans declare war on terrorism

Three ways of looking at the situation;

As Muslims we need to continue to remain alert, if we have an inkling of some one who 'wishes' to hurt another being, it is our religious duty to pounce on him/her and stop it at once unequivocally. The Qur'aan says saving one life is like saving the whole humanity. The only sin God does not forgive is shirk, that is assigning some one to do God's job; one of them is to give life and take life. This is where we need to do our Jihad, to prevent a Bin Laden or another idiot to take over God's job. This is Shirk, unforgivable by God.

Continued: http://mikeghouseforamerica.blogspot.com/2010/05/pakistani-americans-declare-war-on.html

Monday, February 15, 2010

Obama names Indian-American Muslim as special envoy

Obama names Indian-American Muslim as special envoy

Rashad Hussain is an activist par-excellence from my home town Dallas and is greatly influenced by the Indian ethos of Pluralism and inclusiveness. He would fit right in with President's Obama’s idea of one world, where we respect every nation and their sovereignty.

He will strengthen the pluralistic values of America, and President’s desire to encourage the community of nations to review our values of Liberty, Justice and co-existence as catalysts for prosperity. As a Special envoy to the OIC, Rashad will initiate a positive relationship between America and the Muslim nations, I am proud of his heritage; an Indian, a Muslim and an American.

