Equating U.S. and ISIS in some areas; Misleading and Dangerous

Equating U.S. and ISIS in some areas

 Misleading and Dangerous

I was sent an email quoting an article by Chris Hedges “ Violence Begets Violence: How Sometimes the U.S. Acts Like the Islamic State. The United States needs to answer for its own human rights violations.” The full article is attached hereunder.

Without going into the details of the arguments therein, I replied that the basic premise is misleading and dangerous. I wrote:

“U.S. policies, on many occasions are blatantly wrong, undemocratic and even mischievous. However, to draw any resemblance to ISIS is tantamount to granting a great honor to the Islamic State — the psychopathic monster who has given up all norms of civilised behaviour. It is specially distressing and painful for a Muslim because they are subjecting large number of Muslims and minorities under their control to real hardships including rape and beheadings. All this,in the name of Islam, under the banner with our sacred Shahada on it and conducted with our elevating religious slogan Allah-o-Akbar.” 

The original article:

CIVIL LIBERTIES 

Violence Begets Violence: How Sometimes the U.S. Acts Like the Islamic State

The United States needs to answer for its own human rights violations. 

By Chris Hedges /  Truthdig

March 30, 2016

Revenge is the psychological engine of war. Victims are the blood currency. Their corpses are used to

sanctify acts of indiscriminate murder. Those defined as the enemy and targeted for slaughter are

rendered inhuman. They are not worthy of empathy or justice. Pity and grief are felt exclusively for our

own. We vow to eradicate a dehumanized mass that embodies absolute evil. The maimed and dead in

Brussels or Paris and the maimed and dead in Raqqa or Sirte perpetuate the same dark lusts. We

all are Islamic State.

“From violence only violence is born,” Primo Levi wrote, “following a pendular action that, as time goes by, rather than dying down, becomes more frenzied.”

The tit-for-tat game of killing will not end until exhaustion, until the culture of death breaks us emotionally and physically. We use our drones, warplanes, missiles and artillery to rip apart walls and ceilings, blow out windows and kill or wound those inside. 

Our enemies pack peroxide-based explosives in suitcases or suicide vests and walk into airport terminals, concert halls, cafes or subways and blow us up, often along with themselves. 

If they had our technology of death they would do it more efficiently. But they do not. Their tactics are cruder, but morally they are the same as us. T.E. Lawrence called this cycle of violence “the rings of sorrow.”

The Christian religion embraces the concept of “holy war” as fanatically as Islam does. Our Crusades are matched by the concept of jihad. Once religion is used to sanctify murder there are no rules. It is a battle between light and dark, good and evil, Satan and God. Rational discourse is banished. And “the sleep of reason,” as Goya said, “brings forth monsters.”

Flags, patriotic songs, a deification of the warrior and sentimental drivel drown out reality. We communicate in empty clichés and mindless, patriotic absurdities. Mass culture is used to reinforce the lie that we are the true victims. It re-creates the past to conform to the national heroic myth. We alone are said to possess virtue and courage. We alone have the right to revenge. We are hypnotized into a communal somnolence, a state-induced blindness.

Those we fight, lacking our industrial machines of death, kill up close. But killing remotely does not make us less morally deformed. Long-distance killing, epitomized by drone operators at Air Force bases within the United States who go home for dinner, is as depraved. These technicians make the vast machinery of death operate with a terrifying clinical sterility. They depersonalize industrial war. They are the “little Eichmanns.” This organized bureaucracy of killing is the most enduring legacy of the Holocaust.

“The mechanized, rational, impersonal, and sustained mass destruction of human beings, organized and administered by states, legitimized and set into motion by scientists and jurists, sanctioned and popularized by academics and intellectuals, has become a staple of our civilization, the last, perilous, and often repressed heritage of the millennium,” Omer Bartov wrote in Murder in Our Midst: The Holocaust, Industrial Killing and Representation.

We torture kidnapped captives, many held for years, in black sites. We carry out “targeted assassinations” of so-called high-value targets. We abolish civil liberties. We drive millions of families from their homes. Those who oppose us do the same. They torture and behead—replicating the execution style of the Christian Crusaders—with their own brand of savagery. They rule as despots. Pain for pain. Blood for blood. Horror for horror. There is a fearsome symmetry to the madness. It is justified by the same religious perversion. It is the same abandonment of what it means to be humane and just.

As psychologist Rollo May wrote:

At the outset of every war … we hastily transform our enemy into the image of the daimonic; and then, since it is the devil we are fighting, we can shift onto a war footing without asking ourselves all the troublesome and spiritual questions that the war arouses. We no longer have to face the realization that those we are killing are persons like ourselves.

The killing and torture, the more they endure, contaminate the perpetrators and the society that condones their actions. They sever the professional inquisitors and killers from the capacity to feel. They feed the death instinct. They expand the moral injury of war.

Twenty-two veterans of U.S. military service commit suicide every day. They do it without an explosives belt. But they share, with suicide bombers, the overpowering urge to be rid of the world and the sordid role they had in it.

“It is better to suffer certain injustices than to commit them,” Albert Camus, like Immanuel Kant, understood. But the politicians, pundits and mass culture dismiss such wisdom as weakness. Those who speak with sanity, like Euripides when he produced his anti-war masterpiece The Trojan Women, are reviled and banished.

Who are we to condemn the indiscriminate murder of civilians? Have we forgotten our bombing of German and Japanese cities in World War II that left 800,000 civilian women, children and men dead? 

What about those families we obliterated in Dresden (135,000 dead), Tokyo (97,000 dead), Hiroshima (80,000 dead) and Nagasaki (66,000 dead)? What about the 3 million civilian dead we left behind in Vietnam?

We dropped 32 tons of bombs per hour on North Vietnam between 1965 and 1968—hundreds of Hiroshimas. And, as Nick Turse writes in his book Kill Anything That Moves: The Real American War in Vietnam, this tonnage does not count the “millions of gallons of chemical defoliants, millions of pounds of chemical gases, and endless canisters of napalm; cluster bombs, high-explosive shells, and daisy-cutter bombs that obliterated everything within a ten-football-field diameter; antipersonnel rockets, high-explosive rockets, incendiary rockets, grenades by the millions, and myriad different kinds of mines.”

