by Daniel Pipes
New York Sun
Do terrorist atrocities in the West, such as the attacks of September 11, 2001 and those in Bali, Madrid, Beslan, and London, help radical Islam achieve its goal of gaining power?
No, they are counterproductive. That's because radical Islam has two distinct wings - one violent and illegal, the other lawful and political - and they exist in tension with each other. The lawful strategy has proven itself effective, but the violent approach gets in its way.
The violent wing is foremost represented by the world's no. 1 fugitive, Osama bin Laden. The popular and powerful prime minister of Turkey, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, represents the lawful wing. Even as "Al Qaeda has more state adversaries than nearly any force in history," as Daniel C. Twining observes, political imams like Yusuf al-Qaradawi instruct huge audiences on Al-Jazeera television and visit with the mayor of London, Ken Livingstone. As Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr skulks around Iraq, looking for a role, Ayatollah Sistani dominates the country's political life.
Yes, terrorism kills enemies, instills fear, and disrupts the economy. Yes, it boosts morale and recruits non-Muslims to Islam and Muslims to Islamism. It creates an opportunity for Islamists to fight for their favorite causes, such as the elimination of Israel or the disengagement of coalition forces from Iraq. It provides, as Mark Steyn notes, intelligence information on the enemy. And yes, it prompts politically correct talk about Islam being a "religion of peace," with Muslims portrayed as victims.
But for two main reasons, terrorism does radical Islam more harm than good.
First, it alarms and galvanizes Westerners. For example, the July 7 bombings took place during the G8 summit in Scotland, where world leaders were focused on global warming, aid to Africa, and macro-economic issues. In a London minute, the politicians then redirected their attention toward counterterrorism. Thus did the terrorists stiffen, as Mona Charen points out, "whatever small residue of resolve remains in flaccid Western civilization."
More broadly, Mr. Twining notes, "Al Qaeda's rise has produced the kind of great power entente not seen since the Concert of Europe took shape in 1815." (Even the Madrid bombings, an apparent exception, led to a marked strengthening of counterterrorism measures by Spain and other European countries.)
Second, terrorism obstructs the quiet work of political Islamism. In tranquil times, organizations like the Muslim Council of Britain and the Council on American-Islamic Relations effectively go about their business, promoting their agenda to make Islam "dominant" and imposing dhimmitude (whereby non-Muslims accept Islamic superiority and Muslim privilege). Westerners generally respond like slowly boiled frogs are supposed to, not noticing a thing.
Thus does the Muslim Council of Britain delight in a knighthood from the queen, enthusiastic support from Prime Minister Blair, influence within the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, and £250,000 in taxpayer money from the Department of Trade and Industry.
Across the Atlantic, CAIR insinuates itself into an array of important North American institutions, including the FBI, NASA, and Canada's Globe and Mail newspaper. It has won endorsements from high-ranking politicians, both Republican (Florida's governor, Jeb Bush) and Democrat (the House Democratic leader, Rep. Nancy Pelosi). It has organized a meeting of Muslims with Canada's prime minister Paul Martin. It has gotten a Hollywood studio to change a feature film plot and a television network to run a public service announcement. It has goaded a radio station to fire a talk-show host.
Terrorism impedes these advances, stimulating hostility to Islam and Muslims. It brings Islamic organizations under unwanted scrutiny by the media, the government, and law enforcement. CAIR and MCB then have to fight rearguard battles. The July 7 bombings dramatically (if temporarily) disrupted the progress of "Londonistan," Britain's decline into multicultural lassitude and counterterrorist ineptitude.
Some Islamists recognize this problem. One British writer admonished fellow Muslims on a Web site: "Don't you know that Islam is growing in Europe??? What the heck are you doing mingling things up???" Likewise, a Muslim watch repairer in London observed, "We don't need to fight. We are taking over!" Soumayya Ghannoushi of the University of London bitterly points out that Al-Qaeda's major achievements consist of shedding innocent blood and "fanning the flames of hostility to Islam and Muslims."
Things are not as they seem. Terrorism hurts radical Islam and helps its opponents. The violence and victims' agony make this hard to see, but without education by murder, the lawful Islamist movement would make greater gains.
Kamis, 31 Juli 2008
Why I Shed Bikini for Niqab: The New Symbol of Women's Liberation
By Sara Bokker
I am an American woman who was born in the midst of America's "Heartland." I grew up, just like any other girl, being fixated with the glamour of life in "the big city." Eventually, I moved to Florida and on to South Beach of Miami, a hotspot for those seeking the "glamorous life." Naturally, I did what most average Western girls do. I focused on my appearance and appeal, basing my self-worth on how much attention I got from others. I worked out religiously and became a personal trainer, acquired an upscale waterfront residence, became a regular "exhibiting" beach-goer and was able to attain a "living-in-style" kind of life.
Years went by, only to realize that my scale of self-fulfillment and happiness slid down the more I progressed in my "feminine appeal." I was a slave to fashion. I was a hostage to my looks.
As the gap continued to progressively widen between my self-fulfillment and lifestyle, I sought refuge in escapes from alcohol and parties to meditation, activism, and alternative religions, only to have the little gap widen to what seemed like a valley. I eventually realized it all was merely a pain killer rather than an effective remedy.
By now it was September 11, 2001. As I witnessed the ensuing barrage on Islam, Islamic values and culture, and the infamous declaration of the "new crusade," I started to notice something called Islam. Up until that point, all I had associated with Islam was women covered in "tents," wife beaters, harems, and a world of terrorism.
As a feminist libertarian, and an activist who was pursuing a better world for all, my path crossed with that of another activist who was already at the lead of indiscriminately furthering causes of reform and justice for all. I joined in the ongoing campaigns of my new mentor which included, at the time, election reform and civil rights, among others. Now my new activism was fundamentally different. Instead of "selectively" advocating justice only to some, I learned that ideals such as justice, freedom, and respect are meant to be and are essentially universal, and that own good and common good are not in conflict. For the first time, I knew what "all people are created equal" really means. But most importantly, I learned that it only takes faith to see the world as one and to see the unity in creation.
One day I came across a book that is negatively stereotyped in the West--The Holy Qur'an. I was first attracted by the style and approach of the Qur'an, and then intrigued by its outlook on existence, life, creation, and the relationship between Creator and creation. I found the Qur'an to be a very insightful address to heart and soul without the need for an interpreter or pastor.
Eventually I hit a moment of truth: my new-found self-fulfilling activism was nothing more than merely embracing a faith called Islam where I could live in peace as a "functional" Muslim.
I bought a beautiful long gown and head cover resembling the Muslim woman's dress code and I walked down the same streets and neighborhoods where only days earlier I had walked in my shorts, bikini, or "elegant" western business attire. Although the people, the faces, and the shops were all the same, one thing was remarkably distinct--I was not--nor was the peace at being a woman I experienced for the very first time. I felt as if the chains had been broken and I was finally free. I was delighted with the new looks of wonder on people's faces in place of the looks of a hunter watching his prey I had once sought. Suddenly a weight had been lifted off my shoulders. I no longer spent all my time consumed with shopping, makeup, getting my hair done, and working out. Finally, I was free.
Of all places, I found my Islam at the heart of what some call "the most scandalous place on earth," which makes it all the more dear and special.
While content with Hijab I became curious about Niqab, seeing an increasing number of Muslim women in it. I asked my Muslim husband, whom I married after I reverted to Islam, whether I should wear Niqab or just settle for the Hijab I was already wearing. My husband simply advised me that he believes Hijab is mandatory in Islam while Niqab is not. At the time, my Hijab consisted of head scarf that covered all my hair except for my face, and a loose long black gown called "Abaya" that covered all my body from neck to toe.
A year-and-a-half passed, and I told my husband I wanted to wear Niqab. My reason, this time, was that I felt it would be more pleasing to Allah, the Creator, increasing my feeling of peace at being more modest. He supported my decision and took me to buy an "Isdaal," a loose black gown that covers from head to toe, and Niqab, which covers all my head and face except for my eyes.
Soon enough, news started breaking about politicians, Vatican clergymen, libertarians, and so-called human rights and freedom activists condemning Hijab at times, and Niqab at others as being oppressive to women, an obstacle to social integration, and more recently, as an Egyptian official called it--"a sign of backwardness."