We have to maintain a healthy balance within our communities and with all nations, what is good for America has got to be good for the world and vice versa to sustain the equilibrium, he is the right man for the job. May God bless him in uplifting America’s role in creating a better world for the good of all.


~~~

Monday, February 1, 2010

Can Women Be Imams?

http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2010/02/can-women-be-imams.html

Dr. Krausen’s presentation evokes the God given intellect in us. She demurs, “if this is a sign of a development towards a more rational approach to the issue, or whether it is merely an attempt to be politically correct.”, indeed, It is my observation over the last 10 years of work, debates and discussion forums, that it is a development. My comments follow the article - Mike Ghouse

Can Women Be Imams?
Halima Krausen

In the face of the controversy over Amina Wadud's Friday prayer, Muslim scholar Halima Krausen argues that we should have the courage to ask our own questions, to study the matter conscientiously and to reach conclusions which make sense in our times

Koranic traditions must be taken seriously, Krausen says, but it is also necessary to ask questions about their contemporaneity too. Following the Friday prayers led by Dr Amina Wadud in New York on 18th March and the emotional public debate to which that event led, I have repeatedly been asked for my view on the matter. I believe the issue may seem simple, but is more complicated than it appears. So I'd like to contribute a few ideas to the discussion, rather than put forward a clear opinion.

The first point to make is that it's absolutely unclear what we're talking about. Far from defining a clear "rank," the term "Imâm" is used for a wide spectrum of different meanings.

The word Imâm is related to the word umm, "mother"

In the Koran, the word is used in a more fundamental way and refers to leading exemplary figures like Abraham (Sura 2:124) or the judges of the Children of Israel (Sura 32:23-24) or the potential of all upright people in general (Sura 25:74; 28:4-5); but it can also refer misleadingly to characters like Pharaoh and others like him, who lead one "to the fire" (Sura 28:39-41).

The word Imâm stems from the root "amma" – move forward, lead, be in front – and is related to the word "umm" – mother – which goes beyond the biological aspect towards the meaning "Source, basis, being."

The second apparently unclear point in the current debate is one of methodology. Both supporters and critics of the Friday prayers in New York draw hasty conclusions either from specific traditions (since the Koran itself doesn't deal with the issue directly) or from assumed principles, without examining their background or taking account of their context.

"The gates of legal innovation are closed"

One of the most frequent arguments is that "this has never happened before and has never been considered possible in the past, and therefore should never happen."

There is indeed a methodological principle called Istishâb – the extension of a legal ruling – which applies in cases where the original conditions for the ruling remain the same. This prevents legal and social experiments from being carried out for their own sake, and requires urgent reasons for change, especially regarding prayers and services ('Ibâdât).

This principle has been tacitly overemphasised in Sunni schools of legal thought, and this overemphasis has been strengthened by the doctrine that allegedly "the gates of Ijtihâd (Islamic legal innovation) are closed" – a view which has often led to legal inflexibility.

The ontological equality of man and woman in the Koran

But there have been changes even in liturgical matters: while we assume that we are following the example of the prophet in such matters as ritual prayer (which in principle we no doubt do), in fact we follow the standardised instructions of Muslim teachers from the formative period of Islam, whose details can vary from one school to another. And at least in the diaspora, we tend to feel the need to simplify even those differences for the sake of Muslim unity, rather than to use the dynamic which they offer as a way of deepening the riches of our spiritual and cultural life.

On the other hand, the supporters of change cite the ontological equality of man and woman in the Koran and the fact that the same terms are used to refer to their practical and spiritual responsibilities (e.g. Sura 4:1, 33:35, 9:71 etc.). They overlook impatiently the development of Islamic tradition in the past and demand immediate reform in the direction of justice and equality here and now.

Islam knows no hierarchy of office. All the same, in the classical Fiqh, questions of priority regarding who should lead communal prayers were often not decided solely on the basis of knowledge, skill in recitation or piety. Issues of social hierarchy also played a role.

Women may lead prayers – for women

Within the patriarchal structures which ruled in the largest part of the Muslim world at that time, the idea that a woman might lead public prayer would have been seen as very strange.

Most schools of law consider that women can lead prayers for women. There are tendencies which discourage woman from doing so, and, in the case of Mâlikite school, prohibit them from doing so, evidently on the basis of a Hadîth according to which "a people which entrusts its matters to a woman can never win success."

It's an argument which is often called upon to support opposition to women holding positions of leadership, but it's an argument which neither fulfils the necessary criteria of authenticity, nor can it be brought to conform to the image of the Queen of Sheba as presented in the Koran, nor does it conform to the principle that men and women, as mutual friends and allies (Awliyâ'), "should offer each other good and deny each other evil" (Sura 9:71).

At the same time there are confirmed reports that the wives of the prophet certainly led prayers for women, which are verified by details such as that the (female) Imâm stood in the rows together with the other women.

Some scholars said women may lead mixed prayers

We are far from knowing all the debates of the past on this subject. We only have access to that which was recorded in writing and has been preserved. Indeed there were scholars who had nothing against women leading even mixed ritual prayer, among them Abu Thawr al-Kalbi (died 876), Abu Isma'il al-Muzani (died 879), al-Isfahani (died 884), the founder of the Zâhirite school, at-Tabari (died 923), or Ibn Taymiyya (died 1328).

We don't know many details of the arguments they used, but we also have no evidence that their positions called forth a storm of protest in their time or that they were condemned by their contemporaries. This could be because the cases they mentioned were regarded as exceptional (for example, that a woman may lead the Tarawîh prayers during the month of Ramadan when no man is available who knows the Koran by heart, or that a woman may lead her husband, their children and their slaves when she is the most learned of them).

One could argue that the Tarawîh prayers are not obligatory and that prayers with the family are not public, and that one should not transform exceptions into rules. On the other hand, one could understand such exceptions as confirmation of the theory that it's not reasons of theology or principle, but social reasons which are decisive in these rulings.

Between prejudiced doubt and uncritical approval

The case of Umm Waraqa is often given as a precedent in the current debate. In the various versions of her story, which all add a bit to the picture, we learn that she was one of the women who knew the Koran by heart, and that the Prophet called on her to be the Imâm of the members of her household (Ahl Dârihâ).

Critics have tried to prove that there are weak points in one or other of the Isnâd (chains of transmission) which put the authenticity of the tradition into doubt. On the other hand, the example is used uncritically to back the demand for equal rights for women in leading public prayers.

Between these extreme positions, a debate is taking place as to who the members of her household were and whether the situation was a private or a public one.

A Development Towards A More Rational Approach?

There seem to be no examples of women who led Friday prayers, but there were many women who became famous as preachers on other occasions. We only have to look in the classical collections of biographies to find them.

But we would be deceiving ourselves if we left it at that and simply ignored the many statements which say, for example, that the voice of women is seductive, that the welfare of a woman is dependent on the satisfaction of her husband, that a woman's memory and intellect are inferior, or that women cause temptation and disturbance (Fitnah). These views come from Koran verses taken out of context, traditions and general assumptions.

In fact I'm surprised at the fact that such arguments are scarcely to be found in the current debate, and I ask myself if this is a sign of a development towards a more rational approach to the issue, or whether it is merely an attempt to be politically correct.

Islam's rich cultural variety

The debate over the role of the woman as Imâm is symptomatic. What we really need is a critical evaluation of the situation as required by the Muslim Ummah.

To start with, aside from the stereotypes, there isn't anything like "the position of woman in Muslim society." Parallel to the various possibilities for women in the service which are dependent on the views of specific schools of law and local customs, there are, between Morocco and Indonesia, between Central Asia and sub-Saharan Africa, varied climatic and economic and political conditions (which, to be sure, may not necessarily be just), historical experiences, and social and family structures, varying from a clearly patriarchal system to matrilineal structures with every shading in between. All are rooted in the same Koranic and prophetic sources and all make their own contribution to a rich cultural variety.

There's an astonishing contradiction between the high proportion of women students at universities in Muslim countries and the high proportion of illiterate women in the same countries, between the expression of high regard for women and the practical difficulties put in the way of giving women a bigger say in decision making processes, between the lip service paid to the delicacy of women and the off-putting ugliness of the women's areas in many mosques or the rough comments on the duty of obedience of a women towards her husband.

In my own daily work with Muslims in Europe, I meet people from different Arab countries, many of them students or refugees with different backgrounds as far as their education and political attitudes are concerned. Many of them insist on strict separation of the sexes, which may not always be a disadvantage, since it often encourages initiative and solidarity among women.

Does difference necessarily lead to fragmentation?

I am often surprised by the support given to daughters who want to study, and by the attempts in other families to restrict and control their daughters. There are Turkish migrants who are often strongly influenced by the clear role expectations of their rural background, while the next generation works its way through a labyrinth of values and norms between the cultures as they wrestle with their identity.

Many Muslims, especially women, are frightened. They are frightened of difference: they fear it may lead to the fragmentation of their society, to such an extent that they become incapable of dealing with contradictions and differences of opinion.

Many Muslims, especially women, are angry – angry about stereotypes from outside and ignorance and superstition inside the community to which they are repeatedly challenged to react. This gives them scarcely any time for constructive thought. They are angry, because they feel themselves cheated of their spiritual and cultural inheritance, and they are angry about the lack of any possibility of working at the development of a contemporary interpretation and application of the values they hold.

What are our options?

Should we, like uncritical slaves, obey everything which is declared in the tone of command, without questioning the sense of it? Or should we work towards the Koranic ideal under which men and women are partners (Sura 9:71), with the same moral values and religious duties (Sura 33:35) and the same duty to work together to build a just society?

And on another level: should we make women's education and the improvement of women's position in society into a priority, both in the general society and in the Muslim community in particular? Or should we push forward with symbolic actions from which one might expect that they will have an influence on the situation? Or are there perhaps yet other ways to improve things?

Final comments

Currently there are more questions than answers. Ijtihâd is necessary in many areas, and there are many legal rules which have moved away from the spirit of the Koran, even if they are founded on some fragment of the text.

Aside from that, the teaching that Mohammed is the final messenger of God is not the same as saying that the situation of the past must never change. It's much more the starting point for a more mature way of contributing to the welfare of human society.

I certainly don't want to be misunderstood as meaning that I lack respect for any of the scholars of the past. Whatever their position, they have tried hard not simply to follow isolated statements or hasty conclusions from precedent, but to work systematically within the framework of their respective methodology, experience and society.

In the same spirit, we should not follow them blindly. We should have the courage to ask our own questions, to study the matter conscientiously and to reach conclusions which make sense in our times.

Halima Krausen is a Muslim scholar and lecturer for the Initiative for Islamic Studies in Hamburg, Germany. (Translation from German: Michael Lawton)

~~~~-

Mike Ghouse comments:

Dr. Krausen’s presentation evokes the God given intellect in us. She demurs, “if this is a sign of a development towards a more rational approach to the issue, or whether it is merely an attempt to be politically correct.”, indeed, It is my observation over the last 10 years of work, debates and discussion forums, that it is a development.