Have we forgotten the millions who died in our wars and proxy wars in the Philippines, Congo, Laos, Cambodia, Guatemala, Indonesia, El Salvador and Nicaragua? Have we forgotten the 1 million dead in Iraq and the 92,000 dead in Afghanistan? Have we forgotten the nearly 8 million people we have driven from their homes in Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan and Syria?

There have been 87,000 coalition sorties over Iraq and Syria since the air campaign against Islamic State began. This is the newest chapter in our endless war against the wretched of the earth.

How can we rise up in indignation over Islamic State’s destruction of cultural monuments such as Palmyra when we have left so many in ruins? 

As Frederick Taylor points out in his book Dresden, during the World War II bombing of Germany we destroyed countless “churches, palaces, historic buildings, libraries, museums,” including “Goethe’s house in Frankfurt” and “the bones of Charlemagne from Aechen cathedral” along with “the irreplaceable contents of the four-hundred-year-old State Library in Munich.” 

Does anyone remember that in a single week of bombing during the Vietnam War we obliterated most of that country’s historic My Son temple complex? 

Have we forgotten that our invasion of Iraq led to the burning of the National Library, the looting of the National Museum and the construction of a military base on the site of the ancient city of Babylon? Thousands of archeological sites have been destroyed because of the wars we spawned in Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan and Libya.

We perfected the technique of aerial mass murder and wholesale destruction that we call “carpet bombing,” “saturation bombing,” “area bombing,” “obliteration bombing,” “mass bombing” or, in its latest version, “shock and awe.” We created, through our national wealth, the managerial systems and technology that the sociologist James William Gibson calls “technowar.” 

What were the attacks of 9/11 but an answer to the explosions and death we inflicted on towns and cities around the globe? Our attackers spoke to us in the demented language we taught them. They, like the attackers in Paris and Brussels, knew exactly how we communicate.

The merchants of death, the arms manufacturers, are among the few who profit. Most of the rest of us are caught in a cycle of violence that will not cease until we end the U.S. occupation of the Middle East, until we learn to speak in a language other than the primitive howl of war, death and annihilation. We will recover a humane language when we have had enough, when there are too many of our own dead for us to sustain the game. The victims will continue to be mostly innocents, trapped between killers that come from the same womb.

Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter, writes a regular column for Truthdig every Monday. 

Quran and Shari'ah on the Purpose and Style of Dress (distinct from Hijaab) for Muslim Men and Women

Quran and Shari'ah on the Purpose and Style of Dress 
(distinct from Hijaab) for Muslim Men and Women

ABSTRACT

Islam + Dress = Hijaab. So it appears. If you google “Islam and dress” the majority of articles are discussing hijaab; we have discussed it earlier. This article discusses two ayahs that offer general and definite guidance and instructions on how and what to dress: “O CHILDREN of Adam! Indeed, We have bestowed upon you from on high [the knowledge of making] garments to cover your nakedness, and as a thing of beauty: but the garment of God-consciousness is the best of all. Herein lies a message from God, so that man might take it to heart.” and “O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer: eat and drink: But waste not by excess, for God loveth not the wasters”. Before discussing these ayahs, the exact source/sources to guide and lead us to live our Deen in the modern world are discussed. An ayah is quoted which clearly but indirectly advises not to transgress about the role of Ulemaa: “They have taken their rabbis and their monks - as well as the Christ, son of Mary - for their lords beside God, although they had been bidden to worship none but the One God, save whom there is no deity: the One who is utterly remote, in His limitless glory, from anything to which they may ascribe a share in His divinity!” The three aspects of a Muslim dress mentioned in the index ayah are analysed. The word “zeenah" lends itself to two different forms and appearances:1) Natural or bodily beauty, 2)  Acquired adornment which again has two distinct styles: a) Ornaments of gold, silver, platinum, glass etc and b) Clothes of different material,colour, designs and embroidery. These are discussed in some detail as there is lot of variation, controversy and debate on this aspect across the Muslim community presenting some very comical or contradictory spectacles on the streets, malls and parties. The article mentions an ayah which emphasizes that by wearing nice clothes and putting on a good appearance, we are also remembering and acknowledging Allah’s blessings upon us: “Say, ‘Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah, which He has brought forth for His servants and the good things, clean and pure, which Allah has provided for them?’ Say, ‘They are [lawful] for the believers in the present life but they shall be exclusively for them on the Day of Resurrection. Thus We explain Our signs for a people who understand.” Generally speaking the Shari‛ah does not prescribe a special type of clothing. All kinds are acceptable within the bounds set up by Islam. A dress does not and cannot display our Islamic identity as there is no such thing as a “Islamic Dress.” It is a common belief that our dress should be different from the non-believers. Not true. A Muslim attire should not be translucent or tight, both for men and women. Jewelry and make-up within the limits discussed would be perfectly legitimate. Perfume is included in this category. Both genders are refrained from dressing like the opposite gender. A Muslim should not dress for fame, pride and vanity.

March 26, 2016

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

 “An Ayah of the Quran for 30 Days” -- Mach  2016

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                            Two +      Pages

The Main Story:           Recommended                                Four +      Pages

Footnotes:                   For the Perfectionist                         One +       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 email 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 recall 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 compulsory 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 A’Araf 7, Ayah 26

يا بَني آدَمَ قَد أَنزَلنا عَلَيكُم لِباسًا يُواري سَوآتِكُم وَريشًا وَلِباسُ التَّقوىٰ ذٰلِكَ خَيرٌ ۚ ذٰلِكَ مِن آياتِ اللَّهِ لَعَلَّهُم يَذَّكَّرونَ

“O CHILDREN of Adam! Indeed, We have bestowed upon you from on high [the knowledge of making] garments to cover your nakedness, and as a thing of beauty: but the garment of God-consciousness is the best of all. Herein lies a message from God, so that man might take it to heart.”

