The PPK Muslims (Proud, Practicing, Knowledgable)

THE ISLAMIC SHARI’AH HAS ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ARROGANCE AS PER THE QURAN AND HADITH

THE ISLAMIC SHARI’AH HAS ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ARROGANCE
AS PER THE QURAN AND HADITH

ABSTRACT

“And walk not on earth with haughty self-conceit (insolence) for, verily, thou canst never rend the earth asunder, nor canst thou ever grow as tall as the mountains!”

In the ayah that follows in the Quran, we are told that all the deeds and actions that have been narrated in these fifteen ayahs are evil and detestable to Allah Ta’aala:

“All such things are sins and detestable in the sight of your Lord”³

Many ahaadith are quoted in the article to further elaborate this injunction; one of them says:

It has been reported in Hadith Qudsi on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Holy Prophet said

“Allah Ta’aala says that grandeur is My mantle and greatness is my breech. Whoever tries to snatch these from Me, him I shall put in Jahannam.”

Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo then adds in the next ayah in the Quran HIS concluding remarks to this code of conduct narrated in the “ten Commandments of the Quran” which we have been discussing in the last few sessions:

“This is of what your Lord has revealed to you of wisdom (or that knowledge of right and wrong) and do not associate any other god with Allah lest you should be thrown into hell, blamed, cast away.”⁴

We are then warned not to associate any being with Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo emphasising and reminding us that Tauheed is “the basis on which Islam builds its structure for human life” and it is to HIM alone that we worship. A belief in God and HIS ultimate judgment is critical for an acceptance of absolute moral values otherwise they keep on varying with time and social circumstances.

The word “hikmah” is frequently used in our Holy Text. At one place Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo says:⁵

“He granteth “hikmah”(i.e. wisdom) to whom He pleaseth; and he to whom “hikmah” is granted receiveth indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the Message but men of understanding.”

This subject of arrogance has been been discussed repeatedly across the Quran, alluding to its importance to the individual Muslim and Muslimah. Several of them are quoted in the article.

May 22, 2017

Read ONLY, IF AND WHEN you have time and mood for:

“An Ayah of the Quran for 30 Days” -- May 2017

Choose the section you have time, in the next 30 days to read this ayah:-

Prelude: Recurrent Primary Message 1st. Page

Starting Dua, a note & The Ayah 2nd. Page

A Short Summary: For the Busy Bee None Pages

The Main Story: Recommended Two Pages

Footnotes: For the Perfectionist Two Pages

PRELUDE

From the Pen and Perspective of a self-styled PPK Muslim (Proud, Practicing, Knowledgeable) with a humble submission that Islam totally rejects Blind Following BUT vigorously focusses on the Limitations of Pure Human Reasoning..............and clearly and comprehensively AlLAH knows best.

In the beginning of the seventh century C.E., the folks of Mecca and Medina had a fascinatingly unique window: they had direct access to the Heavens through one of their own. They were blessed with a regular stream of Divine counseling and guidelines. Question and answer sessions were part of the program. Even individual questioner was graced by an answer. In the short Introduction to this scheme they were assured that at the end of this twenty-two year project, Divine Directions and Admonitions will continue through the agency of the PEN. The whole discourse has been preserved and archived till eternity under the guarantee of our Lord and Creator. This record in known as the Quran.

It should sound unbelievable but factually appears to be true: Many of our prevalent, widespread and important concepts and opinions about religious matters do not have a basis in the Quran and sometimes even appear to be in obvious conflict with the teachings of the Quran. It would be very educative and helpful to discuss an Ayah once a month to see if it supports or rejects our views and actions in our daily life. I wish and hope this generates a fruitful interactive discussion.

DUAA’

بِسمِ اللَّهِ الرَّحمٰنِ الرَّحيمِ

In the name of Allah, we praise HIM, seek HIS help and ask for HIS forgiveness. Whosoever Allah guideth none can misguide; whosoever HE allows to fall astray, none can guide him right. We bear witness that there is none worthy of worship but Allah alone and we bear witness that Mohammed, SAW is HIS slave-servant and the Seal of HIS Messengers.

Further, we recall that Allah Ta’aala has declared in HIS Book¹

“He granteth wisdom to whom He pleaseth; and he to whom wisdom is granted receiveth indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the Message (or remember or receive admonition) but men of understanding (or intellect)”

and we also recollect that he has warned us about the day of judgement²

“Then on that day you shall most certainly be questioned about the boons (joy, pleasure).”

We realise, that there cannot be a greater boon or blessing or benefit than wisdom and we wonder if this should be a timely reminder to very many of us sincere and practicing Muslims who use our critical thinking to enhance the mundane for ourselves and our families but resort to blind following (taqleed, doctrine of classical Sunni Islamic Fiqh) in matters religion.

(NOTE: I have filtered out the proofs and details into the Footnotes for those who have the time and interest for them. The main email will then be reasonable length, hopefully for the busy majority. What follows is not a sermon; I do not feel qualified to give one, anyhow. I wish, it may provide a food for thought. A caveat seems in order: If the ayah selected pertains to issues we face in our daily life with our family, friends, neighbours or peers it may affect us personally and lead to some self analysis and soul searching which in turn could be divisive and distressing. If taken in the right spirit, it can be a humble attempt towards finding the “straight path”.)

THE AYAH

Surah Al Israa (17), Ayah 37

وَلا تَمشِ فِي الأَرضِ مَرَحًا ۖ إِنَّكَ لَن تَخرِقَ الأَرضَ وَلَن تَبلُغَ الجِبالَ طولً

“And walk not on earth with haughty self-conceit (insolence) for, verily, thou canst never rend the earth asunder, nor canst thou ever grow as tall as the mountains!”