My comments follow the article - Mike Ghouse

She asks, “ Should we, like uncritical slaves, obey everything which is declared in the tone of command, without questioning the sense of it? Or should we work towards the Koranic ideal under which men and women are partners (Sura 9:71), with the same moral values and religious duties (Sura 33:35) and the same duty to work together to build a just society?” The Neocon Muslims usually are afraid of the freedom; they find safety and security in being uncritical slaves. A new thought frightens them; I wish God had made them angels, completely free from the burden of thinking and taking the responsibility.

I agree with her that most of “These views come from Koran verses taken out of context, traditions and general assumptions.” And, “One of the most frequent arguments is that "this has never happened before and has never been considered possible in the past, and therefore should never happen."

Women and men are created to be full partners in life, as Dr. Krausen quotes, “should we work towards the Koranic ideal under which men and women are partners (Sura 9:71), with the same moral values and religious duties (Sura 33:35) and the same duty to work together to build a just society?”

Not all, but many a Muslims are afraid to speak up, even for the sake of discussion. The one who speaks up gets fiercely pounced, so he or she never speaks again. This is how the bullies shut out much of the freedom. I have consistently observed this among Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others. By the way, it is not about Muslims, it is about men, no matter what faith they wear, their phobias are the same.

For some men, the only source of feeling superior (false security) is by considering women to be inferior, a dumb logic, they are so weak that their whole being gets threatened by even feeling their spouse or other woman to be on par. Women are not inferior to men in any form or shape, on the Day of Judgment; it is their deeds that will be accounted for just as much as men’s deeds. A good deed is what you do to make Allah’s creation better; people and environment.

A generation or two from now, it may become a common thing for women to lead mixed gender prayers, Qur’aan orders men to lower their gaze and focus on piety, and pray to God and not look at women’s back. That is a ridiculous argument and those men should wear full Burqa with solid cover on their faces. Indeed, it is a test to those few men, to check their intention of going to the Mosque; to pray or to loaf.

~~~-
Mohsin Maqbool Elahi "Can women be Imams?" is an extremely difficult question to answer. Besides, I am no Islamic scholar to do that. However, I do know that it is NOT allowed for men to offer their prayers behind women due to various and obvious reasons.

However, where the question "what are our options?" is concerned, we should definitely make women's education and ... See Morethe improvement of women's position in society into a priority, both in the general society and in the Muslim community in particular. Pakistan lacks far behind many other Islamic states where these are concerned. Come to think of it even the men stand nowhere near in comparison.

The situation in our rural areas is even worse which is why entire families migrate to urban areas looking for labour. And those who can't find work or rather don't want to work turn to crime.

I am surprised that you being a Muslim scholar and lecturer for Islamic studies use 'Mohammed' for the Prophet's spelling when it should be Muhammad (peace be upon him). 'Mohammed' is an anglicised version which is not used anymore for his name. Besides, Muslims are always supposed to write 'peace be upon him' after his name in veneration which you have not. This is the least we can do to show our profound respect for the final messenger of Allah.
And, please, no offense meant.

Sadikha Hassain I strnongly beleive follow the rules and regulations of Quran and Huzoor Momammed sav. why to make changes and additions?

Amina Akram Faizan bhai ,the expereinces i ahve had last few days are so abrupt that , its sick and sick of people all around here.

Mike Ghouse - Women and men are created to be full partners in life, as Dr. Krausen quotes, “should we work towards the Koranic ideal under which men and women are partners (Sura 9:71), with the same moral values and religious duties (Sura 33:35) and the same duty to work together to build a just society?”

Not all, but many a Muslims are afraid to speak up, even for the sake of discussion. The one who speaks up gets fiercely pounced, so he or she never speaks again. This is how the bullies shut out much of the freedom. I have consistently observed this among Muslims, Jews, Hindus and others. By the way, it is not about Muslims, it is about men, no matter what faith they wear, their phobias are the same.

For some men, the only source of feeling superior (false security) is by considering women to be inferior, a dumb logic, they are so weak that their whole being gets threatened by even feeling their spouse or other woman to be on par. Women are not inferior to men in any form or shape, on the Day of Judgment; it is their deeds that will be accounted for just as much as men’s deeds. A good deed is what you do to make Allah’s creation better; people and environment. ... See More

A generation or two from now, it may become a common thing for women to lead mixed gender prayers, Qur’aan orders men to lower their gaze and focus on piety, and pray to God and not look at women’s back. That is a ridiculous argument and those men should wear full Burqa with solid cover on their faces. Indeed, it is a test to those few men, to check their intention of going to the Mosque; to pray or to loaf?

41 minutes ago · Mike Ghouse - Mohsin, in academic circles, the name Muhammad is commonly written with or without (pbuh). Even in Quraan where ever Prophet's name has appeared, there is no (pbuh). It is our culture that we use. It is not a religious requirement. It is fully acceptalbe to just write Muhammad, he is our prophet, no matter how many suffixes or prefixes we add, it... See More is not enough. It is ok not to add them as well.

By the way, Muhammad is as anglicized as Mohammed. There is no international ruling to use one or the other. I understand it is only in Pakistan it is has to be written in certain way, that is not the case in other nations.
34 minutes ago · Mike Ghouse - I laud Dr. Amina Wadud for restoring the rights of the women, that Islam initiated to begin with. Dr. Wadud, Asra Nomani, and Naeema Ghafoor were on my Radio show on the day of the Juma prayers several years ago.

It was a shame and embarrassment that a few right wingers, intolerant and insecure Muslims held ugly placards outside the prayer.... ... See MoreThe women were afraid of doing the prayers in the Mosque, so they went to the church. Reminded me of the persecution the early Muslims endured in praying in public places and they hid and prayed.

Amina Akram We are thinking of women leading the prayer , when can the women be allowed in the mosque.

Mike Ghouse - Amina, it is a shame that we can pray together in Mecca and not our own mosques. Fortunately, in the US, women and men go to prayers together, but pray in two different separated areas.. it will change in a few years, when our girls will not put up with up it. Although a few men act ugly in Allah's house, but a few have dared to change it too. May Allah give the courage to women to stand up for their rights.

- Please watch Asra Nomanis Public Television documentary ... the Morgan Town Mosque or something like that.

- My late wife Najma and I were challenged to enter the Jumia Masjid in New Delhi, we went any way and the Nayab Imam was staring at us, we did our Nafl prayers together. ... See More

- Najma and I steppted into the Mosque on the left to Taj Mahal, the Imam stood in my way, I asked hm to produce a document of ownership or let me pray in Allah's house as I would pray in Mecca... Najma and I prayed together in that Mosque. He later came and we had a long chat... he was OK.
a few seconds ago

More comments at: http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=285316480717#
~~~

MOHAMMAD IRTAZA ADDS:

Salamun Alykum.