I find it to be a blatant hypocrisy when Western governments and so-called human rights groups rush to defend woman's rights when some governments impose a certain dress code on women, yet such "freedom fighters" look the other way when women are being deprived of their rights, work, and education just because they choose to exercise their right to wear Niqab or Hijab. Today, women in Hijab or Niqab are being increasingly barred from work and education not only under totalitarian regimes such as in Tunisia, Morocco, and Egypt, but also in Western democracies such as France, Holland, and Britain.
Today I am still a feminist, but a Muslim feminist, who calls on Muslim women to assume their responsibilities in providing all the support they can for their husbands to be good Muslims. To raise their children as upright Muslims so they may be beacons of light for all humanity once again. To enjoin good--any good--and to forbid evil--any evil. To speak righteousness and to speak up against all ills. To fight for our right to wear Niqab or Hijab and to please our Creator whichever way we chose. But just as importantly to carry our experience with Niqab or Hijab to fellow women who may never have had the chance to understand what wearing Niqab or Hijab means to us and why do we, so dearly, embrace it.
Most of the women I know wearing Niqab are Western reverts, some of whom are not even married. Others wear Niqab without full support of either family or surroundings. What we all have in common is that it is the personal choice of each and every one of us, which none of us is willing to surrender.
Willingly or unwillingly, women are bombarded with styles of "dressing-in-little-to-nothing" virtually in every means of communication everywhere in the world. As an ex non-Muslim, I insist on women's right to equally know about Hijab, its virtues, and the peace and happiness it brings to a woman's life as it did to mine. Yesterday, the bikini was the symbol of my liberty, when in actuality it only liberated me from my spirituality and true value as a respectable human being.
I couldn't be happier to shed my bikini in South Beach and the "glamorous" Western lifestyle to live in peace with my Creator and enjoy living among fellow humans as a worthy person. It is why I choose to wear Niqab, and why I will die defending my inalienable right to wear it. Today, Niqab is the new symbol of woman's liberation.
To women who surrender to the ugly stereotype against the Islamic modesty of Hijab, I say: You don't know what you are missing.
Sara Bokker is a former actress/model/fitness instructor and activist. Currently, Sara is Director of Communications at "The March For Justice," a co-founder of "The Global Sisters Network," and producer of the infamous "Shock & Awe Gallery."
I am an American woman who was born in the midst of America's "Heartland." I grew up, just like any other girl, being fixated with the glamour of life in "the big city." Eventually, I moved to Florida and on to South Beach of Miami, a hotspot for those seeking the "glamorous life." Naturally, I did what most average Western girls do. I focused on my appearance and appeal, basing my self-worth on how much attention I got from others. I worked out religiously and became a personal trainer, acquired an upscale waterfront residence, became a regular "exhibiting" beach-goer and was able to attain a "living-in-style" kind of life.
Years went by, only to realize that my scale of self-fulfillment and happiness slid down the more I progressed in my "feminine appeal." I was a slave to fashion. I was a hostage to my looks.
As the gap continued to progressively widen between my self-fulfillment and lifestyle, I sought refuge in escapes from alcohol and parties to meditation, activism, and alternative religions, only to have the little gap widen to what seemed like a valley. I eventually realized it all was merely a pain killer rather than an effective remedy.
By now it was September 11, 2001. As I witnessed the ensuing barrage on Islam, Islamic values and culture, and the infamous declaration of the "new crusade," I started to notice something called Islam. Up until that point, all I had associated with Islam was women covered in "tents," wife beaters, harems, and a world of terrorism.
As a feminist libertarian, and an activist who was pursuing a better world for all, my path crossed with that of another activist who was already at the lead of indiscriminately furthering causes of reform and justice for all. I joined in the ongoing campaigns of my new mentor which included, at the time, election reform and civil rights, among others. Now my new activism was fundamentally different. Instead of "selectively" advocating justice only to some, I learned that ideals such as justice, freedom, and respect are meant to be and are essentially universal, and that own good and common good are not in conflict. For the first time, I knew what "all people are created equal" really means. But most importantly, I learned that it only takes faith to see the world as one and to see the unity in creation.
One day I came across a book that is negatively stereotyped in the West--The Holy Qur'an. I was first attracted by the style and approach of the Qur'an, and then intrigued by its outlook on existence, life, creation, and the relationship between Creator and creation. I found the Qur'an to be a very insightful address to heart and soul without the need for an interpreter or pastor.
Eventually I hit a moment of truth: my new-found self-fulfilling activism was nothing more than merely embracing a faith called Islam where I could live in peace as a "functional" Muslim.
I bought a beautiful long gown and head cover resembling the Muslim woman's dress code and I walked down the same streets and neighborhoods where only days earlier I had walked in my shorts, bikini, or "elegant" western business attire. Although the people, the faces, and the shops were all the same, one thing was remarkably distinct--I was not--nor was the peace at being a woman I experienced for the very first time. I felt as if the chains had been broken and I was finally free. I was delighted with the new looks of wonder on people's faces in place of the looks of a hunter watching his prey I had once sought. Suddenly a weight had been lifted off my shoulders. I no longer spent all my time consumed with shopping, makeup, getting my hair done, and working out. Finally, I was free.
Of all places, I found my Islam at the heart of what some call "the most scandalous place on earth," which makes it all the more dear and special.
While content with Hijab I became curious about Niqab, seeing an increasing number of Muslim women in it. I asked my Muslim husband, whom I married after I reverted to Islam, whether I should wear Niqab or just settle for the Hijab I was already wearing. My husband simply advised me that he believes Hijab is mandatory in Islam while Niqab is not. At the time, my Hijab consisted of head scarf that covered all my hair except for my face, and a loose long black gown called "Abaya" that covered all my body from neck to toe.
A year-and-a-half passed, and I told my husband I wanted to wear Niqab. My reason, this time, was that I felt it would be more pleasing to Allah, the Creator, increasing my feeling of peace at being more modest. He supported my decision and took me to buy an "Isdaal," a loose black gown that covers from head to toe, and Niqab, which covers all my head and face except for my eyes.
Soon enough, news started breaking about politicians, Vatican clergymen, libertarians, and so-called human rights and freedom activists condemning Hijab at times, and Niqab at others as being oppressive to women, an obstacle to social integration, and more recently, as an Egyptian official called it--"a sign of backwardness."
I find it to be a blatant hypocrisy when Western governments and so-called human rights groups rush to defend woman's rights when some governments impose a certain dress code on women, yet such "freedom fighters" look the other way when women are being deprived of their rights, work, and education just because they choose to exercise their right to wear Niqab or Hijab. Today, women in Hijab or Niqab are being increasingly barred from work and education not only under totalitarian regimes such as in Tunisia, Morocco, and Egypt, but also in Western democracies such as France, Holland, and Britain.
Today I am still a feminist, but a Muslim feminist, who calls on Muslim women to assume their responsibilities in providing all the support they can for their husbands to be good Muslims. To raise their children as upright Muslims so they may be beacons of light for all humanity once again. To enjoin good--any good--and to forbid evil--any evil. To speak righteousness and to speak up against all ills. To fight for our right to wear Niqab or Hijab and to please our Creator whichever way we chose. But just as importantly to carry our experience with Niqab or Hijab to fellow women who may never have had the chance to understand what wearing Niqab or Hijab means to us and why do we, so dearly, embrace it.
Most of the women I know wearing Niqab are Western reverts, some of whom are not even married. Others wear Niqab without full support of either family or surroundings. What we all have in common is that it is the personal choice of each and every one of us, which none of us is willing to surrender.
Willingly or unwillingly, women are bombarded with styles of "dressing-in-little-to-nothing" virtually in every means of communication everywhere in the world. As an ex non-Muslim, I insist on women's right to equally know about Hijab, its virtues, and the peace and happiness it brings to a woman's life as it did to mine. Yesterday, the bikini was the symbol of my liberty, when in actuality it only liberated me from my spirituality and true value as a respectable human being.
I couldn't be happier to shed my bikini in South Beach and the "glamorous" Western lifestyle to live in peace with my Creator and enjoy living among fellow humans as a worthy person. It is why I choose to wear Niqab, and why I will die defending my inalienable right to wear it. Today, Niqab is the new symbol of woman's liberation.