A SHORT VERSION

 Islam + Dress = Hijaab. So it appears. If you google “Islam and dress” the majority of articles are discussing hijaab. On the other hand the Quranic concept of Hijaab is about the attitude and behaviour at inter-gender social communications and interaction; it is not about the dress. However I do not intend to discuss this issue right now. Earlier, we have discussed “Hijaab” in two sessions:
                                                                      http://khalidmitha.blogspot.com/2015/07/is-it-correct-to-designate-headscarf.html
                                                                      http://khalidmitha.blogspot.com/2015/07/hijaab-shariah-version-vs-late.html
                                                                   
As the index ayah reads, Islam offers general and definite guidance and instructions  on how and what to dress.

I recall distinctly my thoughts on the flight from UK to Karachi……………..(see the Main Story) Let us try once again to define this issue of finding the source so that we can find out what Islam has to say about the dress for women and men. 

Without any doubts or debate, Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo is the ONLY —Primary, secondary, tertiary —  source. HE has chosen Islam as the Deen for all mankind from start to finish. Consequently therefore,  we have to look towards HIM and to HIM alone to find what Islam is about. HE has blessed us with the Holy Quran describing the Principles and Philosophy of our Deen and defining a complete code of life for us. Hence the Holy Text becomes our Primary and Only source for guidance and instructions on Islam. 

The Holy Book has reached us through the lips of our Beloved Holy Prophet Mohammed, may Peace be on him. He is therefore our Primary source on the ground, recognizable and reachable to our senses to learn about Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo, HIS Book and Islam. Be sure, the Holy Prophet has asserted clearly and repeatedly that he is not a law maker or a law giver. He is the Messenger of Allah to explain, elaborate and implement the Divine Plan. This is the “sunnah” — the source of Islam on the ground. 

Next comes the valuable and profuse Hadith literature. Valuable yes, but confusing and misleading at times because of the uncritical (and therefore un-Islamic) conformity to this precious source of information about the words and deeds of our Holy Prophet. First and foremost it is certainly not synonymous with Sunnah…………………(See the main story)

Ijmaa and ijtihaad are technique and process to reach a source or interpret a source; they are not sources in themselves. Just to illustrate the point, the ijmaa of scholars on a point not found in Quran or Sunnah will not make it an issue of our Deen. 

Lastly about the role of Scholars and Ulemaa. Without any hesitation, we have to learn from them. We will be certainly lost without them. But the Holy Quran has clearly though indirectly warned us to avoid transgression in this direction:³     

“They have taken their rabbis and their monks - as well as the Christ, son of Mary - for their lords beside God, although they had been bidden to worship none but the One God, save whom there is no deity: the One who is utterly remote, in His limitless glory, from anything to which they may ascribe a share in His divinity!”

We need the Imams, the Mufassirs, the Muftis, the Mohaddisins and the Shaikhs and need them badly to learn and understand our Deen. That is their sole and only role……………

The index ayah has addressed the Children of Adam. This is the special style of our Text when it wants to address the mankind as a whole. The message in this ayah is addressed to all humans, as distinct from

animals to hide and cover their private and shameful parts; it is both a human need and a

natural desire………….

The ayah, then describes a second purpose of clothing: as a thing of beauty or an adornment for us. “Wa Reeshan” literally means "as plumage”, metaphorically referring to the beauty of birds' plumage. Thus ornamental clothing beautifying oneself is sanctioned and  encouraged in Islam. More about it later.

But the most important clothing as per this ayah is not of any fabric but of “God Consciousness” leading to garment of piety and righteousness which will guard against evil. To revere God and know that HE is always watching us is the basic rule for the dress code in the Quran. A woman knows intuitively what is decent and what is revealing; what is righteousness and how to maintain it. Women can be expected and trusted to make this distinction. This is why God sets in this ayah the rule of revering God and maintaining righteousness as the basic and foremost rule for the dress code.

Let me quote an additional ayah on the importance of good clothes and appearances:⁴  

“O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer: eat and drink: But waste not by excess, for God loveth not the wasters”.   

Literally “khuz zeenatakum” means  "take to your adornment". According to Raghib the proper meaning of the word “zeenah" is "a [beautifying] thing that does not disgrace or render unseemly ... either in the present world or in that which is to come”.  “Thus, it signifies anything of beauty in both the physical and moral connotations of the word” says Dr. Asad…………..

Locally and specifically, this ayah is a direct rebuke to the practice of the pagans of circumambulating the Kaaba naked and additionally  denying or restricting food during this time. However the ayah has wide general application by consensus………… Thus this ayah is talking of adornment, beauty or status by clothing, ornaments or any other item. But transgressions in the form of pride, temptation or wordiness  is strictly prohibited. 

As per this ayah Muslims are required to pay attention to their appearance, making sure that their clothing is beautiful and clean, especially when dealing with others and when performing the prayers. 

The matters do not stop here. There is another pretty ayah:⁵       

“Say, ‘Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah, which He has brought forth for His servants and the good things, clean and pure, which Allah has provided for them? Say, ‘They are [lawful] for the believers in the present life but they shall be exclusively for them on the Day of Resurrection.’ Thus We explain Our signs for a people who understand.”

emphasizing that by wearing nice clothes and putting on a good appearance, we are also remembering and acknowledging Allah’s blessings upon us.

The word “zeenah" lends itself to two different forms and appearances:

1) Natural or bodily beauty,

2)  Acquired adornment which again has two distinct styles:

a) Ornaments of gold, silver, platinum, glass etc

b) Clothes of different material, colour , designs and embroidery

There is lot of variation, controversy and debate on this aspect across the Muslim community presenting some very comical or contradictory spectacles on the streets, malls and parties. Led by our sense of righteousness as demanded by the ayahs discussed, the dictates of the pure nature innate in all humans (fitrah), simple reasoning and sound logic some  principles of dress, attitude and behavior can be framed based on the principles  mentioned in these ayahs.