Both believing men and women shall attend the Congregational Prayer as understood from this verse - "O you who believe, when the Congregational Prayer (Salat Al-Jumuah) is announced on Friday, you shall hasten to the commemoration of God, and drop all business. This is better for you, if you only knew." (Quran 62:9) Please note that this verse is addressed not only to believing man, but also to believing woman.

Leading a Congregational Prayer is a righteous work. The Quran recognizes that men and women are endowed with unique qualities (Quran 4:32). Yet, the Quran teaches us that men and women are equal and they can do any righteous work for which they will be rewarded - "Their Lord responded to them: "I never fail to reward any worker among you for any work you do, be you male or female-you are equal to one another. Thus, those who immigrate, and get evicted from their homes, and are persecuted because of Me, and fight and get killed, I will surely remit their sins and admit them into gardens with flowing streams." Such is the reward from God. God possesses the ultimate reward." (Quran 3:195) Based on this verse, male and female are equal, and an woman may lead a prayer since it is a righteous work.

One of the purpose of the Congregational Sermon (Khutba) is to advocate righteousness and forbid evil. The believing men and women are allies of one another and they can advocate righteousness and forbid evil as understood from this verse - "The believing men and women are allies of one another. They advocate righteousness and forbid evil, they observe the Contact Prayers (Salat) and give the obligatory charity (Zakat), and they obey God and His messenger. They will be showered by God's mercy. God is Almighty, Most Wise." (Quran 9:71) Since, this verse does not specify the type of audiences, a woman may deliver sermon or advocate righteousness or forbid evil to a group of male and female worshipers.

But, can a woman really take a leadership role ? The Quran detailed out the story of Queen Sheba (Quran 27:22-44). She represented a democratic leadership who consulted with her people before making decisions - "She said, "O my advisers, I have received an honorable letter. It is from Solomon, and it is, "In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful." Proclaiming: "Do not be arrogant; come to me as submitters."" She said, "O my advisers, counsel me in this matter. I am not deciding anything until you advise me." (Quran 27:29-32) After witnessing what God gave to Solomon, she became Muslim. The Quran does not indicate that her leadership role is offensive.

But, is it an innovation if woman leads a Prayer with men present in the Congregation? The Quran is a complete(Quran 6:38), perfect (Quran 18:1-2) and fully detailed (Quran 6:114) book. The Quran has no such ruling that leads us to believe that woman cannot be an Imam with men present in the congregation. Please remember that the Quran condemns religious innovations. Any religious ruling not authorized by God Almighty is an innovation as understood from this verse - "You do not worship beside Him except innovations that you have made up, you and your parents. God has never authorized such idols. All ruling belongs to God, and He has ruled that you shall not worship except Him. This is the perfect religion, but most people do not know." (Quran 12:40)

Can you imagine how many religious innovations were made up by our respected imams and scholars just by quoting religious edicts (fatwas) !? The ancient religious scholar manufactured the following religious edict which was falsely attributed to the Prophet to discourage women to go to a mosque.- "Narrated Ibn Umar: The prophet (p.b.u.h) said, "Allow women to go to the Mosque at night." (Vol 2, Book 13, No 22, Bukhari hadith translated by M. Muhsin Khan) !!!!! The following modern religious edict is fabricated by Assembly of Muslim Jurists in America (AMJA) because they failed to resist the right of women to go to a mosque - "A unanimous consensus for the entire Ummah (Muslim community) in the east and west (is) that women cannot lead the Friday prayer nor can they deliver the (sermon). Whoever takes part in such a prayer, then his prayer is nullified, whether he was an Imam or a follower." !!!!!!!!! So, according to the new fatwa, woman may now go to a mosque but she cannot lead a prayer !!!!!

Is there any possibility that the ruling on "woman as imam" existed during the time of Abraham, since God Almighty taught him how to offer salat prayer (Quran 21:73) and Muhammed was enjoined to follow the religion of Abraham (Quran 16:123) ? We simply do not know how women were treated during the time of Abraham. We do not know if God Almighty decreed equality of law (Quran 3:195) for both men and women during Abraham's time. We even do not know if that ruling on "woman as imam" was relevant or premature during that time frame. Slavery is a relevant subject during Muhammed's time (Quran 2:177-178; 4:25) . But, is slavery a relevant subject during our time when it is universally recognized unacceptable practice !? The mathematical miracle of the Quran (Quran 74:30-35) is relevant during our time because the miracle can be verified with the help of a computer (Quran 27:82). But, could that miracle play any significant role during Muhammed's era when numerical system were not even developed and people used alphabets for counting !?

Only fifty years ago, women were not even allowed to pray in the mosque despite the fact that the Quran permits them to pray in the mosque (Quran 62:9). Today, it becomes a reality at a very small scale but with the segregation of men and women !!

Only God Almighty has the full knowledge of the past, present and future of all seven universes. Based on such knowledge, He designed His Quran such a way that it can be effectively applied to any situation for all the generations and generations to come.