A SHORT VERSION

None

THE MAIN STORY

“I am convinced about the veracity of my opinions, but I do consider it likely that they may turn out to be incorrect. Likewise, I am convinced about the incorrectness of the views different from mine, but I do concede the possibility that they may turn out to be correct.” — Imam Shafa’i

We will now complete what has been called as the “ten commandments of the Quran”. Abdullah Ibn Abbas said that the commandments of the entire Torah have been reduced to fifteen verses of Surah Bani Israel” (Mazhari). The index ayah is the thirteenth and final injunction in this group of fifteen verses. According to Javed Ahmed Ghamdi’s calculation this is the tenth injunction hence the comparison to the Ten Commandments of Torah fits better. He explains that all the major sins referred to in the Quran are the result of flouting these ten (thirteen) injunctions.

The ayah is a clear condemnation of arrogance and conceit. We are reminded that we will not be able to tear open the ground under us by our pompous heavy steps nor are we going to reach the mountain heights by stretching out in a blustering stride. As compared to the majesty of the mountains and the great expanse of earth, what is man but a tiny creature. Why is he then boasting about? He better realise his insignificance and instead praise the glory of Almighty Allah. Insolence and elation at our wealth, powers and status is usually a harbinger to many other worst evils; hence the strong denunciation. “Such humility which the Qur’ān calls upon people to adopt, decrying at the same time all types of conceit, is a mark of maintaining proper relations with God and one’s fellow human beings, and a proper personal and social attitude” points Sayyid Qutb. A Muslim treats one and all, low and high, weak and mighty with respect and consideration. Self pride in fact is very inappropriate as well because all our gifts belong to God Almighty. It is this ayah that is responsible, as pointed by Maulana Maudoodi that our exalted Caliphs and their governors and commanders were examples of unusual humility in all aspects of their life — their garb and attire, their carriage, their living and their behavior in the streets, office or battlefield. Sayyedna Umer Ibn Khattab is a perfect embodiment of such a personality, completely clean of any pomp or pride. This ayah also addresses the mankind in general and implores them to be considerate and sympathetic to other creatures and not to look down upon them.

In the ayah that follows in the Quran, we are told that all the deeds and actions that have been narrated in these fifteen ayahs are evil and detestable to Allah Ta’aala:

“All such things are sins and detestable in the sight of your Lord³

There are many ahaadith to further elaborate this injunction:

Abdullah Ibn Masood narrates that the Holy Prophet said “Not to enter Paradise is he who has arrogance in his heart even to the measure of a particle” (Mazhari, Sahih Muslim)

It has been reported in Hadith Qudsi on the authority of Abu Huraira that the Holy Prophet said

“Allah Ta’aala says that grandeur is My mantle and greatness is my breech. Whoever tries to snatch these from Me, him I shall put in Jahannam.”

Huzrat Umer bin Khattab said from his pulpit “I have heard form the Holy Prophet that a person who takes to humility, Allah Ta’aala elevates him to higher ranks following which he is , though insignificant in his own sight, but he is great in the sight of everybody else. And whoever waxes proud, him Allah Ta’aala puts to disgrace following which he is, though great in his own sight but he is in the sight of people worse than a dog and pig” (Mazhari)

The Prophet is reported to have said: “Whoever maintains humility for God’s sake, God will elevate him. Thus he looks humbly at himself but people look at him with respect. By contrast, God humiliates an arrogant person so as he rates himself highly while people look down upon him. Indeed he may be more disliked by people than a dog or a pig.” ( Ibn Kathīr in his commentary on the Qur’ān)

We are told that this code of conduct is based on “hikmah” which is mostly translated as wisdom, reminding us that our Deen is a rational religion needing thinking and pondering to reach the depths of Faith. Please note that the Text uses the word “mimmaa” meaning ‘is of what’ or ‘is from what’ has been revealed in the Quran. In other words this code of conduct which we have discussed hitherto is only a part of the knowledge and wisdom to which Allah Ta’aala has guided HIS creatures all along the Quran. We are then warned not to associate any being with Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo emphasising and reminding us that Tauheed is “the basis on which Islam builds its structure for human life” and it is HE alone that we worship. A belief in God and HIS ultimate judgment is critical for an acceptance of absolute moral values otherwise they keep on varying with time and social circumstances. Hence this message of fifteen ayahs started with and ends with a call to oneness and uniqueness of God Almighty. Yousuf Ali suggests a noble angle to this reference “It begins with a mention of the worship of God, the One True God and ends with a similar mention to close the argument, thus emphasizing the fact that the love of God embraces the love of man and practical help of our fellow-creatures.”

The word “hikmah” is frequently used in our Holy Text. At one place, and is included in our recurrent dua AllahTa'aala Subhaanahoo says:⁵

“He granteth “hikmah” i.e. wisdom to whom He pleaseth; and he to whom “hikmah”wisdom is granted receiveth indeed a benefit overflowing; but none will grasp the Message but men of understanding.”

Is it not surprising that even today the concept of “Taqleed” i.e. blind following of the tenth century Fiqh of the four schools of Sunni Islam and uncritical conformity to the hadith literature — exact antithesis of “hikmah”, wisdom — has a strong hold on many Muslims. Dr. Mohammed Asad has brought our very effectively an important nuance in the meaning of this word, hikmah. I would like to share with you:

“It is to be noted that the noun hikmah, usually signifying "wisdom", is derived from the verb hakama ("he prevented" or "restrained [him or it]", i.e., from acting in an undesirable manner). Hence, the primary meaning of hikmah is "that which prevents one from evil or ignorant behaviour" (cf. Lane 11, 617); in its positive sense, it signifies "[conscious] insight into that which is most excellent" (Lisan al-'Arab, Taj al-'Arus). Inasmuch as this term refers here, in particular, to what is "odious in God's sight", it implies moral discrimination (or "the knowledge of right and wrong") on the part of men; and this, in its turn, presupposes the existence of an absolute, God-willed standard of moral values.”