To women who surrender to the ugly stereotype against the Islamic modesty of Hijab, I say: You don't know what you are missing.
Sara Bokker is a former actress/model/fitness instructor and activist. Currently, Sara is Director of Communications at "The March For Justice," a co-founder of "The Global Sisters Network," and producer of the infamous "Shock & Awe Gallery."
Wedding in Islam
by Mir Mohammed Assadullah
Spouses
Allah, most Gracious says about spouses in Quran:
Among His signs is [the fact] that He has created spouses for you among yourselves so that you may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has planted love and mercy between you; In that are signs for people who reflect.
Qur'an [30 : 21]
and says:
... they are a garment for you and you are a garment to them ...
Qur'an [2 : 187]
Consider this in conjunction with the following verse:
... the best garment is the garment of God-consciousness ...
Qur'an [7 : 26]
It requires that a husband and wife should be as garments for each other. Just as garments are for protection, comfort, show and concealment for human beings, Allah expects husbands and wives to be for one another.
And the believers, men and women, are protecting friends of one another; they enjoin the right and forbid the wrong, and they establish worship and they pay the poor-due, and they obey Allah and His messenger; as for those, Allah will have mercy on them; Lo! Allah is Mighty, Wise. Allah hath promised to believers - men and women - gardens underwhich rivers flow, to dwell therein, and beautiful mansions in gardens of everlasting bliss; but the greatest bliss is the good pleasure of Allah: This is the supreme felicity.
Qur'an [9 : 71 - 72]
Whom to marry
Allah also gives us freedom and urges us to:
...Marry the women of your choice...
Qur'an [4 : 3]
Similarly, for the women:
"A girl came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and informed him that her father had married her to her cousin against her wishes, whereupon the Prophet allowed her to exercise her choice. She then said, 'I am reconciled to what my father did but I wanted to make it known to women that fathers have no say in this matter'".
[Ibn Majah]
Narrated Abdullah: "We were with the Prophet, peace be upon him, while we were young and had no wealth whatever. So Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `O young people! Whoever among you can marry, should marry, because it helps him lower his gaze and guard his modesty, and whoever is not able to marry, should fast, as fasting diminishes his sexual power.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Huraira: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `A woman is married for four things, i.e., her wealth, her family status, her beauty, and her religion. So you should marry the religious woman [otherwise] you will be a loser.'"
[Bukhari]
Mahr
Mahr is the gift that is given by the husband to his wife at wedding. It can be anything in any amount, as agreed by the bride and bride-groom. Allah says about Mahr in the Chapter `Woman' in Quran:
And give the women (on marriage) their Mahr as a free gift ...
Qur'an [4 : 4]
But if you had given the latter a cantar (of gold i.e. a great amount) for dower (Mahr) take not the least bit of it back ...
Qur'an [4 : 20]
Narrated Sahl bin Sa`d: " A woman came to the Prophet,, and presented herself to him (for marriage). He said, 'I am not in need of women these days.' Then a man said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Marry her to me." The Prophet asked him, 'What have you got?' He said, 'I have got nothing.' The Prophet said, 'Give her something, even an iron ring.' He said, 'I have got nothing.' The Prophet asked (him), "How much of the Quran do you know (by heart)?' He said, 'So much and so much.' The Prophet said, 'I have married her to you for what you know of the Quran.' '"
[Bukhari]
Sex
Sex is seen as an act of procreation. An eye for the what is about to come is kept open in this respect as well. The following prayer reminds us of God, results of our actions, and reminds us of our commitment to train our offsprings.
Narrated Ibn Abbas: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `If anyone of you, when having a sexual intercourse with his wife says:
In the name of Allah! O Allah! Protect me from Satan and protect what you bestow upon us (i.e. an offspring) from Satan.
and if it is destined that they should have a child, then Satan will never be able to harm him.'"
[Bukhari]
Walima
Walima is the wedding reception given to friends and family after the consummation of marriage. It is given by the husband on this auspicious occassion, showing his happiness and sharing it with the friends and family.
Narrated Anas: When 'Abdur-Rahman came to us, the Prophet established a bond of brotherhood between him and Sa'd bin Ar-Rabi'. Once the Prophet said, "As you (O 'Abdur-Rahman) have married, give a wedding banquet even if with one sheep." '"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Musa: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `Set the captives free, accept the invitation (including to a wedding banquet), and pay a visit to the patients.'"
[Bukhari]
By this saying of the Prophet, peace be upon him, it is also enjoined upon us to join in the happiness of our brothers.
Duties and Rights of Husband and Wife after marriage
Allah informs us about the just rights of each other on us:
... the wife's rights (with regard to their husbands) are equal to the (husband's) rights with regard to them, although men are a degree above them; and Allah is Almighty, Wise.
Qur'an [2 : 228]
The statement that men are a degree above women means that authority within the household has been give to the husband in preference to the wife because a heavier burden has been placed on his shoulders by another verse of the Quran which says:
Men shall take full care of women, because Allah has given the one more strength than the other, and because they support them from their means.Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard ...
Qur'an [4 : 34]
Advice to Husbands
Jabir Narrated that the Prophet, peace be upon him, gave these instructions in his sermon during Farewell Pilgrimage: "Fear God regarding women; for you have taken them [in marriage] with the trust of God."
[Mishkat]
Narrated Aisha, God's messenger said: "Among the believers who show most perfect faith are those who have the best disposition, and are kindest to their families."
[Tirmidhi]
Narrated Abu Huraira, God's messenger said: "The believers who show the most perfect faith are those who have the best disposition and the best of you are those who are best to their wives."
[Tirmidhi]
Aisha has related that the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, would enter the house with a pleasing disposition and a smile on his lips.
[Uswa-i-Hasana]
Narrated Al-Aswad: "I asked Aisha, `What did the Prophet, peace be upon him, do at home?' She said, `He used to work for his family and when he heard the call for the prayer, he would go out.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `The woman is like a rib; if you try to straighten her, she will break. So if you want to get benefit from her, do so while she still has some bent.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Huraira: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should not hurt (trouble) his neighbor. And I advise you to take care of women, for they are created from a rib and the most crooked portion of the rib is its upper part; if you try to straighten it, it will break, and if you leave it, it will reamin crooked, so I urge you to take care of women.
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-As: "Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `O Abdullah! Have I not been informed that you fast all the day and stand in prayer all night?' I said, `Yes, O Allah's Apostle!' He said, `Do not do that! Observe the fast sometimes and also leave them at other times; stand up for the prayer at night and also sleep at night. Your body has a right over you and your eyes have right over you and your wife has a right over you.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Ibn Umar: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `All of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards. The ruler is a guardian and the man is a guardian of his family; the lady is a guardian who is responsible for her husband's house and his offspring; and so all of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards.'"
[Bukhari]
Men should forbear any shortcomings of women in view of the following verse of Quran:
Live with them in kindness; even if you dislike them, perhaps you dislike something in which God has placed much good.
Qur'an [4 : 19]
Advice to Wives
Anas reported God's messenger as saying, "When a woman observes the five times of prayer, fasts during Ramadan, preserves her chastity and obeys her husband, she may enter by any of the gates of paradise she wishes (in other words nothing will prevent her from entering paradise)."
[Mishkat]
Um Salama reported God's messenger as saying, "Any woman who dies when her husband is pleased with her will enter Paradise."
[Tirmidhi]
Abu Huraira told that when God's messenger was asked which woman was best, he replied, "The one who fills [her husband] with joy when he sees her, obeys him when he directs and does not oppose him by displeasing him regarding her person or property."
[Mishkat]
Providing for wife and family
Quran teaches us to be reasonable and fair to our wives and family.
House women wherever you reside, accoding to your circumstances, and do not harass them in order to make life difficult for them ...
Qur'an [65 : 6]
The statement of Allah in the chapter `Woman':
`Men are protectors and maintainers of women ...'
Qur'an [4 : 34]
Bukhari quotes the following verse under the heading: .. the superiority of providing for one's family:
(O Mohammed!) They ask you what they ought to spend. Say: That which is beyond your needs. Thus Allah make clear to you His Signs in order that you may give thought (to it) in this worldly life and the Hereafter ...