Let me first emphasize a very important general rule in our Shari’ah………….

Hence, generally speaking the Shari‛ah does not prescribe a special type of clothing……… 

I have said “within the bounds set up by Islam”. What are these bounds? An Islamic dress promotes modesty and seeks to minimize vice and immorality in society. Contrary to the modern trend of  proudly using the word “sexy” Islam denounces any sex appeal and physical allurement outside the bedroom. This is lethal to the development of a happy Family — the unit of an Islamic society…………. 

It is a common belief that our dress should be different from the non-believers. Not true. Our Holy Prophet adored the same dress as those of pagan Quraish and never advised  the sahaabaa on a particular style of dress ……………

A Muslim attire should not be translucent or tight, both for men and women…………….

Jewelry and make-up within the limits we have discussed would be perfectly legitimate. Perfume is included in this category…….

Both genders are refrained from dressing like the opposite gender. …….l

A Muslim should not  dress for fame, pride and vanity………..

The dress must cover the whole body down from the shoulders; I do not intend discussing the debatable and emotional problem of covering the hair and face.

The discussion on dress in the Quran revolves round the experience of Sayyidna Adam and Sayyidna Hawa. Let me quote two ayahs on this subject as I conclude this discussion:⁶ ……………..    

........and Allah knows best. 

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

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

 Islam + Dress = Hijaab. So it appears. If you google “Islam and dress” the majority of articles are discussing hijaab. On the other hand the Quranic concept of Hijaab is about the attitude and behaviour at inter-gender social communications and interaction; it is not about the dress. However I do not intend to discuss this issue right now. Earlier, we have discussed “Hijaab” in two sessions earlier:
                                                                          http://khalidmitha.blogspot.com/2015/07/is-it-correct-to-designate-headscarf.html
                                                                      http://khalidmitha.blogspot.com/2015/07/hijaab-shariah-version-vs-late.html
                                                                   
As the index ayah reads, Islam offers general and definite guidance and instructions  on how and what to dress.

I recall distinctly my thoughts on the flight from UK to Karachi. I had just finished my studies. Your generation cannot imagine the sentiments and enthusiasm and thrill of an Indian Muslim with a British passport heading towards the capital of the Islamic State of Pakistan, the land of his dreams. As I was reading a book on Islam ( I have forgotten which one) my focus was on finding an answer to: How do we decide the Islamic answer to a given issue? What is the exact source/sources to guide and lead us to live our Deen in the modern world? Half a century later, I still find myself debating this issue, searching for an answer. Let us try once again to define this issue so that we can find out what Islam has to say about the dress for women and men. 

Without any doubts or debate, Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo is the ONLY —Primary, secondary, tertiary —  source. HE has chosen Islam as the Deen for all mankind from start to finish. Consequently therefore,  we have to look towards HIM and to HIM alone to find what Islam is about. HE has blessed us with the Holy Quran describing the Principles and Philosophy of our Deen and defining a complete code of life for us. Hence the Holy Text becomes our Primary and Only source for guidance and instructions on Islam. 

The Holy Book has reached us through the lips of our Beloved Holy Prophet Mohammed, may Peace be on him. He is therefore our Primary source on the ground, recognizable and reachable to our senses to learn about Allah Ta'aala Subhaanahoo, HIS Book and Islam. Be sure, the Holy Prophet has asserted clearly and repeatedly that he is not a law maker or a law giver. He is the Messenger of Allah to explain, elaborate and implement the Divine Plan. This is the “sunnah” — the source of Islam on the ground. 

Next comes the valuable and profuse Hadith literature. Valuable yes, but confusing and misleading at times because of the uncritical (and therefore un-Islamic) conformity to this precious source of information about the words and deeds of our Holy Prophet. First and foremost it is certainly not synonymous with Sunnah. The latter was played out in the early seventh century over a span of twenty two years while the hadith literature was compiled two hundred years later in mid-ninth century. Hence these just cannot be the same thing. Hadith is a very good and most common source to find the sunnah of the Prophet. As a matter of fact, for Ibaadah, Hadith is the only source. Any ritual not supported by hadith immediately becomes a bidah. However a misconception about the nature and significance of the substance of hadith has led to a very damaging distortion of our Deen. The love, respect, awe and regard that the Sahaabaa had for the towering figure of our Holy Prophet was phenomenal and understandably so. Hence every word that came out of his noble lips was recorded somewhere by somebody. But the noble Messenger was very cordial, friendly and affable with his sahaabaa. He was more than willing to respond to anybody and any question. Many and many of the topics and discussions in that august company had nothing to do with our deen. They were general topics like tribal customs or poetry or incidents and happenings  of the day where the Holy Prophet expressed his private feelings and opinions. He used to enjoy jokes and poetry in the company of sahaabaa. All these have become part of the hadith literature but cannot and should not be regarded as part of our deen. Resorting to hadith for guidance, therefore should not be taken lightly. Just stating “It is stated in hadith” has led to some opinions and practices in religion in gross conflict with the teachings of the Holy Quran. I refer to this fact in the Preamble to each monthly session. Exact reference and the occasion and audience of a given hadith must be carefully sifted before acting on it. Is the substance of a hadith inherently a matter of our deen, for example prayers or fasting or has the Prophet labelled it as a part of deen? If yes then acceptance becomes mandatory. If not then the hadith remains important but not relevant to our Deen.

Ijmaa and ijtihaad are technique and process to reach a source or interpret a source; they are not sources in themselves. Just to illustrate the point, the ijmaa of scholars on a point not found in Quran or Sunnah will not make it an issue of our Deen. 

Lastly about the role of Scholars and Ulemaa. Without any hesitation, we have to learn from them. We will be certainly lost without them. But the Holy Quran has clearly though indirectly warned us to avoid transgression in this direction:³     

“They have taken their rabbis and their monks - as well as the Christ, son of Mary - for their lords beside God, although they had been bidden to worship none but the One God, save whom there is no deity: the One who is utterly remote, in His limitless glory, from anything to which they may ascribe a share in His divinity!”