This subject of arrogance has been been discussed repeatedly across the Quran, alluding to its importance to the individual Muslim and Muslimah. Let us run our eye over a few:

“And the servants of (God) Most Gracious are those who walk on the earth in humility, and when the ignorant1 address them, they say, “Peace!”⁶

“And turn not thy cheek away from people in [false] pride, and walk not haughtily on earth: for, behold, God does not love anyone who, out of self-conceit, acts in a boastful manner. "Hence, be modest in thy bearing, and lower thy voice: for, behold, the ugliest of all voices is the [loud] voice of asses”⁷

“……………..Verily, God does not love any of those who, full of self-conceit, act in a boastful manner”⁸

“[Know this,] so that you may not despair over whatever [good] has escaped you nor exult [unduly] over whatever [good] has come to you:1 for, God does not love any of those who, out of self-conceit, act in a boastful manner”

........and Allah knows best. May Allah Ta’aala bless us with true understanding--“fahm”--of our Deen, Aameen.

FOOTNOTES

(1) Surah 2/269

يُؤتِي الحِكمَةَ مَن يَشاءُ ۚ وَمَن يُؤتَ الحِكمَةَ فَقَد أوتِيَ خَيرًا كَثيرًا ۗ وَما يَذَّكَّرُ إِلّا أُولُو الأَلبابِ

(2) Surah 102/8

ثُمَّ لَتُسأَلُنَّ يَومَئِذٍ عَنِ النَّعيمِ

(3) Surah 17/38

كُلُّ ذٰلِكَ كانَ سَيِّئُهُ عِندَ رَبِّكَ مَكروهًا

(4) Surah 17/39

ذٰلِكَ مِمّا أَوحىٰ إِلَيكَ رَبُّكَ مِنَ الحِكمَةِ ۗ وَلا تَجعَل مَعَ اللَّهِ إِلٰهًا آخَرَ فَتُلقىٰ في جَهَنَّمَ مَلومًا مَدحورًا

(5) Surah 2/269

(6) Surah 25/63

وَعِبادُ الرَّحمٰنِ الَّذينَ يَمشونَ عَلَى الأَرضِ هَونًا وَإِذا خاطَبَهُمُ الجاهِلونَ قالوا سَلامًا

(7) Surah 31/18-19

وَلا تُصَعِّر خَدَّكَ لِلنّاسِ وَلا تَمشِ فِي الأَرضِ مَرَحًا ۖ إِنَّ اللَّهَ لا يُحِبُّ كُلَّ مُختالٍ فَخورٍ وَاقصِد في مَشيِكَ وَاغضُض مِن صَوتِكَ ۚ إِنَّ أَنكَرَ الأَصواتِ لَصَوتُ الحَميرِ

(8) Surah 4/36

إِنَّ اللَّهَ لا يُحِبُّ مَن كانَ مُختالًا فَخورًا………….

(9) Surah 57/23

لِكَيلا تَأسَوا عَلىٰ ما فاتَكُم وَلا تَفرَحوا بِما آتاكُم ۗ وَاللَّهُ لا يُحِبُّ كُلَّ مُختالٍ فَخورٍ

“What Does It Mean to Be a ‘Secular Muslim’?” Is It Compatible wth Islamic Shari’ah?

“What Does It Mean to Be a ‘Secular Muslim’?”

Is It Compatible with the Islamic Shari’ah?

Recently Imam Asad Zaman shared a thought provoking article on FB "What Does it Mean to Be a 'Secular Muslim'?" in the Atlantic of April 27, 2017 by Anna Momigliano . It is a lengthy piece dwelling on debatable issues. I found it a little heavy reading. I intend to comment only on some of the topics discussed therein.

First, the article starts with a photograph of a beautiful young sister (a grand daughter to me) with a lovely smile, in a stylish yellow headscarf with a broad and heavy knot in front of the neck, a short tie hanging from it, with the European flag in her left hand posing for a photo. I, personally have no issue with this. However I do feel that the Imams and Sheikhs who advise this sort of head dress to Muslim sisters as Islamic will not approve of this sort of attitude; in the first place photos are not allowed; exposing to non-mehram is disapproved; smiling to them is strictly forbidden. So a damaging and far reaching contradiction (very common in our society) is obvious.

The term “secular Muslims” is unnecessarily provocative because it is a paradox. Most Muslims are allergic to the word “secular” treating it wrongly as “anti-religion”. I also feel it is risky and unwise to add a qualifying label to “Muslims” or “Islam”. It can lead to fragmentations into different “brands”. Instead, let us keep the words Islam and Muslims as such without any tag and dig into the sources of our Deen with logic and reasoning to define what Islam is and what does it prescribe for Muslims. The article also has this sub-heading: “In Italy, some want the category recognized by the government. Others say it’s totally meaningless.”

The article discusses at length some specific problems for Italy. I have ignored them. It tries to define “secular Muslims” at different places. My main purpose is to respond to them.