Qur'an [2 : 219-220]
Narrated Abu Masud Al-Ansari: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `When a Muslim spends something on his family intending to receive Allah's reward, it is regarded as Sadqa (spending in the name of God) for him.'"
[Bukhari]
We should always remember that Allah is the one who gives us, we are mere trustees of the funds.
Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `Allah said, O the son of Adam! Spend, and I shall spend on you.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `The best alms is that which you give when you are rich, and you should support your dependants first.'"
[Bukhari]
Abu Huraira reported God's messenger, peace be upon him, as saying: "Of the dinar (unit of currency) that you spend as a contribution in God's path, or to set free a slave, or as charity given to a needy, or to support your family, the one yielding the greatest reward is that which you spent on your family.
Spouses
Allah, most Gracious says about spouses in Quran:
Among His signs is [the fact] that He has created spouses for you among yourselves so that you may dwell in tranquillity with them, and He has planted love and mercy between you; In that are signs for people who reflect.
Qur'an [30 : 21]
and says:
... they are a garment for you and you are a garment to them ...
Qur'an [2 : 187]
Consider this in conjunction with the following verse:
... the best garment is the garment of God-consciousness ...
Qur'an [7 : 26]
It requires that a husband and wife should be as garments for each other. Just as garments are for protection, comfort, show and concealment for human beings, Allah expects husbands and wives to be for one another.
And the believers, men and women, are protecting friends of one another; they enjoin the right and forbid the wrong, and they establish worship and they pay the poor-due, and they obey Allah and His messenger; as for those, Allah will have mercy on them; Lo! Allah is Mighty, Wise. Allah hath promised to believers - men and women - gardens underwhich rivers flow, to dwell therein, and beautiful mansions in gardens of everlasting bliss; but the greatest bliss is the good pleasure of Allah: This is the supreme felicity.
Qur'an [9 : 71 - 72]
Whom to marry
Allah also gives us freedom and urges us to:
...Marry the women of your choice...
Qur'an [4 : 3]
Similarly, for the women:
"A girl came to the Prophet (peace be upon him) and informed him that her father had married her to her cousin against her wishes, whereupon the Prophet allowed her to exercise her choice. She then said, 'I am reconciled to what my father did but I wanted to make it known to women that fathers have no say in this matter'".
[Ibn Majah]
Narrated Abdullah: "We were with the Prophet, peace be upon him, while we were young and had no wealth whatever. So Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `O young people! Whoever among you can marry, should marry, because it helps him lower his gaze and guard his modesty, and whoever is not able to marry, should fast, as fasting diminishes his sexual power.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Huraira: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `A woman is married for four things, i.e., her wealth, her family status, her beauty, and her religion. So you should marry the religious woman [otherwise] you will be a loser.'"
[Bukhari]
Mahr
Mahr is the gift that is given by the husband to his wife at wedding. It can be anything in any amount, as agreed by the bride and bride-groom. Allah says about Mahr in the Chapter `Woman' in Quran:
And give the women (on marriage) their Mahr as a free gift ...
Qur'an [4 : 4]
But if you had given the latter a cantar (of gold i.e. a great amount) for dower (Mahr) take not the least bit of it back ...
Qur'an [4 : 20]
Narrated Sahl bin Sa`d: " A woman came to the Prophet,, and presented herself to him (for marriage). He said, 'I am not in need of women these days.' Then a man said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Marry her to me." The Prophet asked him, 'What have you got?' He said, 'I have got nothing.' The Prophet said, 'Give her something, even an iron ring.' He said, 'I have got nothing.' The Prophet asked (him), "How much of the Quran do you know (by heart)?' He said, 'So much and so much.' The Prophet said, 'I have married her to you for what you know of the Quran.' '"
[Bukhari]
Sex
Sex is seen as an act of procreation. An eye for the what is about to come is kept open in this respect as well. The following prayer reminds us of God, results of our actions, and reminds us of our commitment to train our offsprings.
Narrated Ibn Abbas: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `If anyone of you, when having a sexual intercourse with his wife says:
In the name of Allah! O Allah! Protect me from Satan and protect what you bestow upon us (i.e. an offspring) from Satan.
and if it is destined that they should have a child, then Satan will never be able to harm him.'"
[Bukhari]
Walima
Walima is the wedding reception given to friends and family after the consummation of marriage. It is given by the husband on this auspicious occassion, showing his happiness and sharing it with the friends and family.
Narrated Anas: When 'Abdur-Rahman came to us, the Prophet established a bond of brotherhood between him and Sa'd bin Ar-Rabi'. Once the Prophet said, "As you (O 'Abdur-Rahman) have married, give a wedding banquet even if with one sheep." '"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Musa: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `Set the captives free, accept the invitation (including to a wedding banquet), and pay a visit to the patients.'"
[Bukhari]
By this saying of the Prophet, peace be upon him, it is also enjoined upon us to join in the happiness of our brothers.
Duties and Rights of Husband and Wife after marriage
Allah informs us about the just rights of each other on us:
... the wife's rights (with regard to their husbands) are equal to the (husband's) rights with regard to them, although men are a degree above them; and Allah is Almighty, Wise.
Qur'an [2 : 228]
The statement that men are a degree above women means that authority within the household has been give to the husband in preference to the wife because a heavier burden has been placed on his shoulders by another verse of the Quran which says:
Men shall take full care of women, because Allah has given the one more strength than the other, and because they support them from their means.Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient, and guard in (the husband's) absence what Allah would have them guard ...
Qur'an [4 : 34]
Advice to Husbands
Jabir Narrated that the Prophet, peace be upon him, gave these instructions in his sermon during Farewell Pilgrimage: "Fear God regarding women; for you have taken them [in marriage] with the trust of God."
[Mishkat]
Narrated Aisha, God's messenger said: "Among the believers who show most perfect faith are those who have the best disposition, and are kindest to their families."
[Tirmidhi]
Narrated Abu Huraira, God's messenger said: "The believers who show the most perfect faith are those who have the best disposition and the best of you are those who are best to their wives."
[Tirmidhi]
Aisha has related that the Holy Prophet, peace be upon him, would enter the house with a pleasing disposition and a smile on his lips.
[Uswa-i-Hasana]
Narrated Al-Aswad: "I asked Aisha, `What did the Prophet, peace be upon him, do at home?' She said, `He used to work for his family and when he heard the call for the prayer, he would go out.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `The woman is like a rib; if you try to straighten her, she will break. So if you want to get benefit from her, do so while she still has some bent.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Huraira: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `Whoever believes in Allah and the Last Day should not hurt (trouble) his neighbor. And I advise you to take care of women, for they are created from a rib and the most crooked portion of the rib is its upper part; if you try to straighten it, it will break, and if you leave it, it will reamin crooked, so I urge you to take care of women.
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abdullah bin Amr bin Al-As: "Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `O Abdullah! Have I not been informed that you fast all the day and stand in prayer all night?' I said, `Yes, O Allah's Apostle!' He said, `Do not do that! Observe the fast sometimes and also leave them at other times; stand up for the prayer at night and also sleep at night. Your body has a right over you and your eyes have right over you and your wife has a right over you.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Ibn Umar: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `All of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards. The ruler is a guardian and the man is a guardian of his family; the lady is a guardian who is responsible for her husband's house and his offspring; and so all of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards.'"
[Bukhari]
Men should forbear any shortcomings of women in view of the following verse of Quran:
Live with them in kindness; even if you dislike them, perhaps you dislike something in which God has placed much good.
Qur'an [4 : 19]
Advice to Wives
Anas reported God's messenger as saying, "When a woman observes the five times of prayer, fasts during Ramadan, preserves her chastity and obeys her husband, she may enter by any of the gates of paradise she wishes (in other words nothing will prevent her from entering paradise)."
[Mishkat]
Um Salama reported God's messenger as saying, "Any woman who dies when her husband is pleased with her will enter Paradise."
[Tirmidhi]
Abu Huraira told that when God's messenger was asked which woman was best, he replied, "The one who fills [her husband] with joy when he sees her, obeys him when he directs and does not oppose him by displeasing him regarding her person or property."
[Mishkat]
Providing for wife and family
Quran teaches us to be reasonable and fair to our wives and family.
House women wherever you reside, accoding to your circumstances, and do not harass them in order to make life difficult for them ...