Thank you and may God guide me,
Muhammed Irtaza
~~~~~

Monday, January 4, 2010

The struggle for the soul of Islam

This is the decade of Pluralism, you will see Rabbis, Pastors, Pundits, Imams, Shamans and clergy speaking in terms of generalities, their language would include fair conversation about other faiths.- Mike Ghouse

The struggle for the soul of Islam

The story of the year is the great religious story of our time: the struggle of religions, particularly Islam, to choose an inclusive, tolerant attitude toward those outside the faith (and toward dissenters or those deemed heretics within). The alternative is an intolerance that will destroy us.

The Swiss minaret controversy (where a referendum prohibited the construction of new minarets designed for Mosques) was a useful flashpoint. Here is critic Carlin Romano: "The day that Turkey apologizes and pays reparations for the Armenian genocide, that Saudi Arabia permits the building of churches and synagogues, that the Arab world thinks the homeland principles it applies to the Arabs of Palestine also apply to the Armenians of Turkey--on that day, I will find time to commiserate with the generally kind and hard-working Muslims of Switzerland."

Romano's point is the imbalance in assumptions of tolerance. Europe was dragged, often kicking and screaming, into the pluralism that holds uneasy sway in the West. Yet Christianity did most of its struggling at the 'right' time - in Europe the battle for tolerance was fought in an age before weapons could kill millions at a stroke. Intolerance is ugly enough with a lance or longbow in hand. The fanatic's finger on a nuclear button is catastrophe.

There are encouraging signs of growing moderation. After the Bali bombings Indonesia, the largest Muslim state, has grown more moderate, according to most observers. The recognition of extremism's frightening cost is growing. More prominent moderate voices are heard in the news. Still, the intolerance that edges into savagery is the great civilizational struggle of our day. There is no hiding from it or flinching from its consequences. It will not do to point out the undoubted truth that Christianity has its dangerous fundamentalists (Timothy McVeigh and his ilk) as does Judaism (some of the xenophobic extremists who are Baruch Goldstein's spiritual heirs) and Hinduism and indeed almost every faith on the planet. These individuals or groups are not the predominant population, nor those with power. In numbers, in sway, in the virulence and danger of the ideology, religiously motivated rejectionism and terror is today overwhelmingly a Muslim problem.

None of the other issues: the paranoiac piffle about President Obama's being Muslim, the Pope's strange insensitivity to the legacy of the Holocaust, the role of religion in health care, not even the President's Cairo speech (which is a manifestation of the larger issue of addressing extremism) are more significant than this continuing life and death drama.

Not even the overriding human rights issue of our time - the eradication of the sexual slave trade of women - ultimately takes precedence. In the liberation of women from subjugation however, there are the seeds of a greater liberality of thought and practice. Terrorism is not entirely separable from training in oppressively patriarchal systems. When religion abets suppression it betrays its own ideals and the image of God that is our most precious gift and legacy.

The west has a great deal of work to do in reckoning with its own long history in the Muslim world. We have to take care with our rhetoric and assumptions. Yet clearly and inarguably, how Islam copes with its own extremism is the story of 2009, and will most likely prove the religious story of the age.

What's God got to do with it?

You will see more stories about God in this decade, every faith will make a serious attempt to universalize God, to let go of exclusive claims and learn to believe that it is the same thing that created the universe and that includes both theists and atheists. Again this is the decade of Pluralism - Mike Ghouse
What's God got to do with it?

Q: What was the most important religion story of 2009?

The important story for me was the omni-absence of a personal God in so many stories about religion. God may not exactly be dead, but perhaps he, she, or it should be denied health insurance because of a strongly suspected pre-existing condition of nonexistence.

The 2008 American Religious Identification Survey, released in March of 2009, showed that "Nones," those who don't belong to any particular religious group, is the fastest growing religious category in America. They are the only group to have grown in every state of the Union. Some are atheists, some are agnostics, some are spiritual, some believe in Karma or crystals, and some believe in a deity or deities. Most have simply rejected the religion in which they were raised. Generally, though, they are more accepting of those with different beliefs.

Atheist and agnostic "Nones," emboldened by the release of the ARIS survey that showed unexpected growth of the non-religious, have become more vocal. And along with opportunities to increase the visibility of, and respect for, the viewpoints of secular Americans, there come the inevitable strategic and philosophical divisions. Here is my gross oversimplification of the two basic camps.

Group A: Atheists who don't suffer fools gladly. They point out that religious belief should be treated as any other kind of belief, open to criticism, and that unquestioned faith is a vice with inherent dangers, not a virtue to be respected.

Group B: Atheists who prefer identifying as humanists, who would rather look for ways to make this world a better place than talk about gods in which they don't believe. They try to find common bonds between theists and nontheists, and seek issues on which to cooperate. Their focus is on being good without God.

Group A's take pride in being intellectually honest, while Group B's take pride in helping a movement grow. Quite a few, myself included, have a foot or toe in both groups.

Many people distrust atheists because atheists don't worry about rewards or punishments in an afterlife. The message that needs to get out is how many non-atheists live like atheists, for all practical purposes, without belief in a judging god involved in the workings of the world. This would include all deists, almost all Unitarians, and most liberal religionists of all stripes. I even think many politicians, not just the one acknowledged atheist, Rep. Pete Stark (D-Cal), would be willing to make known publicly that their actions and policies have nothing to do with belief in an afterlife. I expect this category of "functional atheists," those who believe that their actions in this life have nothing to do with how or whether they are treated in an afterlife, is larger than just about any religious denomination.

This brings me back to non-God religion stories, which I'll illustrate with two of this year's movies. The first is the blockbuster, Avatar. Russ Douthat, in the New York Times, wrote about its pantheism, a faith that equates God with Nature, where trees have "spiritual energy" and a network of energy is the sum total of every living thing. Douthat claims that Hollywood regularly returns to such themes because most people can't accept the literal-mindedness of monotheistic religions. It's a movie for my Group B people, since the good guys on this alien planet are spiritual progressives who prefer to be engaged in cooperating and making love, not war.

For Group A people, a more interesting and less viewed movie is The Invention of Lying. It's about a culture even more alien, one in which nobody can lie. There is not even a word for "lie" or for "truth." You can guess what this does to politics, advertising, and dating. Then one person develops the ability to lie. In a world where every word is assumed to be the absolute truth, a liar can become a king or a god. With the best of intentions, our liar-hero (Mark) tries to comfort his dying mother by telling her that she will be going to a wonderful afterlife. Of course she and others believe him. Soon everyone in the world is begging for information about this afterlife. Every word Mark makes up is taken as, well, gospel. In the biggest lie of all, he tells the world there is a Man in the Sky who is responsible for everything, and they will be happy up there with him after death. When asked if the Man in the Sky is also responsible for cancer, Mark quickly has to grapple with theodicy, the question no monotheistic religion has been able to answer: Why is there evil in a world created by an all-powerful and benevolent god? Incidentally, I think the 10 rules for the world that Mark writes on Pizza Hut boxes compare favorably to the 10 Commandments.

This movie helped me to imagine a world without lies. The movie's theme was that Man in the Sky religion is possible only in a world where it's possible to lie. (This reminds me that if there were an international anthem for atheists, it would be John Lennon's "Imagine"--no religion).

Atheists sometimes compare belief in the biblical God to belief in Santa Claus. One difference is that Santa is omniscient only in December and omnipotent only on Christmas Eve. In "Do as I say, not as I do" fashion, many parents this month explained to their children why lying is bad, and that "Santa will know if you've been bad or good." Whatever parents teach their children about God or Santa, I hope it will include a message to be good for goodness' sake, a message to live by in all seasons.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/herb_silverman/2009/12/whats_god_got_to_do_with_it.html

Baptists and Muslims: different books, common word

Baptist and Muslim