We need the Imams, the Mufassirs, the Muftis, the Mohaddisins and the Shaikhs and need them badly to learn and understand our Deen. That is their sole and only role with all due respect. They are not the source of our Deen but our guide, adviser and model on the path that leads to the source. We are not allowed to idolize or deify them; certainly not worship them. We will be absolutely on our own in the dock on the Day of Judgement. Not even our Four Great Imams have promised any help on the Final Day. Even our parents and children will be nowhere near us to hold out hand. We will have to learn to speak for ourselves in our Final Viva.

The index ayah has addressed the Children of Adam. This is the special style of our Text when it wants to address the mankind as a whole. The message in this ayah is addressed to all humans, as distinct from

animals to hide and cover their private and shameful parts; it is both a human need and a

natural desire. In Saudi Arabia of those days the immodest exposure of the private parts of their body in public was common such as publicly taking a bath absolutely naked or to attend to the call of nature on thoroughfares.  Disgracefully they used to circumambulate around the Ka'bah in stark nakedness. Women were not far behind. Such practices are flagrantly displayed in modern “liberal” Western societies also. The other day, as I was changing in the locker room of YMCA a fully naked man walked frontally towards me; I found it very disgusting. There should not be any place in civilised human society for nudism. We Muslims should have zero tolerance for it.Every year fashion centers in Europe and America come up with the latest designs with greater exhibitionism and lesser privacy and protection. There is an inborn sense of shame in humans. However the modern “liberal” movement has successfully muted that sense in large sections of humanity. I can confidently state that people of all religions agree on the need to cover themselves in public; unfortunately the hold of religion in actual life has relaxed a lot. To cover or not to cover has become a real struggle.

The ayah, then describes a second purpose of clothing: as a thing of beauty or an adornment for us. “Wa Reeshan” literally means "as plumage”, metaphorically referring to the beauty of birds' plumage. Thus ornamental clothing beautifying oneself is sanctioned and  encouraged in Islam. More about it later.

But the most important clothing as per this ayah is not of any fabric but of “God Consciousness” leading to garment of piety and righteousness which will guard against evil. To revere God and know that HE is always watching us is the basic rule for the dress code in the Quran. A woman knows intuitively what is decent and what is revealing; what is righteousness and how to maintain it. Women can be expected and trusted to make this distinction. This is why God sets in this ayah the rule of revering God and maintaining righteousness as the basic and foremost rule for the dress code.

Let me quote an additional ayah on the importance of good clothes and appearances:⁴  

“O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel at every time and place of prayer: eat and drink: But waste not by excess, for God loveth not the wasters”.   

Literally “khuz zeenatakum” means  "take to your adornment". According to Raghib the proper meaning of the word “zeenah" is "a [beautifying] thing that does not disgrace or render unseemly ... either in the present world or in that which is to come”.  “Thus, it signifies anything of beauty in both the physical and moral connotations of the word” says Dr. Asad. Another scholar Yousuf Ali defines “zeenah” as  “…..adornments or apparel for beautiful living: construed to mean not only clothes that add grace to the wearer, but toilet and cleanliness, attention to hair, and other small personal details which no self respecting man or woman ought to neglect….” A dirty, unkept, slovenly Faqir could not claim sanctity in Islam. 

Locally and specifically, this ayah is a direct rebuke to the practice of the pagans of circumambulating the Kaaba naked and additionally  denying or restricting food during this time. However the ayah has wide general application by consensus. Another scholar defines “zeenah” as “The word zeenah which occurs in this verse refers to full and proper dress….one of a decent appearance…. refuting the misconception entertained by ignorant people down the ages that man should worship God either in a nude or semi-naked state, or at least have a shabby and unkempt appearance while worshipping.” Thus this ayah is talking of adornment, beauty or status by clothing, ornaments or any other item. But transgressions in the form of pride, temptation or wordiness  is strictly prohibited. 

As per this ayah Muslims are required to pay attention to their appearance, making sure that their clothing is beautiful and clean, especially when dealing with others and when performing the prayers. 

The matters do not stop here. There is another pretty ayah:⁵       

“Say, ‘Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah, which He has brought forth for His servants and the good things, clean and pure, which Allah has provided for them? Say, ‘They are [lawful] for the believers in the present life but they shall be exclusively for them on the Day of Resurrection.’ Thus We explain Our signs for a people who understand.”

emphasizing that by wearing nice clothes and putting on a good appearance, we are also remembering and acknowledging Allah’s blessings upon us.

The word “zeenah" lends itself to two different forms and appearances:

1) Natural or bodily beauty,

2)  Acquired adornment which again has two distinct styles:

a) Ornaments of gold, silver, platinum, glass etc

b) Clothes of different material, colour , designs and embroidery

There is lot of variation, controversy and debate on this aspect across the Muslim community presenting some very comical or contradictory spectacles on the streets, malls and parties. Led by our sense of righteousness as demanded by the ayahs discussed, the dictates of the pure nature innate in all humans (fitrah), simple reasoning and sound logic some  principles of dress, attitude and behavior can be framed based on the principles  mentioned in these ayahs.

Let me first emphasize a very important general rule in our Shari’ah. There is a clear distinction between the rules for Ibaadaat and Muaamlaat. The former has to be based on clear dictates in the traditions; if not these will be labelled as bidah'. The rule is exactly opposite for the latter: everything is allowed unless there is evidence in the Text, sunnah or traditions to the contrary. 

Hence, generally speaking the Shari‛ah does not prescribe a special type of clothing. All kinds are acceptable within the bounds set up by Islam. A dress does not and cannot display our Islamic identity because there is no such thing as a “Islamic Dress”.  Islam gives us ample room to accommodate our needs, circumstances and tastes. The design of our dress must avoid, though three deadly sins: show off, arrogance, and self indulgence. A Hadith states "Eat what you feel like and wear what you feel like. But avoid two things: extravagance and arrogance." [Bukhari].