Qur'an [65 : 6]
The statement of Allah in the chapter `Woman':
`Men are protectors and maintainers of women ...'
Qur'an [4 : 34]
Bukhari quotes the following verse under the heading: .. the superiority of providing for one's family:
(O Mohammed!) They ask you what they ought to spend. Say: That which is beyond your needs. Thus Allah make clear to you His Signs in order that you may give thought (to it) in this worldly life and the Hereafter ...
Qur'an [2 : 219-220]
Narrated Abu Masud Al-Ansari: "The Prophet, peace be upon him, said, `When a Muslim spends something on his family intending to receive Allah's reward, it is regarded as Sadqa (spending in the name of God) for him.'"
[Bukhari]
We should always remember that Allah is the one who gives us, we are mere trustees of the funds.
Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `Allah said, O the son of Adam! Spend, and I shall spend on you.'"
[Bukhari]
Narrated Abu Huraira: "Allah's Apostle, peace be upon him, said, `The best alms is that which you give when you are rich, and you should support your dependants first.'"
[Bukhari]
Abu Huraira reported God's messenger, peace be upon him, as saying: "Of the dinar (unit of currency) that you spend as a contribution in God's path, or to set free a slave, or as charity given to a needy, or to support your family, the one yielding the greatest reward is that which you spent on your family.
THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE ( VII ) - BIBLE, QUR’AN AND SCIENCE
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille
BIBLE, QUR’AN AND SCIENCE
We have now come to the last subject I would like to present in this short pamphlet: it is the
comparison between modern knowledge and passages in the Qur’an that are also referred to in the Bible.
Creation
We have already come across some of the contradictions between scripture and science regarding the creation of the universe. When dealing with that topic, I stressed the perfect agreement between modern knowledge and verses in the Qur’an, and pointed out that the Biblical narration contained statements that were scientifically unacceptable. This is hardly surprising if we are aware that the narration of the creation contained in the Bible was the work of priests living in the sixth century BC, hence the term ‘sacerdotal’ ( priestly ) narration is officially used to refer to it. The narration seems to have been conceived as the theme of a sermon designed to exhort people to observe the Sabbath. The narration was constructed with a definite end in view, and as Father de Vaux (a former head of the Biblical School of Jerusalem) has noted, this end was essentially legalist in character.
The Bible also contains a much shorter and older narration of Creation, the so-called ‘Yahvist’ version, which approaches the subject from a completely different angle. They are both taken from Genesis, the first book of the Pentateuch or Torah. Moses is supposed to have been its author, but the text we have today has undergone many changes.
The sacerdotal narration of Genesis is famous for its whimsical genealogies, that go back to Adam, and which nobody takes very seriously. Nevertheless, such Gospel authors as Matthew and Luke have reproduced them, more or less word-for-word, in their genealogies of Jesus. Matthew goes back as far as Abraham, and Luke to Adam. These writings are scientifically unacceptable, because they set a date for the age of the world and the time humans appeared on Earth, which most definitely contradicts what modern science has firmly established. The Qur’an, on the other hand, is completely free of dates of this kind.
Earlier on, we noted how perfectly the Qur’an agrees with modern ideas on the formation of the Universe. On the other hand, the Biblical narration of primordial waters is hardly, nor is the creation of light on the first day before the creation of the stars which produce this light; the existence of an evening and a morning before the creation of the earth; the creation of the earth on the third day before that of the sun on the fourth; the appearance of beasts of the earth on the sixth day after the appearance of the birds of the air on the fifth day, although the former came first. All these statements are the result of beliefs prevalent at the time this text was written and do not have any other meaning.
Age of the Earth
As for the Biblical genealogies which form the basis of the Jewish calendar and assert that today the world is 5738 years old, these are hardly admissible either. Our solar system may well be four and a quarter billion years old, and the appearance of human beings on earth, as we know him today, may be estimated in tens of thousands of years, if not more. It is absolutely essential, therefore, to note that the Qur’an does not contain any such indications as to the age of the world, and that these are specific to the Biblical text.
The Flood
There is a second highly significant subject of comparison between the Bible and the Qur’an; descriptions of the deluge. In actual fact, the Biblical narration is a fusion of two descriptions in which events are related differently. The Bible speaks of a universal flood and places it roughly 300 years before Abraham.
According to what we know of Abraham, this would imply a universal cataclysm around the twenty-first or twenty-second century BC This story would be untenable, in view of presently available historical data. How can we accept the idea that, in the twenty-first or twenty-second century BC, all civilization was wiped off the face of the earth by a universal cataclysm, when we know that this period corresponds, for example, to the one preceding the Middle Kingdom in Egypt, at roughly the date of the first Intermediary period before the eleventh dynasty? It is historically unacceptable to maintain that, at this time, humanity was totally wiped out. None of the preceding statements is acceptable according to modern knowledge. From this point of view, we can measure the enormous gap separating the Bible from the Qur’an.
In contrast to the Bible, the narration contained in the Qur’an deals with a cataclysm that is limited to Noah’s people. They were punished for their sins, as were other ungodly peoples. The Qur’an does not fix the cataclysm in time. There are absolutely no historical or archaeological objections to the narration in the Qur’an.
The Pharaoh
A third point of comparison, which is extremely significant, is the story of Moses, and especially the Exodus from Egypt of the Hebrews. Here I can only give a highly compressed account of a study on this subject that appears in my book. I have noted the points where the Biblical and Qur’anic narrations agree and disagree, and I have found points where the two texts complement each other in a very useful way.
Among the many hypotheses, concerning the historical time-frame occupied by the Exodus in the history of the pharaohs, I have concluded that the most likely is the theory which makes Merneptah, Ramesses II’s successor, the pharaoh of the Exodus. The comparison of the data contained in the Scriptures with archeological evidence strongly supports this hypothesis. I am pleased to be able to say that the Biblical narration contributes weighty evidence leading us to situate Moses in the history of the pharaohs. Moses was probably born during the reign of Ramesses II. Biblical data. are therefore of considerable historical value in the story of Moses. A medical study of the mummy of Merneptah has yielded further useful information on the possible causes of this pharaoh’s death. The fact that we possess the mummy of this pharaoh is one of paramount importance. The Bible records that pharaoh was engulfed in the sea, but does not give any details as to what subsequently became of his corpse. The Qur’an, in chapter Yoonus, notes that the body of the pharaoh would be saved from the waters:
“Today I will save your dead body so that you may be a sign for those who come after you.” Qur’an, 10:92
A medical examination of this mummy, has, shown that the body could not have stayed in the water for long, because it does not show signs of deterioration due to prolonged submersion. Here again, the comparison between the narration in the Qur’an and the data provided by modern knowledge does not give rise to the slightest objection from a scientific point of view.
Such points of agreement are characteristic of the Qur’anic revelation. But, are we throwing the Judeo-Christian revelation into discredit and depriving it of all its intrinsic value by stressing the faults as seen from a scientific point of view? I think not because the criticism is not aimed at the text as a whole, but only at certain passages. There are parts of the Bible which have an undoubted historical value. I have shown that in my book, The Bible, The Qur’an and Science, where I discuss passages which enable us to locate Moses in time.
The main causes which brought about such differences as arise from the comparison between the Holy Scriptures and modern knowledge is known to modern scholars. The Old Testament constitutes a collection of literary works produced in the course of roughly nine centuries and which has undergone many alterations. The part played by men in the actual composition of the texts of the Bible is quite considerable.
The Qur’anic revelation, on the other hand, has a history which is radically different. As we have already seen, from the moment it was first commto humans, it was learnt by heart and written down during Muhammad’s own lifetime. It is thanks to this fact that the Qur’an does not pose any problem of authenticity.
A totally objective examination of the Qur’an, in the light of modern knowledge, leads us to recognize the agreement between the two, as has already been noted on repeated occasions throughout this presentation.
It makes us deem it quite unthinkable for a man of Muhammad’s time to have been the author of such statements, on account of the state of knowledge in his day. Such considerations are part of what gives the Qur’anic revelation its unique place among religious and non-religious texts, and forces the impartial scientist to admit his inability to provide an explanation based solely upon materialistic reasoning.
Such facts as I have had the pleasure of exposing to you here, appear to represent a genuine challenge to human explanation leaving only one alternative: the Qur’an is undoubtedly a revelation from God.