The article explains the meaning of “secular Muslims” by quoting the example of Jews: “Many are familiar with the concept of “secular Jews,” people who choose to identify as Jewish despite being non-practicing, agnostic, or even atheist, because they see Judaism as a culture or ethnicity and not just as a religion.” I am sure, this Jewish definition of “secular” instantly throws out a similar phrase for Muslims to whom Islam is primarily and definitely a religion. It is a complete code of life for us and ushers in and escorts us every step of the way. Yes we are free to choose our own path but have been given very definite and equally broad counsel and exhortation for the “Straight Path” if we are aiming at the Hereafter.

The author reports “Two Italian Somali women, the anthropologist and former politician Maryan Ismail and the engineer and immigrant rights activist Layla Yusuf, founded the Movement of Secular Muslims on April 5……….They want to pressure Italian and EU authorities to acknowledge that there is such a thing as “secular Islam”—and they want its representatives, “secular Muslims,” to get a seat at the table when Muslim associations meet with Italian authorities to discuss issues like the protection of religious minorities, the integration of Muslim immigrants, and funding to build mosques. The movement is planning an international conference on secular Islam, to be held this fall.” However, the author adds “But others are skeptical that the Movement of Secular Muslims will effect change as its leaders envision. Even if conservative Muslims are the minority, Branca argued, it’s hard to prevent them from having a larger say in mosques, where the more-observant minority tends to be more active, “because that’s what usually happens with religious associations.”

It appears that the term “secular Muslim” has been coined and a movement started for it for a political purpose and in the specific context of Italian situation. Good luck to our Italian brothers and sisters in their just struggle. Strictly from a religious point of view this approach is non-starter for most Muslims who will not and cannot digest the idea of “secular Muslims”.The lexicon defines secular as “Worldly rather than spiritual; non religious”. On the face of it therefore the term “secular Muslims” is ambiguous and contradictory. Islam covers the whole spectrum from purely spiritual to purely worldly and the spiritual cum worldly in between. A Muslim is very much a man of this world; this is his playing field. But he is guided by Divine injunctions. He lives, strives and enjoys this world but this is not his goal; he does all this to ensure a pleasant Hereafter. So a Muslim may be termed as worldly — secular — but his drive and objective is spiritual. Shari’ah directs and guides us all the way in our life; at times it is strict and demanding; most of the time it leaves the individual to decide his/her line of action within the general principles of Islam. So let us settle for plain and simple term “Muslim” as our identity; a Muslim who is “Secular under the Spell of the Spiritual”.

“To me, religion is something intimate and private,” says the engineer and immigrant rights activist Layla Yusuf. This is a very common argument in such discussions but totally misplaced. Every individual has a right to his/her own opinions: enjoy and follow it. But the right question in in the present discussion is: does Islamic Shari’ah allow each and every of its follower to treat the religion as “intimate and private”? Layla Yousuf and Maryan Ismail should answer this question. Islam is a complete code of Life encompassing the individual and collective life of the Community. The former is private and personal and the latter has to be communal.

Layla Yusuf wants “secular” Muslims and imams to “work together to fight this practice of using the Quran as a pretext to oppress women.” Answer is very simple.You do not need any “secular” help here. Correct interpretations of the Quran by many Islamic scholars regard the Holy Book as the strongest guardian of women and their rights.

“Maryan Ismail, who observes Ramadan and has gone on pilgrimage to Mecca, recognizes that her approach could be called “progressive” or “liberal” Islam, but said that she chose the term “secular” in order to stress the value of “separation between religion and state, which is now a priority.” I would like to respond that Islam is a Divine religion with a program of life for its followers; in certain issues mandatory and others optional. A practicing Muslim has to tap the sources of our Deen to find the dictates of our religion to the best of our knowledge. This will be the “optimum” solution. We do not have to aim at “liberal, progressive or secular”. Let us try to find the correct Islamic directive on any issue and as I said this will be optimum. Islam does not look out for any conflict with the State. What is a State? It is the collective will of the people — organized and functional. If the Muslims are in majority, Islamic values will be prominently visible in the State. As a minority and specially a tiny minority, Muslims should negotiate with the “state” for the best status we can have in the society. The footing that minorities enjoy in Muslim majority countries will be a major handle or drag in these negotiations. The values, culture, practice, feelings and passions of the majority have to be respected. This attitude will be more fruitful than displaying ourselves as “secular”. The majority command as much right as the minority, if not more to ultimately decide the majority-minority balance.

I would strongly endorse this statement in the article “ But others, who understand the concept of secular Islam differently, question the underlying premise of the Movement of Secular Muslims. Olivier Roy, a French scholar of Islam teaching at the European University Institute in Florence, told me that Islam is a religion, not a culture, and thus the concept of secular Islam “doesn’t make any sense”—it would be as contradictory as funding “a non-religious religious community.”

Again we see a selection of adjectives for Islam when the article says “The movement’s fixation on the term “secular” will prove self-defeating, according to Roy; instead, “they should use the correct terminology and call themselves liberal,” the scholar said.” I would respond, there is a basic flaw in this logic. We all are “plain and simple” Muslims and we must try to find the real face and colour of Islam. Ours is a Divine religion presented to the camel trotting nomads of the desert of Arabia yet our adorable Deen is destined to remain relevant in the era of inter-planetary travel. So, by definition Islam has to be progressive and dynamic and so it is, in fact. It is the unfortunate and irrational self-infliction of the doctrine of Taqleed, the narrow minded Madrasah Curriculum and the uncritical conformity to the valuable hadith literature which has disfigured our pure religion. Get rid of these influences and you will discover that Islam has brought a living and breathing Doctrine and Ideology of life to guide mankind through the thick and thin of all times. It is a beautiful blend of the liberal, secular, logic and Faith.