This decade can be labeled as the decade of Pluralism, where emphasis will be placed on co-existence, aka Pluralism. I believe the moderate people of faith will step in and pave the way for peaceful co-existence. Mike Ghouse

Baptists and Muslims: different books, common word

Baptists and Muslims:It began in January 2009 with a three-day meeting in Boston between 40 Baptist leaders and 40 Muslim leaders. Papers were presented. Prayers were said. Meals were shared. Business cards were exchanged. Promises for follow-up steps were made.

Baptist-Muslim engagement may be the most unanticipated and underreported religion story of 2009 with the far-reaching potential to advance the common good. Time will soon determine whether it is a fool's errand or a fullness-of-time movement.




Also in January, the Baptist World Alliance, the largest global Baptist body, released its official response to the Islamic letter known as "A Common Word Between Us and You."

Two months later, the BWA dedicated a baptismal center on the Jordan River where John the Baptist is thought to have baptized Jesus. The land was a gift from the Jordanian government, facilitated by Prince Ghazi Bin Muhammad, who is the chief architect of the "Common Word" initiative.

On the July 4th weekend in Washington, D.C., well-known Baptist preacher Rick Warren spoke at the annual meeting of the Islamic Society of North America.

Off the public radar was another development. The Baptist Center for Ethics, better known for its Web site, EthicsDaily.com, was invited to produce an hour-long documentary that will begin airing on ABC-TV stations in January 2010. The documentary is titled "Different Books, Common Word: Baptists and Muslims."
At the heart of the documentary is the recognition that Baptists and Muslims have different sacred books but a common word--love the neighbor. The documentary tells five stories about Muslims and Baptists who pursue neighbor love through interfaith dialogue and interfaith action, stories that will surprise viewers.
These stories run counter to the dominant attitude among Baptist clergy toward Muslims. Too many Baptist preachers in America demonize the Prophet Muhammad and smear Muslims as terrorists, fearing Islam as a dangerous religion. Other fearful clerics avoid hate talk. Instead, they talk about the need to win Muslims to Jesus as the only way to relate to them.

We take another approach. We believe the Bible calls us to love our neighbors, not as a means of conversion, but because it's the right thing to do. And the right thing for goodwill Baptists to do is to speak up for Muslims in our culture of anger and to reach out with a hand of partnership.

Our documentary is about replacing the negative narratives with positive ones. We hope it will bring Baptists and Muslims together on the local level for conversations and community-building. If Muslims and Baptists are peacemakers together in the United States, then they will show the rest of the world a better way forward.


By Robert Parham December 26, 2009; 6:20 PM ET



Who Owns God?

WHO OWNS GOD?

To the People of Malaysia


Mike Ghouse

The Malaysian Government may consider setting up a commission to figure out who owns Allah. From what I know, no one owns the word "Allah" nor does any one own "Allah". I can have one of the seven billionth (# of people) piece of God without asking permission from any one. And each part would be fulsome seven billion. You are welcome to steal my piece, I still would have it; owning one piece is like owning whole of the God.

Same formula applies to the other names of God be it Yahweh, Krishna, Allah, Ahura Mazda, Wahe Guru, God or any other name one can imagine to call on the creator. God probably would be embarrassed if he figures out that we believe him to have limited linguistic comprehension, and that he only understands Hebrew, Sanskrit, Pali, Avesta, Aramaic, Latin or Arabic. Quite! Let him know not.

Perhaps, one single event led to the other and the whole cosmos came into being. Whether it is evolution, creation or big bang, the fact of the matter is we exist. Thus the concept of oneness of creation, oneness of the humanity and oneness of the people translates into Oneness of God, One all loving God. Our Atheist friends don't have to call that thing God, just call it the causer of evolution, creation or the big bang; or don't call any thing, he has no problems with it and I know I don't.

I hope you find the answer in various ways of praising your version of the lord; your lord, my version and every one's lord; the same causer and sustainer of the creation. Whatever way works for you is good, why should it matter how you worship? Your devotion to the creator is your own, it won't interfere with my life and it should not worry us a bit.

God has not signed a secret deal with you to tell me that your way is the right way, you quote the Qur'aan, I will quote the Vedas, Bible, Torah, Avesta and other books or my native friend may quote his/her traditions. None of us is wrong, each one has his or her own version and all versions produce the same result; acknowledging something higher, immortal than us and that we have be humble, and humility eats up arrogance and brings conflictlessness among the people. That is what the kingdom of heaven is all about or may be more per you, and that is fine with me.

The phrases like No God, One God, Many Gods, One family or Vasudeva Kutumbukum is all about peaceful co-existence of diverse people as one family. If we can learn to accept and respect the God given uniqueness of each one of the 7 billion of us, then conflicts fade and solutions emerge.

Since I am a human like you and happen to believe in one of the 250 versions of God, let me share my version of that creator with you and I invite you to share your version right here in the comments section. Remember we create God in our own image, so there are at least 7 billion versions of the same God, and he (she or it) loves every which way we bow to him, acknowledge it and respect her.

My version is Islamic, still the same God.

The symbols in this article are the name of God, "Allah" in Arabic, as a Muslim I won't lock the unlockable God in words or in picture; it is not a being and is certainly not containable. No one's version is complete to the other, but given our limitations we create him in our own image, a deeper image en-carved in our imagination that is inexplicable and invisible like the pain in the neck.

The Qur'aan starts with this verse:
Translation by Mohammad Asad

1:2 All praise is due to God alone, the Sustainer of all the worlds,
Alhamdu lillahi rabbi alAAalameena

الْØ­َÙ…ْدُ للّÙ‡ِ رَبِّ الْعَالَÙ…ِينَ
(1:2)

In this instance, the term "worlds" denotes all categories of existence both in the physical and the spiritual sense. The Arabic expression rabb - rendered by me as ',`Sustainer" - embraces a wide complex of meanings not easily expressed by a single term in another language. It comprises the ideas of having a just claim to the possession of anything and, consequently, authority over it, as well as of rearing, sustaining and fostering anything from its inception to its final completion. Thus, the head of a family is called rabb ad-dar ("master of the house") because he has authority over it and is responsible for its maintenance; similarly, his wife is called rabbat ad-dar ("mistress of the house"). Preceded by the definite article al, the designation rabb is applied, in the Qur'an, exclusively to God as the sole fosterer and sustainer of all creation - objective as well as conceptual - and therefore the ultimate source of all authority.(By Mohammad Asad, Quran Ref: 1:2 )

Here is how the last chapter begins :

114:1 SAY: "I seek refuge with the Sustainer of men,

:[Allah:seek refuge with Him] [Allah's attributes:Cherisher and Sustainer] [Mankind]
Qul aAAoothu birabbi alnnasi

Ù‚ُÙ„ْ Ø£َعُوذُ بِرَبِّ النَّاسِ
(114:1)

The most important aspect of quoting both the first and last chapters of Qur'aan has a purpose in it. Both verses do not address Muslims exclusively, in turn they address the whole cosmos and the human beings.

Allah is addressing all of us in the book; he made sure that he did not address one people to exclude the other. He may have been motivated by the fear that some other God may take away the unclaimed people, so he was smart enough to include every one from the beginning to the end. I am sure he used the same strategy in all his books, be it the Vedas, Bible, Torah or any book or just through the oral traditions that our brothers and sisters in native and earth based traditions follow.

God belongs to all, we don't need to own him (her or it), let him remain the creator and owner of our lives and let us call him whichever way we can.

The Neocons Muslims (Equal and opposite counterparts of Neocons in all faiths) need to be happy that the Christians and Sikhs want to keep "Allah" as one of the names of God. Indeed, the Arab Christians also call the creator Allah. Perhaps it is the same word Ilahi Jesus used to use in Aramaic.

Allah is God's name in Arabic. Allah, the creator and sustainer has no problems if we call him Yahweh, Ahura Mazda, Buddha, God, Ishwar, Mahavir, Wahe Guru or Allah. Let's not limit the capabilities of God to a language and a religion. He is the creator and sustainer of all worlds.

As a Muslim I welcome every one to call God with his name in Arabic – "Allah" with equal devotion and honor. Quietly and peacefully this would be the response of over 99% of Muslims in the world. It is time for us to appeal the majority of Muslims in Malaysia to help those few lost brothers.

Mike Ghouse is a thinker, writer speaker and an activist of pluralism, interfaith, co-existence, peace, Islam and India. He is a frequent guest at the TV, radio and print media offering pluralistic solutions to issues of the day. His websites and Blogs are listed on
http://www.mikeghouse.net/