BIBLE, QUR’AN AND SCIENCE
We have now come to the last subject I would like to present in this short pamphlet: it is the
comparison between modern knowledge and passages in the Qur’an that are also referred to in the Bible.
Creation
We have already come across some of the contradictions between scripture and science regarding the creation of the universe. When dealing with that topic, I stressed the perfect agreement between modern knowledge and verses in the Qur’an, and pointed out that the Biblical narration contained statements that were scientifically unacceptable. This is hardly surprising if we are aware that the narration of the creation contained in the Bible was the work of priests living in the sixth century BC, hence the term ‘sacerdotal’ ( priestly ) narration is officially used to refer to it. The narration seems to have been conceived as the theme of a sermon designed to exhort people to observe the Sabbath. The narration was constructed with a definite end in view, and as Father de Vaux (a former head of the Biblical School of Jerusalem) has noted, this end was essentially legalist in character.
The Bible also contains a much shorter and older narration of Creation, the so-called ‘Yahvist’ version, which approaches the subject from a completely different angle. They are both taken from Genesis, the first book of the Pentateuch or Torah. Moses is supposed to have been its author, but the text we have today has undergone many changes.
The sacerdotal narration of Genesis is famous for its whimsical genealogies, that go back to Adam, and which nobody takes very seriously. Nevertheless, such Gospel authors as Matthew and Luke have reproduced them, more or less word-for-word, in their genealogies of Jesus. Matthew goes back as far as Abraham, and Luke to Adam. These writings are scientifically unacceptable, because they set a date for the age of the world and the time humans appeared on Earth, which most definitely contradicts what modern science has firmly established. The Qur’an, on the other hand, is completely free of dates of this kind.
Earlier on, we noted how perfectly the Qur’an agrees with modern ideas on the formation of the Universe. On the other hand, the Biblical narration of primordial waters is hardly, nor is the creation of light on the first day before the creation of the stars which produce this light; the existence of an evening and a morning before the creation of the earth; the creation of the earth on the third day before that of the sun on the fourth; the appearance of beasts of the earth on the sixth day after the appearance of the birds of the air on the fifth day, although the former came first. All these statements are the result of beliefs prevalent at the time this text was written and do not have any other meaning.
Age of the Earth
As for the Biblical genealogies which form the basis of the Jewish calendar and assert that today the world is 5738 years old, these are hardly admissible either. Our solar system may well be four and a quarter billion years old, and the appearance of human beings on earth, as we know him today, may be estimated in tens of thousands of years, if not more. It is absolutely essential, therefore, to note that the Qur’an does not contain any such indications as to the age of the world, and that these are specific to the Biblical text.
The Flood
There is a second highly significant subject of comparison between the Bible and the Qur’an; descriptions of the deluge. In actual fact, the Biblical narration is a fusion of two descriptions in which events are related differently. The Bible speaks of a universal flood and places it roughly 300 years before Abraham.
According to what we know of Abraham, this would imply a universal cataclysm around the twenty-first or twenty-second century BC This story would be untenable, in view of presently available historical data. How can we accept the idea that, in the twenty-first or twenty-second century BC, all civilization was wiped off the face of the earth by a universal cataclysm, when we know that this period corresponds, for example, to the one preceding the Middle Kingdom in Egypt, at roughly the date of the first Intermediary period before the eleventh dynasty? It is historically unacceptable to maintain that, at this time, humanity was totally wiped out. None of the preceding statements is acceptable according to modern knowledge. From this point of view, we can measure the enormous gap separating the Bible from the Qur’an.
In contrast to the Bible, the narration contained in the Qur’an deals with a cataclysm that is limited to Noah’s people. They were punished for their sins, as were other ungodly peoples. The Qur’an does not fix the cataclysm in time. There are absolutely no historical or archaeological objections to the narration in the Qur’an.
The Pharaoh
A third point of comparison, which is extremely significant, is the story of Moses, and especially the Exodus from Egypt of the Hebrews. Here I can only give a highly compressed account of a study on this subject that appears in my book. I have noted the points where the Biblical and Qur’anic narrations agree and disagree, and I have found points where the two texts complement each other in a very useful way.
Among the many hypotheses, concerning the historical time-frame occupied by the Exodus in the history of the pharaohs, I have concluded that the most likely is the theory which makes Merneptah, Ramesses II’s successor, the pharaoh of the Exodus. The comparison of the data contained in the Scriptures with archeological evidence strongly supports this hypothesis. I am pleased to be able to say that the Biblical narration contributes weighty evidence leading us to situate Moses in the history of the pharaohs. Moses was probably born during the reign of Ramesses II. Biblical data. are therefore of considerable historical value in the story of Moses. A medical study of the mummy of Merneptah has yielded further useful information on the possible causes of this pharaoh’s death. The fact that we possess the mummy of this pharaoh is one of paramount importance. The Bible records that pharaoh was engulfed in the sea, but does not give any details as to what subsequently became of his corpse. The Qur’an, in chapter Yoonus, notes that the body of the pharaoh would be saved from the waters:
“Today I will save your dead body so that you may be a sign for those who come after you.” Qur’an, 10:92
A medical examination of this mummy, has, shown that the body could not have stayed in the water for long, because it does not show signs of deterioration due to prolonged submersion. Here again, the comparison between the narration in the Qur’an and the data provided by modern knowledge does not give rise to the slightest objection from a scientific point of view.
Such points of agreement are characteristic of the Qur’anic revelation. But, are we throwing the Judeo-Christian revelation into discredit and depriving it of all its intrinsic value by stressing the faults as seen from a scientific point of view? I think not because the criticism is not aimed at the text as a whole, but only at certain passages. There are parts of the Bible which have an undoubted historical value. I have shown that in my book, The Bible, The Qur’an and Science, where I discuss passages which enable us to locate Moses in time.
The main causes which brought about such differences as arise from the comparison between the Holy Scriptures and modern knowledge is known to modern scholars. The Old Testament constitutes a collection of literary works produced in the course of roughly nine centuries and which has undergone many alterations. The part played by men in the actual composition of the texts of the Bible is quite considerable.
The Qur’anic revelation, on the other hand, has a history which is radically different. As we have already seen, from the moment it was first commto humans, it was learnt by heart and written down during Muhammad’s own lifetime. It is thanks to this fact that the Qur’an does not pose any problem of authenticity.
A totally objective examination of the Qur’an, in the light of modern knowledge, leads us to recognize the agreement between the two, as has already been noted on repeated occasions throughout this presentation.
It makes us deem it quite unthinkable for a man of Muhammad’s time to have been the author of such statements, on account of the state of knowledge in his day. Such considerations are part of what gives the Qur’anic revelation its unique place among religious and non-religious texts, and forces the impartial scientist to admit his inability to provide an explanation based solely upon materialistic reasoning.
Such facts as I have had the pleasure of exposing to you here, appear to represent a genuine challenge to human explanation leaving only one alternative: the Qur’an is undoubtedly a revelation from God.
THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE ( VI ) - EMBRYOLOGY
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille
EMBRYOLOGY
There are a multitude of statements in the Qur’an on the subject of human reproduction which constitute a challenge to the embryologist seeking a human explanation for them. It was only after the birth of the basic sciences which contributed to our knowledge of biology and the invention of the microscope, that humans were able to understand the depth of those Qur’anic statements. It was impossible for a human being living in the early seventh century to have accurately expressed such ideas. There is nothing to indicate that people in the Middle-East and Arabia knew anything more about this subject than people living in Europe or anywhere else. Today, there are many Muslims, possessing a thorough knowledge of the Qur’an and natural sciences, who have recognized the amazing similarity between the verses of the Qur’an dealing with reproduction and modern scientific knowledge.
I shall always remember the comment of an eighteen-year-old Muslim, brought up in Saudi Arabia, commenting on a reference to human reproduction as described in the Qur’an. He pointed to the Qur’an and said, “This book provides us with all the essential information on the subject. When I was at school, my teachers used the Qur’an to explain how children were born. Your books on sex-education are a bit late on the scene!”
If I were to spend as long on all the details of reproduction contained in the Qur’an, as the subject merits, this pamphlet would become a book. The detailed linguistic and scientific explanations I have given in The Bible, The Qur’an and Science are sufficient for the person who does not speak Arabic nor know much about embryology to be able to understand the meaning of such verses in the light of modern science in more depth.