This informative article discloses that in Italy Islam is not recognised as a religion and has no legal standing in the country. But negotiations for the recognition of Islam are underway. This identity debate has become particularly pressing for Italians—and that may help explain why it’s crystallizing into a movement in Italy specifically. Since the constitution mandates a strict regulation of religious groups it is a priority for secular Muslims to have a seat at the table in the negotiations for the recognition of Islam are. For example, Judaism received official recognition in 1987, but because only Orthodox Judaism was represented in negotiations at the time, Reform Jews have no official standing today; their marriages, say, are not recognized.

Lastly, the article brings in a very pertinent question in bold letters “Beneath the semantic debate lies a deeper question: Who gets to speak for a religion?” It goes on to explain, giving statistics: “Across Europe, there is a gap between Islamic associations and the Muslim population, according to Rolla Scolari, the editorial director of Oasis, an international foundation studying Christian-Muslim relations. According to the German Ministry of Interior, for instance, German Muslim associations, as listed by the authorities, represent just 20 percent of the local Muslim population of 4.3 million. What about the other 80 percent? In France, less than a third of Muslims are “practicing,” Roy said. According to a survey conducted in Lombardy, Italy the province with the largest Muslim population, only 12 percent of Muslims belong to some kind of Islamic association. Who gets to speak for a religion? The orthodox, because they are the most strictly observant and sometimes the most actively invested? The secular, even though they can be the most numerous are silent?”

I would like to emphasize that this topic in this article “Who gets to speak for a religion?” is far more relevant to us Muslims today than the debate over secularism. When I migrated to US, I thought that I will now be free from the popular and dominant colour of my Deen in Pakistan. As this is a very rational and intellectual society, Muslims also, I deluded would be analytical and discerning about their Faith. They will find out that the Holy Quran, time and again exerts it followers to Think and Ponder. Not true, I found out to my dismay. I find many of my brothers and sisters have an intellectual dichotomy. In the mundane, they exhibit super intellectual qualities rising to great heights bringing opulence and prosperity to themselves and their families. In matters religion they seem to have mortgaged their intellect and have opted for first,Taqleed i.e. blind following of the tenth century Fiqh, second, the Madrasah curriculum of fifteen percent Quran and third, uncritical conformity to the very valuable but equally corrupt and contradictory hadith literature. Hence they are willing to dip the fly that has fallen in their milk and drink it as per a hadith in Sahih Bokhari, they are ready and willing to execute the apostate, or one who desecrates the Quran or defames our Holy Prophet, torture and murder the homosexuals, glorify and push the headscarf, instead of prayers as the Muslim identity, stone to death an adulterer, refuse the God given human instincts of aesthetics and beauty and discard all fine arts like music and photography etc etc. So far no problem. They have a right for their views. But here is the issue which this article highlights. To their credit, many of these brothers and sisters are practicing Muslims and organize and lead our mosques and its valuable services. Rest of us, probably the majority tend to neglect our collective responsibilities. Hence, by default the views of the former group have attained the “official” status as Islamic. This is a challenge to those Muslims who regard our laudable Deen (from the teachings of the Quran and our Holy Prophet and the exalted Caliphs, the example of the sahaabaas and an intelligent study of the Hadith) as progressive and dynamic to remain live and relevant for ever. They should also try to propagate and disseminate their point of view with intelligence and reasoning in all the forums and sources at their command to preserve the true message of Islam.

May 13, 2017

HEY MUSLIMS, LET US MAKE UP OUR MIND -- LET US NOT PUZZLE AND MUDDLE ISLAM AND IT’S SHARI’AH

HEY MUSLIMS, LET US MAKE UP OUR MIND

LET US NOT PUZZLE AND MUDDLE ISLAM AND IT’S SHARI’AH

Strictly speaking, what I am going to say concerns mainly the Western Muslims. However, (theoretically at least) we claim that we are a single Ummah very sensitive to the pains of our sisters and brothers all across the globe. Hence what follows is addressed to the “Ummah” as a whole.

A little self criticism, an art we have totally forgotten will point to the glaring hypocrisy and double standards we seem to indulge in. We love the liberal principles of the West when it supports our customs and values and throw these principles overboard when they do not suit us. “Women should have a right to dress as they like” is our strong argument in defense of the head-scarf. However we hate this “right” when it comes to skinny jeans and short fitting shirts as discussed in my blog "Islamophobia? Yes. What about Christophobia? Yes? No?"

While we are perfectly justified in complaining and protesting about Islamophobia, it is our Islamic duty to assess and find out how “Islam” is behaving in areas where it holds a majority. Taken together, we can achieve a sense of balance and treat the problem with justice and equity as demanded by our Deen. We must compare the extent and the manifestations of the “phobia” on both sides. How does ugly gestures, sarcastic remarks, pulling the scarf, spitting on the face and vandalizing a masjid by “them” compares with bombings and mass killing by “us”.

At the birth of Islam, Christianity was already established in vast lands on the earth for about six centuries. As both were treading the same path there is long history of co-operation, confrontation, conflict — violent and non-violent — between the two Abrahamic Faith. As I have discussed earlier in my blog "Islamic Theological Approach to Beliefs and Doctrines of Ehle Kitaab - People of the Book - as dictated in the Quran" misinterpretation and wrong application of some Quranic Ayahs has led to a widespread and deeply entrenched notion among the rank and file of the Ummah that we cannot be friends and cannot trust Jews and Christians. I grew up like most of you with this conception. Surely this is Christophobia, albeit non-violent. The opposite sentiment, Islamophobia is similarly prevalent in the Christian world. This inter-action between the top two of the great religions is very unfortunate but equally real and authentic. It is felt in offices and work places and circulated in social media, talk shows, comedy broadcasts and lectures; generally speaking it is not a street phenomenon even though on occasions one leads to the other. Stephen Bannon, Bill Maher, Ted Cruz and of course our unique and remarkable president Donald Trump are the leading and prominent actors in this field.