I have said “within the bounds set up by Islam”. What are these bounds? An Islamic dress promotes modesty and seeks to minimize vice and immorality in society. Contrary to the modern trend of  proudly using the word “sexy” Islam denounces any sex appeal and physical allurement outside the bedroom. This is lethal to the development of a happy Family — the unit of an Islamic society. It is natural and physiological that a woman in a scanty and revealing dress produces feelings of unwanted and inappropriate arousal in young people.  “The eye is the spy of the hearts and the messenger of the intellect; therefore lower your gaze from whatever is not appropriate to your faith...” Lantern of the Path. In short, an erotic dress is out of bonds of Shari’ah. Our deen allows inter gender communications but wants definite  restrictions on the dress to maintain a standard of morality.  On the other hand the ayahs under discussion are clear and vocal to differentiate between erotic appeal and beauty and elegance. Our sisters, wives and daughters are free to  indulge in gratifying their God given inner desire to dress up with clothes and ornaments to look pretty and lovely. A righteous Muslim woman will stay intuitively miles away from being enticing or seductive. I admit the distinction at times gets blurred. We will shortly discuss the limits to stay safe.

It is a common belief that our dress should be different from the non-believers. Not true. Our Holy Prophet adored the same dress as those of pagan Quraish and never advised  the sahaabaa on a particular style of dress . Hence imitation here does not include wearing clothing that is predominant in one’s country even if such dress is worn by the majority of non-Muslims. The Prophet  said, “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” (Sunan Abu Daawood: 4031) This imitation refers to dress specific to a religion or of religious significance such as those of monks and priests or wearing a cross.

A Muslim attire should not be translucent or tight, both for men and women. Tight clothes, while concealing the colour of the skin, describe the size and shape of the body or part of it and create vivid images. The dress must be loose enough so as not to describe the curves of a woman's body. As defined above, these are the “natural” parts of female “zeenah”. Therefore, skin-tight and see-through clothes are not allowed in Islam. In fact, the Prophet  warned those people who do not observe modesty in dress, calling them “types among the people of Hellfire”, one of them being “women who are clothed yet naked”. The aim should not be to attract the attention of the opposite gender.

Jewelry and make-up within the limits we have discussed would be perfectly legitimate. Perfume is included in this category. Extravagance, as a general rule of Islam has to be avoided. The Holy Prophet  once said, “Eat, give charity and wear clothes. Let no extravagance or pride be mixed with what you do.” (Sunan An-Nasaa’ee: 2559)

Both genders are refrained from dressing like the opposite gender. lbn 'Abbas narrated that "The Prophet cursed the men who act like women and the women who act like men.”Additionally men are not permitted to wear garments made of silk or jewelry made of gold.

A Muslim should not  dress for fame, pride and vanity. Such fame may be sought by wearing an excessively fancy dress as a status symbol or an excessively ragged dress to gain others' admiration of one's humility. Both motives are improper by Islamic standards. The Prophet says:

"Whoever wears a dress of fame in this world; Allah will clothe him with a dress of humiliation in the day of resurrection, then set it afire.” About clothing that is worn with pride and conceit, the Prophet  said, “No one who has an atom’s weight of pride in his heart will enter Paradise.” (Saheeh Muslim: 91)

It is for this reason that Islam warns against trailing one’s lower garments on the ground out of pride. The Prophet  said, “On the Day of Resurrection, Allah will not even look at those who drag their garments on the ground out of pride.” (Saheeh Al-Bukhary: 3465; Saheeh Muslim: 2085)

The dress must cover the whole body down from the shoulders; I do not intend discussing the debatable and emotional problem of covering the hair and face.

The discussion on dress in the Quran revolves round the experience of Sayyidna Adam and Sayyidna Hawa. Let me quote two ayahs on this subject as I conclude this discussion:⁶     

“O children of Adam! Do not allow Satan to seduce you in the same way as he caused your ancestors to be driven out of the garden: he deprived them of their garment [of God-consciousness] in order to make them aware of their nakedness.” and⁷        

“and thus he led them on with deluding thoughts. But as soon as the two had tasted [the fruit] of the tree, they became conscious of their nakedness; and they began to cover themselves with pieced-together leaves from the garden. And their Sustainer called unto them: "Did I not forbid that tree unto you and tell you, 'Verily, Satan is your open foe?"

........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 9/31                  

اتَّخَذوا أَحبارَهُم وَرُهبانَهُم أَربابًا مِن دونِ اللَّهِ وَالمَسيحَ ابنَ مَريَمَ وَما أُمِروا إِلّا لِيَعبُدوا إِلٰهًا واحِدًا ۖ لا إِلٰهَ إِلّا هُوَ ۚ سُبحانَهُ عَمّا يُشرِكونَ

(4) Surah 7/31        

يا بَني آدَمَ خُذوا زينَتَكُم عِندَ كُلِّ مَسجِدٍ وَكُلوا وَاشرَبوا وَلا تُسرِفوا ۚ إِنَّهُ لا يُحِبُّ المُسرِفينَ

O Children of Adam! wear your beautiful apparel1 at every time and place of prayer: eat and drink: But waste not by excess, for God loveth not the wasters.  yousuf

(5) Surah 7/32

قُل مَن حَرَّمَ زينَةَ اللَّهِ الَّتي أَخرَجَ لِعِبادِهِ وَالطَّيِّباتِ مِنَ الرِّزقِ ۚ قُل هِيَ لِلَّذينَ آمَنوا فِي الحَياةِ الدُّنيا خالِصَةً يَومَ القِيامَةِ ۗ كَذٰلِكَ نُفَصِّلُ الآياتِ لِقَومٍ يَعلَمونَ

Say: Who hath forbidden the beautiful (gifts) of God,1 which He hath produced for His servants, and the things, clean and pure, (which He hath provided) for sustenance? Say: They are, in the life of this world, for those who believe, (and) purely2 for them on the Day of Judgment. Thus do We explain the signs in detail for those who understand.  you

(6) Surah 7/27 )Part of the ayah)

يا بَني آدَمَ لا يَفتِنَنَّكُمُ الشَّيطانُ كَما أَخرَجَ أَبَوَيكُم مِنَ الجَنَّةِ يَنزِعُ عَنهُما لِباسَهُما لِيُرِيَهُما سَوآتِهِما

O children of Adam! Do not allow Satan to seduce you in the same way as he caused your ancestors to be driven out of the garden: he deprived them of their garment [of God-consciousness] in order to make them aware of their nakedness.