It is especially in the field of embryology that a comparison between the beliefs present at the time of the Qur’an’s revelation and modern scientific data, leaves us amazed at the degree of agreement between the Qur’an’s statements and modern scientific knowledge. Not to mention the total absence of any reference in the Qur’an to the mistaken ideas that were prevalent around the world at the time.
Fertilization
Let us now isolate, from all these verses, precise ideas concerning the complexity of the semen and the fact that an infinitely small quantity is required to ensure fertilization. In chapter al-Insaan the Qur’an states:
“Verily, I created humankind from a small quantity of mingled fluids.” Qur’an, 76:2
The Arabic word nutfah has been translated as "small quantity”. It comes from the verb meaning ‘to dribble, to trickle’ and is used to describe what remains in the bottom of a bucket which has been emptied. The verse correctly implies that fertilization is performed by only a very small volume of liquid.
On the other hand, mingled fluids ( amshaaj ) has been understood by early commentators to refer to the mixture of male and female discharges. Modern authors have corrected this view and note that the sperm is made up of various components.
When the Qur’an talks of a fertilizing fluid composed of different components, it also informs us that human progeny will be formed from something extracted from this liquid. This is the meaning of the following verse in chapter as-Sajdah:
“Then He made [ man’s ] offspring from the essence of a despised fluid.”
Qur’an, 32:8
The Arabic word translated by the term ‘essence’ is sulaalah which means ‘something extracted, the best part of a thing’. In whatever way it is translated, it refers to part of a whole. Under normal conditions, only one single cell, spermatozoon, out of over 50 million ejaculated by a man during sexual intercourse will actually penetrate the ovule.
Implantation
Once the egg has been fertilized in the fallopian tube, it descends to lodge itself inside the uterus. This process is called the ‘implantation of the egg’. Implantation is a result of the development of villosities, which, like roots in the soil, draw nourishment from the wall of the uterus and make the egg literally cling to the womb. The process of implantation is appropriately described in several verses by the word ‘alaq, which is also the title of the chapter in which one of the verses appears:
“God fashioned humans from a clinging entity.” Qur’an, 96:2
I do not think there is any reasonable translation of the word ‘alaq other than to use it in its original sense. It is a mistake to speak of a ‘blood clot’ here, which is the term Professor Hamidullah uses in his translation. It is a derivative meaning which is not as appropriate in this context.
Embryo
The evolution of the embryo inside the maternal uterus is only briefly described, but the description is accurate, because the simple words referring to it correspond exactly to fundamental stages in its growth. This is what we read in a verse from the chapter al-Mu’minoon:
“I fashioned the clinging entity into a chewed lump of flesh and I fashioned the chewed flesh into bones and I clothed the bones with intact flesh.” Qur’an, 23:14
The term ‘chewed flesh’ (mudghah) corresponds exactly to the appearance of the embryo at a certain stage in its development.
It is known that the bones develop inside this mass and that they are then covered with muscle. This is the meaning of the term ‘intact flesh’ (lahm).
The embryo passes through a stage where some parts are in proportion and others out of proportion with what is later to become the individual. This is the obvious meaning of a verse in the chapter al-Hajj, which reads as follows:
“I fashioned (humans) a clinging entity, then into a lump of flesh in proportion and out of proportion.” Qur’an, 22:5.
Next, we have a reference to the appearance of the senses and internal organs in the chapter as-Sajdah:
“... and (God) gave you ears, eyes and hearts.” Qur’an, 32:9
Nothing here contradicts today’s data and, furthermore, none of the mistaken ideas of the time have crept into the Qur’an. Throughout the Middle Ages there were a variety of beliefs about human development based on myths and speculations which continued for several centuries after the period. The most fundamental stage in the history of embryology came in 1651 with Harvey’s statement that “all life initially comes from an egg”. At that time, when science had benefited greatly from the invention of the microscope, people were still arguing about the respective roles of the egg and spermatozoon. Buffon, the great naturalist, was one of those in favor of the egg theory.Bonnet, on the other hand, supported the theory of ‘the ovaries of Eve’, which stated that Eve, the mother of the human race, was-supposed to have had inside her the seeds of all human beings packed together one inside the other.
EMBRYOLOGY
There are a multitude of statements in the Qur’an on the subject of human reproduction which constitute a challenge to the embryologist seeking a human explanation for them. It was only after the birth of the basic sciences which contributed to our knowledge of biology and the invention of the microscope, that humans were able to understand the depth of those Qur’anic statements. It was impossible for a human being living in the early seventh century to have accurately expressed such ideas. There is nothing to indicate that people in the Middle-East and Arabia knew anything more about this subject than people living in Europe or anywhere else. Today, there are many Muslims, possessing a thorough knowledge of the Qur’an and natural sciences, who have recognized the amazing similarity between the verses of the Qur’an dealing with reproduction and modern scientific knowledge.
I shall always remember the comment of an eighteen-year-old Muslim, brought up in Saudi Arabia, commenting on a reference to human reproduction as described in the Qur’an. He pointed to the Qur’an and said, “This book provides us with all the essential information on the subject. When I was at school, my teachers used the Qur’an to explain how children were born. Your books on sex-education are a bit late on the scene!”
If I were to spend as long on all the details of reproduction contained in the Qur’an, as the subject merits, this pamphlet would become a book. The detailed linguistic and scientific explanations I have given in The Bible, The Qur’an and Science are sufficient for the person who does not speak Arabic nor know much about embryology to be able to understand the meaning of such verses in the light of modern science in more depth.
It is especially in the field of embryology that a comparison between the beliefs present at the time of the Qur’an’s revelation and modern scientific data, leaves us amazed at the degree of agreement between the Qur’an’s statements and modern scientific knowledge. Not to mention the total absence of any reference in the Qur’an to the mistaken ideas that were prevalent around the world at the time.
Fertilization
Let us now isolate, from all these verses, precise ideas concerning the complexity of the semen and the fact that an infinitely small quantity is required to ensure fertilization. In chapter al-Insaan the Qur’an states:
“Verily, I created humankind from a small quantity of mingled fluids.” Qur’an, 76:2
The Arabic word nutfah has been translated as "small quantity”. It comes from the verb meaning ‘to dribble, to trickle’ and is used to describe what remains in the bottom of a bucket which has been emptied. The verse correctly implies that fertilization is performed by only a very small volume of liquid.
On the other hand, mingled fluids ( amshaaj ) has been understood by early commentators to refer to the mixture of male and female discharges. Modern authors have corrected this view and note that the sperm is made up of various components.
When the Qur’an talks of a fertilizing fluid composed of different components, it also informs us that human progeny will be formed from something extracted from this liquid. This is the meaning of the following verse in chapter as-Sajdah:
“Then He made [ man’s ] offspring from the essence of a despised fluid.”
Qur’an, 32:8
The Arabic word translated by the term ‘essence’ is sulaalah which means ‘something extracted, the best part of a thing’. In whatever way it is translated, it refers to part of a whole. Under normal conditions, only one single cell, spermatozoon, out of over 50 million ejaculated by a man during sexual intercourse will actually penetrate the ovule.
Implantation
Once the egg has been fertilized in the fallopian tube, it descends to lodge itself inside the uterus. This process is called the ‘implantation of the egg’. Implantation is a result of the development of villosities, which, like roots in the soil, draw nourishment from the wall of the uterus and make the egg literally cling to the womb. The process of implantation is appropriately described in several verses by the word ‘alaq, which is also the title of the chapter in which one of the verses appears:
“God fashioned humans from a clinging entity.” Qur’an, 96:2
I do not think there is any reasonable translation of the word ‘alaq other than to use it in its original sense. It is a mistake to speak of a ‘blood clot’ here, which is the term Professor Hamidullah uses in his translation. It is a derivative meaning which is not as appropriate in this context.
Embryo
The evolution of the embryo inside the maternal uterus is only briefly described, but the description is accurate, because the simple words referring to it correspond exactly to fundamental stages in its growth. This is what we read in a verse from the chapter al-Mu’minoon:
“I fashioned the clinging entity into a chewed lump of flesh and I fashioned the chewed flesh into bones and I clothed the bones with intact flesh.” Qur’an, 23:14
The term ‘chewed flesh’ (mudghah) corresponds exactly to the appearance of the embryo at a certain stage in its development.