The cataclysmic event on 9/11 has drastically and dangerously transformed the nature and dimensions and manifestations of this “phobia” between the two communities. In the latest form of this phobia there is “no Islam” on either side. The “Jihaadists” go out of the way to claim and demonstrate that they are conducting their nefarious activities in the service and propagation of Islam. Fortunately the Ummah seems to be united in regarding their game of death and destruction as totally against the laudable principles of Islam. They, the Talibaan, al Qaeeda and ISIS blare loudly and clearly that this is “all Islam” and we, the Ummah roar back that this is “no Islam”. Unfortunately and rather paradoxically the Ummah is not prepared to accept that there is also “no Islam” in the reaction to this “jihadism” — this post 9/11 garden variety of phobia. This current wave of phobia is fear and hatred against the Muslims for their killings and bombings — and not because of their faith. Just think calmly and fairly, which by the way is an important Shari’ah demand. We are sure the Jihaadi activities are not Islamic. When there is a reaction to these activities (whicn we have declared as non-Islamic), we raise the flag of “Islamophobia”. Is not the contradiction and double standard very obvious: deadly activities done in the name of Islam are labelled by us as against Islam but the reaction to these non-Islamic activities is branded by us as Islamophoblc.

Talking about terminology. Terms should clearly spell out the facts they are referring to. I strongly object to common but very misleading terms like “Islamic terrorism or Radical Islam”. It is clearly an inappropriate label. Our Divine religion is a total antithesis of violence and murder. “Radical Muslims or Muslim terrorism” sound proper and fair and factual. But, “Islamophobia” has become the buzzword for Muslims these days i.e. after 9/11. As I have explained earlier, this is inappropriate. It can preferably be labelled as “Muslimophobia”. However, I found a better and appropriate term instead, in an article in the Economist of February 11, 2017 "Act 'normal' or Get Out". It refers to Geert Wilders, leader of the anti-Muslim party (PVV) as “anti-Muslim populist” and then goes on to state that “Anti-Muslim populism” took off earlier (in the Netherlands) than elsewhere in Europe……” That’s it! This is the term that very properly and fittingly underlines and focuses on the real problem and emotions involved in the post 9/11 drama i.e. anti Muslim feelings rather than our favorite expression Islamophobia. The sooner we realise, the better for us, the Ummah. Once we are convinced of this, we will at least start looking for reasons for this feelings against us. And if we come across a genuine one, let us try and correct it. Allow me one suggestion to start with. Let us look at the problem as “members of Deen of Islam” with its laudable principles of justice and fair play rather than as “members of the Tribe of Islam” who glorify brutal dictators at home as lofty heroes of Ummah simply because of their posturing against the “the Great Satan, the enemy and killer of Muslims”. Nothing can be further from truth than the very popular and passionate formula: “what a Muslim does = Islam; what is done against a Muslim = Islamophobia.”

We do not accept and appreciate that we are indebted to the Liberal Values of the West

for many of the liberties we enjoy in this part of the world. It is not found in the rest of the planet. Certainly not in the Muslim majority countries. No we cannot be booked for the action of rest of Muslims, I agree. But as members of the Ummah we cannot summarily disown them.When a Muslim reneges, our immediate Verdict: “Kill him”. Simultaneously we demand that others should allow us the right to proselytization. As a matter of fact we take immense pride in our history of missionary activities. Building masaajid is a very popular and enthusiastic activity specially in non-Muslim areas. But in Muslim majority areas, building churches or synagogues is either disallowed completely or wrapped in layers of rules and regulations to delay or discourage such activity.

The Ummah needs to mature; move out of our fantasies and emotional bubble and do some adult objective thinking. This is the twenty First Century of multiracial, multiethnic, multi-religious national states. How do we intend to fit in with the classical Muslim world view of Darul Islam and Darul Harb, a single Muslim Ummah across the national boundaries, our romance with the concept of khilaafat i.e. a single ruler spanning across the globe and the strong opinion of the Muslim scholarship and enthusiastically embraced by rank and file of Muslims that Muslims alone have a right to rule the planet because we are the bearers of the true Divine religion. According to this principle, others are free to follow their religion but live under Islamic rule. “We have a right to these beliefs and entitled to act on it” is the response of many Muslims. I cannot question that. But here is the caveat. It gives the other side the natural right and reason to control and suppress us. As power and might is with them, do not be surprised if they act on it now.Till very recently this has not happened. Muslims and their families even with such views have migrated to the West and flourished because of the Western liberal values. Be warned, there is clear writing on the walls that this is probably changing. The pattern in Europe is clear and loud. Let me quote from the article “Act ‘normal’ or get out” which I have referred to earlier to illustrate the point I am making:

“There is something wrong with our country,” began an open letter to the Dutch people published last month. It went on to moan about those who “abuse our country’s freedom to cause havoc, when they came to our country precisely for that freedom”, and warned them to “act normal or leave”. The author was not Geert Wilders, leader of the anti-Muslim Freedom Party (PVV), but Mark Rutte, leader of the free-thinking Liberals (VVD) and prime minister of a country that presents itself as one of the most tolerant in the world. “Act normal” (doe normaal) is a common injunction in Dutch; it can mean “Don’t be obnoxious” or “Don’t be silly.” But here it had a dark, exclusionary ring.