~~~~

Thursday, December 24, 2009

A tribute to Jesus

A tribute to Jesus on this Christmas;
What does it mean to be religious?
.
Mike Ghouse

This column is dedicated to Rev. Petra Weldes of the Center for Spiritual Living in Dallas. Some of my conversation with her inspired me to write this tribute to Jesus and what it means to be religious. http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/12/tribute-to-jesus.html

When Jesus calls on us to follow him, Krishna suggests us to surrender to him, Allah asks us to submit to his will, and every spiritual master shares similar wisdom in one form or the other, what could they mean?

By the way Jesus did not call on Christians exclusively to follow him, he called on the whole humanity to follow him, neither Allah in Qur’aan addresses Muslims, he addresses the whole universe from the very first verse.

The bottom line: Every effort was made to pull one up from one’s selfish interests that are a source of conflicts with other’s selfish interests, to the larger interests of the society which paves the way for peace and long term security of every one. The idea applies to the nations as well, what is good for one has got to be good for others and vice-versa for a sustainable balance in the society. No nation or we as individuals can have advantages at the cost of others; such benefits are temporary and deleterious to lasting peace.

Whether you are a painter, artist, poet, tailor, sculptor, mechanic, teacher, chef, engineer, janitor, doctor or a builder, you want your output to be good, pleasant, durable, sustainable and co-exist in harmony with its surroundings. God is no different, like a mother, he, she or it wants his creation to co-exist in harmony with what surrounds; life and environment.

Through the great teachers, the creator has communicated that wisdom to everyone of the seven billion of us; for example in one version, Krishna says whenever the balance in a society is lost (adharma), some wise man or woman will emerge from among them and restore that elusive balance to the society (bring righteousness - dharma). In the Qur’aan, God says, he sent a messenger to every tribe, nation and people to create harmony and peace among themselves.

You can see that act played out by Moses, Jesus, Muhammad, Bahaullah, Nanak, Buddha, Mahavir, Confucius, Zarathushtra, Gandhi and the shamans in every native, and earth based traditions. Even among Atheists there will be one who will work on creating peace within and with others. They all have done what a representative of Goodness (or God) ought to do; cultivate a culture of harmony and co-existence, isn’t that religious? No one of God's creation is left out of his grace and mercy, if we can learn to respect the (God) given wisdom of each one of us, then conflicts fade and solutions emerge.

Indeed, you do have a peace maker amongst you; on your board, at your school, city council, business, church or a social club. That one person brings the relief, just as one can bring the grief. Let's do our individual share of good, that's all it take to bring peace on earth.