(7) Surah 7/22

فَدَلّاهُما بِغُرورٍ ۚ فَلَمّا ذاقَا الشَّجَرَةَ بَدَت لَهُما سَوآتُهُما وَطَفِقايَخصِفانِ عَلَيهِما مِن وَرَقِ الجَنَّةِ ۖ وَناداهُما رَبُّهُما أَلَم أَنهَكُما عَن تِلكُمَا الشَّجَرَةِ وَأَقُل لَكُما إِنَّ الشَّيطانَ لَكُما عَدُوٌّ مُبينٌ

and thus he led them on with deluding thoughts. But as soon as the two had tasted [the fruit] of the tree, they became conscious of their nakedness; and they began to cover themselves with pieced-together leaves from the garden. And their Sustainer called unto them: "Did I not forbid that tree unto you and tell you, 'Verily, Satan is your open foe'?"

Interesting Remarks about Donald the Dirty and perhaps Reassuring

Interesting Remarks about Donald

  Dirty but Reassuring

Nicholas Kristof, Op-Ed columnist of New York Times had suggested on Twitter that Trump was pugnacious, pugilistic, preening and puerile. He then asked for other P words to describe him. The result was a deluge: “petulant, pandering, pathetic, peevish, prickly, pernicious, patronizing, Pantagruelian, prevaricating, phony, presumptuous, potty-mouthed, provocative, pompous, predatory and so many more, including the troubling “probably president.” He further added  “There’s something heartbreaking about the prospect that America’s next commander in chief may be a global joke, a man regarded in most foreign capitals as a buffoon, and a dangerous one.”

Response with Respect to Dalia Mogahed; What is Hijaab; Why the anti-Muslim Sentiments

Response with Respect to Dalia Mogahed

 What is Hijaab; Why the anti-Muslim Sentiments

I am probably being presumptuous to address Dalia Mogahed, a Muslim studies scholar,

researcher and pollster, an author, advisor and consultant. She has been addressed as “you're giving a TED Talk, you're clearly a deep thinker, you work at a fancy think tank, you're an exception, you're not the rule.” I describe myself as a PPK Muslim (proud, practicing, knowledgeable), So bear with me. I can assure you my aim is to dissect and clarify certain issues. I am confident that the Scholar will appreciate this sort of attitude. I would like to concentrate in this discussion on “us” rather than on “them”; a little bit of soul searching.

I would like to turn your question to yourself, Dalia Mogahed if I may. What do you think of yourself, when you look in the mirror? Do you feel that you are “flying the flag of faith” as you walk about? Certainly not; you are too wise and mature for that. However this is what the symbolism of the scarf has blown into these days. It is actually considered the poster girl for Islam by those who wear it. Whenever the electronic media is talking about Muslims or Islam, an image of ladies in attractive scarves pops up in the background. I would submit this is a very misleading depiction of “hijaab” as recommended in our Shari’ah. 

Pick up a textbook on “Fiqh”, the Islamic Jurisprudence anywhere in the world or read and consult any traditional Muslim Scholar of Sunni Islam you will find that the minimum requirement for Shari’ah Hijaab in all the four schools of thought is what the Somali Muslim Sisters wear in Minnesota: a long, loose and plain abaya from shoulders to the feet and a cloth (no fancy headscarf) to cover the head. This is the minimum. Three schools consider a face veil as mandatory. Hanafia regard a veil as optional but strongly recommend it. It is debatable if the female voice should be heard by men. The final and fundamental step in Hijaab is segregation of the genders in all out door activities. This is Classical Sunni Islam on Hijaab as enunciated by the four great Imams and organized and compiled by their students. I do not conform to this view, however. I prefer the Islamic scholarship which maintains that the Quran and Sunnah has not prescribed any dress code for Muslim women and men. Instead it has laid down very clear directions for modesty, decency and shyness (yes, shyness, a cool concept completely rooted out by the liberal Western societies) in the inter action between men and women. 

This trend of labelling just the headscarf —colorful, attractive, designer — as  hijaab without any other requirements in the dress is a development in the 1970s. It is mainly a geo-political phenomenon; a reaction to Western imperialism. The extreme agony of the Muslim Ummah at the humiliating defeat of three Arab states by Israel within six days gave this trend a great boost. An effort to display and exhibit our Islamic identity in some way became very urgent. The headscarf serves this purpose even though it draws a resemblance to Christian nuns.  To label this type of scarf as an Islamic hijaab has no basis in our Shari’ah. The practice of putting a scarf on the head with a short fitting shirt and skinny jeans is a simultaneous mockery of Shari’ah and liberal values. I have nothing against a headscarf. Go ahead and have it if you like it. But this will be a matter of personal taste; Shari’ah does not call for it.

Your comment  “One study found that 80 percent of news coverage about Islam and Muslims is negative” is very pertinent. There is another side of the coin. A Pew poll some time back had shown that 65% to 85% of population in most Muslim majority countries have a negative view of America. 

The adverse effect on you and so many other Muslims after 9/11 must have caused a lot of sorrow, pain and agony. Without in anyway underestimating its effect, I would like to add that this was a cataclysmic incident for America. A great degree of over reaction by a section of Americans is therefore very natural and expected. We must be generous to appreciate this fact and try to accommodate it. 