Mr Rutte’s letter marked how much Dutch politics has changed as the country prepares for a national election on March 15th. The vote will test the strength of European populism in the era of Brexit and Donald Trump, and will be seen as a portent of the French and German elections later this year.”

In the recent elections in Netherland and France the extreme right were runner-up. Moving our of Europe, Brexit should be a reminder of the same trend.The rise of Donald Trump is the final proof. Thus the mood is slowly but surely changing. Our responsibilities as citizens are thrown at our faces in return for the liberties we enjoy in the West. This needs serious thinking and assessment for the welfare and status of your grand and great grand children.

While you will mull over my suggestion, I found some support for my views in an excellent article "Is Free Speech Good For Muslims" in the New York Times of March 27, 2017 by Mustafa Akyol who is a contributing opinion writer, a visiting fellow at the Freedom Project at Wellesley College and the author, most recently, of “The Islamic Jesus: How the King of the Jews Became a Prophet of the Muslims.” I can vouch he is good writer because the piece is very interesting and absorbing. I will edit some really relevant features from this write-up for my readers.

The author starts: “I recently watched a curious debate that took place in 2015 at the Free Press Society of Denmark. On one side was Geert Wilders, the far-right Dutch politician and anti-Islam campaigner whose ascendance to power was, I’m happy to say, checked by the elections in the Netherlands this month. On the other side was Flemming Rose, the journalist who angered many Muslims in 2005 by publishing cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad in the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten. The crux of the debate was what to do with Muslims and Islam in Europe. Mr. Wilders argued that the Quran must be banned and mosques must be shut down. Mr. Rose, in contrast, explained that this view is unacceptably authoritarian, and Muslims deserve freedom like everyone else. “You cannot deny Muslims the right to build a mosque or to establish faith-based schools,” he said, simply because some Europeans find them offensive.”

Having said this, the author points out that most Muslims will not be able to gauge the real meaning underlining this debate “Most Muslims watching this debate would probably sympathize with Mr. Rose, thinking he was defending them. Mr. Rose, however, was merely defending a liberal principle: freedom for all. It was the very principle that led him to publish the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad — cartoons seen by many Muslims, including me, as offensive”. The author then goes on to spell out a glaring ambiguity in Muslim thought “This is just one of many manifestations of a paradox Muslims, especially those of us living in the West, face in the modern world: They are threatened by Islamophobic forces against which they need the protections offered by liberalism — freedom of speech, freedom of religion, nondiscrimination. But the same liberalism also brings them realities that most of them find un-Islamic — irreverence toward religion, tolerance of L.G.B.T. people, permissive attitudes on sex. They can’t easily decide, therefore, whether liberalism is good or bad for Muslims”.

This contradiction in Muslim attitudes is clearly visible when it comes to female dress. The author states “The same paradox can also be seen in the debates over female dress. When illiberal secularists in the West interfere regarding the outfits of conservative Muslim women — with bans on the burqa, the “burkini” or even just the head scarf — the defense is found within liberalism: Women have the right to “dress as they please.” This, of course, is a perfectly legitimate argument in a free society. But the idea that women can “dress as they please” doesn’t actually go over well with some Muslims — if that means, for example, tight jeans and miniskirts. In Saudi Arabia and Iran women are forced by law to cover their heads. In fact, in some ways Saudi Arabia is a mirror image of the culturally hegemonic dystopia that Mr. Wilders dreams of: a land where the scriptures and shrines of a foreign religion are banned — not the Quran and mosques, in this case, but the Bible and churches”.

Akyol then calls to attention a strong confusion in Muslim minds “This is not to say that Muslims who ask for freedom in the West must be held accountable for the lack of freedom in “Islamic” states. But it does mean that Muslim opinion leaders — imams, scholars, intellectuals — should give serious thought to a key question: Is liberalism a good or bad thing for Muslims? Should they embrace freedom or not?” I would like to suggest an amendment to this question: “Does our Shari’ah promotes liberalism and freedom?”

The author then goes on to provide some good and educational examples of oddities and inconsistencies in Muslim social behavior “Often Muslims support liberalism when it serves them and reject it when it does not. They use the religious freedom in the West, for example, to seek converts to Islam, while condemning converts from Islam to another religion as “apostates” who deserve death. Or ask for the right to freely organize political rallies in Europe, while you are crushing opposition rallies at home — as the Turkish government recently did during its spat with the Netherlands. Such double standards can be found in every society. Mr. Wilders himself, who cheers for “freedom” while aiming to ban the Quran, is a striking example. But some contemporary Muslims do it too easily, switching at will between “our rules” and “their rules.” The prominent Turkish theologian Ali Bardakoglu, the former head of the Religious Directorate, wrote about this “double morality” in a recent book and called on fellow Muslims to be more self-critical about it. Muslims should not be, he argued, “people who can surf between different value systems.”

Akyol ends his piece with a provocative and debatable quandary and predicament facing the present day Muslims. He offers a lucid and rational description of the problem and leaves us to find our own answers:

“The deeper problem is that Islam, as a legal and moral tradition, developed at a time when the world was a very different place. There was a very limited concept of individual freedom, as people lived in strictly defined communities. There were no notions of international law, universal human rights, the secular state or freedom of religion. Moreover, Muslims were often the dominant faith, making the rules to their advantage — such as tolerating non-Muslims as “protected” but inferior communities.