It is from this perspective; I share the thought that, to be religious is to be a mitigater of conflicts and a nurturer of goodwill. Each one of us has to ask ourselves every moment of the day, is my act, my thought and my words mitigate or aggravate a conflict? Do I see the wisdom in the teachings of the great masters? Am I religious? (One does not have to believe in God to be religious, an Atheist can be religious in the sense, he or she wants to create harmony by mitigating conflicts and nurturing goodwill).

In the name of the creator, whatever name we choose to call or in the interests of co-existence, and in the name of our great teacher Jesus, let’s commit to be the mitigaters of conflict and nurturers of goodwill, on his on his birthday to honor him.

Let’s believe in his message of loving even our enemies is good for us as individuals and the society. Together, let us all see the beauty and wisdom of his teachings without any reserve. Let’s us all receive his message of goodness today and become religious.

Merry Christmas, May God tempt you to be religious and to be like Jesus.

Mike Ghouse is a thinker, writer speaker and an activist of pluralism, interfaith, co-existence, peace, Islam and India. He is a frequent guest at the TV, radio and print media offering pluralistic solutions to issues of the day. His three websites and 22 Blogs are listed on http://www.mikeghouse.net/

Feel free to write your comments: http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2009/12/tribute-to-jesus.html#comments
~~~

Monday, December 14, 2009

Copenhagen is about Climate Justice

Climate Justice assures every one in the long haul that one can continue living and breathing regardless of being rich or poor. Protecting the environment is the right thing to do; indeed it is a sacred duty of every human. As an individual or a nation we cannot shut ourselves in a bubble; either we suffer the damage together or save the environment for all. None of us can live in silos.

Continued: http://wisdomofreligion.blogspot.com/2009/12/copenhagen-is-about-climate-justice.html
~~~

Monday, November 30, 2009

Mike Ghouse to Speak at Parliament of Worlds Religions

DALLAS – (November 28, 2009) – Mike Ghouse, board member of The Memnosyne Foundation, has been invited to speak at the Council for a Parliament of the World Religions in Melbourne, Australia. Co-Founder and President of The Memnosyne Foundation, Mary Ann Thompson-Frenk, made the announcement recently.

Continued - http://wisdomofreligion.blogspot.com/2009/11/mike-ghouse-to-speak-at-parliament-of.html

~~~~

MUSLIM SPEAKER

MUSLIM SPEAKER
Email to: SpeakerMikeGhouse@gmail.com

Voice of Moderate Muslims

Voice of Moderate Muslims
Voice of Moderate Muslims

Moderate Islam Speaker

Moderate Islam Speaker
Moderate Islam Speaker

quraan burning

Planned Muslim Response to Qur'an Burning by Pastor Jones on September 11 in Mulberry, Florida

PRESS RELEASE
August 19, 2013| Dallas, Texas

Mike Ghouse
Text/Talk: (214) 325-1916
MikeGhouse@aol.com

Mirza A Beg
(205) 454-8797
mirza.a.beg@gmail.com

www.WorldMuslimCongress.com


PLANNED MUSLIMS RESPONSE TO QUR'AN BURNING BY PASTOR JONES ON 9/11/13 IN MULBERRY, FLORIDA

We as Muslims plan to respond to pastor Terry Jones' planned burning of 3000 copies of Quran on September 11, 2013 in positive terms.

Our response - we will reclaim the standard of behavior practiced by the Prophet concerning “scurrilous and hostile criticism of the Qur’an” (Muhammad Asad Translation Note 31, verse 41:34). It was "To overcome evil with good is good, and to resist evil by evil is evil." It is also strongly enjoined in the Qur’an in the same verse 41:34, “Good and evil deeds are not equal. Repel evil with what is better; then you will see that one who was once your enemy has become your dearest friend.”

God willing Muslims will follow the divine guidance and pray for the restoration of Goodwill, and on that day many Muslim organizations will go on a “blood drive” to save lives and serve humanity with kindness.

We invite fellow Americans of all faiths, races, and ethnicities to join us to rededicate the pledge, “One nation under God”, and to build a cohesive America where no American has to live in apprehension, discomfort or fear of fellow Americans. This event is a substitute for our 10th Annual Unity Day Celebration (www.UnitydayUSA.com) held in Dallas, but now it will be at Mulberry, Florida.

Unwittingly Pastor Jones has done us a favor by invigorating us by his decision to burn nearly 3000 copies Quran on September 11, 2013. Obviously he is not satisfied by the notoriety he garnered by burning one Qur'an last year.

As Muslims and citizens we honor the free speech guaranteed in our constitution. We have no intentions to criticize, condemn or oppose Pastor Terry Jones' freedom of expression. Instead, we will be donating blood and praying for goodness to permeate in our society.

We plan to follow Jesus Christ (pbuh), a revered prophet in Islam as well as Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) – that of mitigating the conflicts and nurturing good will for the common good of the society.

We hope, this event and the message will remind Muslims elsewhere in the world as well, that violence is not the way. Muslims, who react violently to senseless provocation, should realize that, violence causes more violence, and besmirches the name of the religion that we hold so dear. We believe that Prophet Muhammad was a mercy to the mankind, and we ought to practice what we believe and preach. We must not insult Islam by the negative reactions of a few.

We can only hope it will bring about a change in the attitude of the followers of Pastor Jones, and in the behavior of those Muslims who reacted violently the last time Pastor sought notoriety – We hope this small step towards a bridge to peaceful coexistence would propel us towards building a cohesive society.

Like most Americans a majority of Muslims quietly go about their own business, but it is time to speak up and take positive action instead of negative reaction. May this message of peace and goodwill reverberate and reach many shores.

Lastly, we appreciate the Citizens of Mulberry, Florida, Honorable Mayor George Hatch, City Commissioners, police and Fire Chiefs for handing this situation very well. This will add a ‘feather of peace’ in the City’s reputation. We hope Mulberry will be a catalyst in showing the way in handling conflict with dignity and peace.

We thank the Media for giving value to the work towards peace rather than conflict.






URL- http://worldmuslimcongress.blogspot.com/2013/08/planned-muslim-response-to-quran_18.html



Thank you.

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.