This would have died down in due course. It did not and the anti-Muslim sentiments continue. This again is a reaction to the continuing deaths and destruction in Europe, Africa and America committed by mis-guided Muslims under their perception of fighting in the cause of Islam. It hurts all of us. How do we respond to these sentiments against us. You have given some valuable suggestions. I would dare a few, realizing that they are not popular:

First, I would start with stressing a very confident and clear statement by American Muslims that America still is one of the best if not the best country for Muslims to live with its freedoms of religion and speech and its strong Rule of Law. We are very happy to be here.This will go a long way to reassure our fellow citizens. 

Second, we must realise and confess that the reaction of our non-Muslim fellow citizens is much milder in face of grave provocations like mass shootings of fellow workers as compared to the well known strong and physical reaction of Muslims in face of mild provocations like cartoons.

Third, I have evidence to think that many very good, sincere and practicing Muslims have some sympathy/support/justification for the Taliban, Al Qaeda and ISIS. Many of them just do not see any evidence to implicate them in any of the atrocities in US and Europe. This certainly complicates the situation.

ISIS is extremely audacious, thorough and persistent in its claim of working for the cause and glory of Islam. It is fiercely ideological and has a global reach. It has declared itself as a Caliphate, its leader has the name of a person who is next to our Holy Prophet, Caliph Abu Bakr Siddique, its flag has our Shahada on it and it embarks on its vicious bloody attacks using our holy slogan of Allah-o-Akbar. In its cruelty and barbarism it does qualify to what the Holy Quran says “asfala safeleen” — the lowest of the lowest. Therefore, I am sorry I cannot applaud when you say “ISIS has as much to do with Islam as the Ku Klux Klan has to do with Christianity.” First, it is not wise or scholarly to refer to another evil while discussing an evil. Second, the first and the main Ku Klux Klan flourished in the Southern United States more than a century ago in the late 1860s, then died out by the early 1870s. It worked for, not Christianity but white supremacy, white nationalism, and anti-immigration. It was the second group founded in1915 and flourishing nationwide in the early and mid-1920s that had a religious bias and opposed Catholics and Jews. The present KKK is week and mostly irrelevant.

I can sympathize with my fellow non-Muslim citizens when they find it hard to believe us when we just say “they are not one of us”. We have to try harder to convince them; as hard as ISIS tries to convince them that they are Islamic. The major step, I think is a honest, sincere and whole hearted and emphatic denunciation of the Talibaan, Al Qaeda and ISIS without any ifs and buts. Your advice “ Now, as a Muslim, as a mother, as a human being, I think we need to do everything we can to stop a group like ISIS. But we would be giving in to their narrative if we cast them as representatives of a faith of 1.6 billion people” is really fitting and pertinent and must be taken seriously by we Muslims. I am really sorry to say this but I have good reasons to believe it is not so. A very large section of Muslims do not think that Al Qaeda or ISIS has anything to do with the atrocities, death and destruction in New York, Boston, California, Paris, UK and Spain. Most Muslims are able to rationalize/ignore the most horrific crime — a major gunahe kabeera — of parading a young Jordanian Muslim pilot in a locked cage, sprinkling petroleum on him, light it to burn him to death screaming and shouting under video surveillance to be circulated on the internet!!! It beats me how a Muslim can have even a semblance of sympathy for such a hideous organization, more so if they do it under the banner of our Shahada and with our slogan Allah-o-Akbar. By consensus, no Muslim can stoop so low. But many good sincere Muslims do exactly that with a clear conscience. Why and how? They just deny the whole story completely. Consequently, our reaction to these obvious crimes does not go beyond some verbal denunciation from responsible organizations like ISNA. Almost the whole city was out in the streets in Paris after the “jihadi” carnage there. For San Bernardino, reaction of Muslims was opposite. The very next day I received an email suggesting no connection with any Muslim organization. Even today many Muslims state that the “couple” had nothing to do with it. They insist on some conspiracy somewhere.  These Muslims may be right and have a right to say so. However they are not being prudent or pragmatic when they do not expect a negative reaction to this from the mainstream who are fully convinced based on facts that “jihadi” organizations are responsible for these atrocities. Deny if we wish; it is our right; but we must be ready for a reaction: equal and opposite; it is their right.

You have said “……somebody else's actions had turned me from a citizen to a suspect…….”. Is this a correct assessment? All of us have a very intense love for the Muslim “Ummah”. Anything distantly Muslim immediately becomes Islamic and therefore dear to us. I used to hate boxing; I did not even regard it as a sport. Enters Mohammed Ali and I developed a liking for the sport. This is the usual style and we all are proud of it. Notwithstanding the facts on the ground, we firmly desire and strongly believe that the whole Muslim world is a family of brothers and sisters. We consider the Muslim world as a “single body; pain in one part, hurts the whole body,” Therefore this “somebody”, you have referred to are in fact your brothers and sisters in Islam. It is not wise nor acceptable to just disown them summarily in the face of mayhem committed by them. We have to try harder, much harder. 

You have stated “ Today we hear people actually saying things like, "There's a problem in this country, and it's called Muslims. When are we going to get rid of them?" So, some people want to ban Muslims and close down mosques. They talk about my community kind of like we're a tumor in the body of America. And the only question is, are we malignant or benign? You know, a malignant tumor you extract altogether, and a benign tumor you just keep under surveillance.” VERY TRUE and causing lot of sorrow and pain to many of our brothers and sisters. I cannot and will not belittle those sentiments, sitting comfortably in my arm chair in my office. But this must be kept in proper proportions; there is the other side of the coin. Donald Trump made a wild and vulgar statement that all Muslims should be kept out of our country. The whole political and elite leadership of our country, across the political divide denounced and condemned this statement. This cannot happen anywhere else in the world. Let us clearly remember this when, in times of frustration we tend to descend in the “victim” mode. Your beautiful experience in your first visit to a mosque after 9/11 “The place was completely full. And then the imam made an announcement, thanking and welcoming our guests, because half the congregation were Christians, Jews, Buddhists, atheists, people of faith and no faith, who had come not to attack us, but to stand in solidarity with us” is critical and seminal. This should be very reassuring and heartening to all of us in these days of anti-Muslim sentiments.