That premodern world is long gone. There is now an increasingly diverse world where boundaries fade, cultures meet and individuals roam. And the forces that try to reverse this trend — liberal globalization — are often the very forces that despise Islam and threaten Muslims.

Muslim opinion leaders have to decide where they stand. Do we Muslims want a free world with universal principles in which everyone, including us, lives according to their own values? Or do we prefer a segregated world where whoever grabs power imposes their values? And, if we choose the latter, what is going to protect us from all the Geert Wilderses of the world? In fact, what makes us any different?”

Chechen Authorities Allegedly Tell Parents: ‘Kill Your Gay Sons Or We Will’ Is This a Demand of Islamic Shari’ah? or Is it a denigration of Muslims and Islam?

Chechen Authorities Allegedly Tell Parents: ‘Kill Your Gay Sons Or We Will’

Is This a Demand of Islamic Shari’ah?

Is it a denigration of Muslims and Islam?

I was shocked to read an article in the Huffpost of May 4, 2017 by James Michael Nichols Chechen Authorities Allegedly Tell Parents: "Kill Your Gay Sons or We Will" . It tells of very sordid state of affairs. Among other things it reports:

“Throughout the course of April, different reports from Russia media claimed that gay men were being rounded up and held in “concentration camps” in the republic of Chechnya, with detainees subjected to torture and death………….“They tell the parents to kill their child,” one survivor states in the above video. “They say: ‘Either you do it or we will.’ They call it: ‘Cleaning your honor with blood.’……………“They tortured a man for two weeks. They summoned his parents and brothers who all came. They said to them: ‘your son is a homosexual. Sort it out or we’ll do it ourselves.’ They replied: ‘It’s our family, we’ll do it.’ The family took him and killed him in the forest. They buried him there. They didn’t even give him a funeral. If I go home my own family will kill me.”

How do you feel on reading it? I feel small and ashamed. I hope this turns out to be a fake news. I share with most of my Muslims brothers and sisters a feeling of disgust and loathing at homosexuality. It is the result of centuries of the dominant view of Islamic scholarship. Rise above these emotions, and one feels immediately that something is amiss. It does not seem right. At least the punishment suggested and given sounds severe and unjust and therefore un-Islamic

It is noteworthy that Shari’-ate Mohammedi (the law that Prophet Mohammed enforced) is silent on the status of homosexuality and its punishment. We have not received any direct commandments on this subject in the Quran or from our beloved Prophet. The Quran mentions clearly that the followers of Prophet Lut were guilty of this sin and that they were punished. However, there is so much of new God-given information on this subject since then. Our scholars need to re-assess the problem and guide us on this.

I had discussed this problem in my blog few years earlier: Is Muslim Fixation About Homosexuality Supported by the Quran and Shari'ah. Later in April 2014 I revisited the issue in another blog Rethinking Homosexuality: Fiqh and Shari'ah v/s Modern Knowledge and Trend with the following opening remarks: “We have discussed this Ayah in October 2012. Since then the topic of Homosexuality has gathered tremendous momentum, specially in US. I feel we ought to re-visit, revise and update this issue to confidently and rationally work out the Islamic attitude on this burning topic”. I would like to share with you the “conclusions” I had made in that article hoping that it may help you in a small manner to analyse the problem of Homosexuality in the light of Theological and Shari’ah guidelines of our Deen while standing firmly in the twenty first century and resolutely fighting all attempts to be pushed back into the seventh. I have stated in my blog:

“My conclusions are the following:

• The Quran refers to homosexuality many times as the practice of People of Lut living in 2000 BC in the Shari’ah of Prophet Lut and squarely condemns it

• The folks of Lut were annihilated as they refused to give up this “wicked, perverse and disobedient” practice

• There is no direct commandment in our Holy Book for Muslims about homosexuality

• A rule of Shari’ah of the previous Prophets is binding on us unless it has been abrogated by the Holy Prophet

• Hence, Islam considers homosexuality a sin and forbids it

• It is KUFR even to challenge, let alone disobey a clear injunction in the Quran

• However scholarly opinions based on interpretation of and/or deduction from Quranic ayahs are open to scrutiny and critique

• There was no occasion for indictment or punishment for this vice during the life span of the Holy Prophet; hence he is silent on it.

• The Hadith literature is replete with very harsh punishment for this practice.

• Most of us Muslims have grown up with an innate disgust for this practice.

• The Islamic attitude towards homosexuals is complex, diverse and uncertain and needs a serious attention of our scholars and imams in the light of current scientific knowledge and cultural and social demands and practices

• There is no reliable and authentic scientific evidence to prove that homosexuality is a normal occurrence in the spectrum of human sexual orientation. If ever there is one, a Muslim is obliged to consider it.

• It remains controversial, if this practice can be altered or “cured.”

• It is a wrong approach to make homosexuality an issue of Human Rights or Individual freedom. It is a religious, ethical and philosophical problem for the civilised society.

• The LGBT should not be allowed to destroy the sacred, basic and fundamental Institution of heterosexual Marriage recognised since known human history.”

Search This Blog

THE ISLAMIC SHARI’AH HAS ZERO TOLERANCE FOR ARROGANCE AS PER THE QURAN AND HADITH

“What Does It Mean to Be a ‘Secular Muslim’?” Is It Compatible wth Islamic Shari’ah?

HEY MUSLIMS, LET US MAKE UP OUR MIND -- LET US NOT PUZZLE AND MUDDLE ISLAM AND IT’S SHARI’AH

Chechen Authorities Allegedly Tell Parents: ‘Kill Your Gay Sons Or We Will’ Is This a Demand of Islamic Shari’ah? or Is it a denigration of Muslims and Islam?