It is known that the bones develop inside this mass and that they are then covered with muscle. This is the meaning of the term ‘intact flesh’ (lahm).
The embryo passes through a stage where some parts are in proportion and others out of proportion with what is later to become the individual. This is the obvious meaning of a verse in the chapter al-Hajj, which reads as follows:
“I fashioned (humans) a clinging entity, then into a lump of flesh in proportion and out of proportion.” Qur’an, 22:5.
Next, we have a reference to the appearance of the senses and internal organs in the chapter as-Sajdah:
“... and (God) gave you ears, eyes and hearts.” Qur’an, 32:9
Nothing here contradicts today’s data and, furthermore, none of the mistaken ideas of the time have crept into the Qur’an. Throughout the Middle Ages there were a variety of beliefs about human development based on myths and speculations which continued for several centuries after the period. The most fundamental stage in the history of embryology came in 1651 with Harvey’s statement that “all life initially comes from an egg”. At that time, when science had benefited greatly from the invention of the microscope, people were still arguing about the respective roles of the egg and spermatozoon. Buffon, the great naturalist, was one of those in favor of the egg theory.Bonnet, on the other hand, supported the theory of ‘the ovaries of Eve’, which stated that Eve, the mother of the human race, was-supposed to have had inside her the seeds of all human beings packed together one inside the other.
THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE ( V ) - BIOLOGY
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille
BIOLOGY
More than anything else, I was struck by statements in the Qur’an dealing with living things, both in the animal and vegetable kingdoms, especially with regard to reproduction. We should really devote much more time to this subject, but, due to the limited scope of this presentation, I can only give a few examples.
I must once again stress the fact that it is only in modern times that scientific progress has made the hidden meaning of some Qur’anic verses comprehensible to us. Numerous translations and commentaries on the Qur’an have been made by learned men who had no access to modern scientific knowledge. It is for this reason that scientists find some of their interpretations
unacceptable.
There are also other verses whose obvious meanings are easily understood, but which conceal
scientific meanings which are startling, to say the least. This is the case of a verse in chapter al-Ambiyaa, a part of which has already been quoted:
“Do the unbelievers not realize that the heavens and the earth were joined together,
then I clove them asunder and I made every living thing out of water. Will they still not believe?” Qur’an, 21:30
This is a dramatic affirmation of the modern idea that the origin of life is aquatic.
Botany
Progress in botany at the time of Muhammad (S) was not advanced enough in any country for scientists to know that plants have both male and female parts. Nevertheless, we may read the following in the chapter Taa Haa:
“(God is the One who) sent down rain from the sky and with it brought forth a variety of plants in pairs.” Qur’an, 20:53
Today we know that fruit comes from plants that have sexual characteristics even when they come from unfertilized flowers, like bananas. In the chapter ar-Ra‘d we read the following:
“... and of all fruits (God) placed (on the earth) two pairs.” Qur’an, 13:3
Physiology
In the field of physiology, there is one verse which appears extremely significant to me. One thousand years before the discovery of the blood circulatory system, and roughly thirteen centuries before it was determined that the internal organs were nourished by the process of digestive , a verse in the Qur’an described the source of the constituents of milk, in conformity with scientific facts.
To understand this verse, it must first be known that chemical reactions occur between food and enzymes in the mouth, the stomach and the intestines releasing nutrients in molecular form which are then absorbed into the circulatory system through countless microscopic projections of the intestinal wall called villi. Blood in the circulatory system then transports the nutrients to all the organs of the body, among which are the milk-producing mammary glands.
This biological process must be basically understood, if we are to understand a verse in the Qur’an which has for many centuries given rise to commentaries that were totally incomprehensible.
Today it is not difficult to see why! This verse is taken from the chapter an-Nahl:
“Verily, in cattle there is a lesson for yon. I give you drink from their insides, coming from a conjunction between the digested contents ( of the intestines ) and the blood, milk pure and pleasant for those who drink it.” Qur’an, 16:66
The constituents of milk are secreted by the mammary glands which are nourished by the product of food digestion brought to them by the bloodstream. The initial event which sets the whole process in motion is the conjunction of the contents of the intestine and blood at the level of the intestinal wall itself.
This very precise concept is the result of the discoveries made in the chemistry and physiology of the digestive system over one thousand years after the time of Prophet Muhammad (S).
BIOLOGY
More than anything else, I was struck by statements in the Qur’an dealing with living things, both in the animal and vegetable kingdoms, especially with regard to reproduction. We should really devote much more time to this subject, but, due to the limited scope of this presentation, I can only give a few examples.
I must once again stress the fact that it is only in modern times that scientific progress has made the hidden meaning of some Qur’anic verses comprehensible to us. Numerous translations and commentaries on the Qur’an have been made by learned men who had no access to modern scientific knowledge. It is for this reason that scientists find some of their interpretations
unacceptable.
There are also other verses whose obvious meanings are easily understood, but which conceal
scientific meanings which are startling, to say the least. This is the case of a verse in chapter al-Ambiyaa, a part of which has already been quoted:
“Do the unbelievers not realize that the heavens and the earth were joined together,
then I clove them asunder and I made every living thing out of water. Will they still not believe?” Qur’an, 21:30
This is a dramatic affirmation of the modern idea that the origin of life is aquatic.
Botany
Progress in botany at the time of Muhammad (S) was not advanced enough in any country for scientists to know that plants have both male and female parts. Nevertheless, we may read the following in the chapter Taa Haa:
“(God is the One who) sent down rain from the sky and with it brought forth a variety of plants in pairs.” Qur’an, 20:53
Today we know that fruit comes from plants that have sexual characteristics even when they come from unfertilized flowers, like bananas. In the chapter ar-Ra‘d we read the following:
“... and of all fruits (God) placed (on the earth) two pairs.” Qur’an, 13:3
Physiology
In the field of physiology, there is one verse which appears extremely significant to me. One thousand years before the discovery of the blood circulatory system, and roughly thirteen centuries before it was determined that the internal organs were nourished by the process of digestive , a verse in the Qur’an described the source of the constituents of milk, in conformity with scientific facts.
To understand this verse, it must first be known that chemical reactions occur between food and enzymes in the mouth, the stomach and the intestines releasing nutrients in molecular form which are then absorbed into the circulatory system through countless microscopic projections of the intestinal wall called villi. Blood in the circulatory system then transports the nutrients to all the organs of the body, among which are the milk-producing mammary glands.
This biological process must be basically understood, if we are to understand a verse in the Qur’an which has for many centuries given rise to commentaries that were totally incomprehensible.
Today it is not difficult to see why! This verse is taken from the chapter an-Nahl:
“Verily, in cattle there is a lesson for yon. I give you drink from their insides, coming from a conjunction between the digested contents ( of the intestines ) and the blood, milk pure and pleasant for those who drink it.” Qur’an, 16:66
The constituents of milk are secreted by the mammary glands which are nourished by the product of food digestion brought to them by the bloodstream. The initial event which sets the whole process in motion is the conjunction of the contents of the intestine and blood at the level of the intestinal wall itself.
This very precise concept is the result of the discoveries made in the chemistry and physiology of the digestive system over one thousand years after the time of Prophet Muhammad (S).
THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE ( IV ) - GEOLOGY
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille
GEOLOGY
Let us now return to earth to discover some of the many amazing statements contained in Qur’anic reflections about our own planet. They deal, not only with the physical phenomena observed here on earth, but also with details concerning the living organisms that inhabit it.
As in the case of everything we have discussed so far, we shall see that the Qur’an also expresses concepts in the field of geology that were way ahead of those current at the time of its revelation.
At this point, we must ask ourselves the following question: How could an uneducated man in the middle of the desert accurately tackle so many and such varied subjects at a time when mythology and superstition reigned supreme? How could he so skillfully avoid every belief that was proven to be totally inaccurate many centuries later?
Water Cycle
The verses dealing with the earthly systems are a case in point. I have quoted a large number of them in my book, The Bible, The Qur’an and Science, and have paid special attention to those that deal with the water cycle in nature. This is a topic which is well known today. Consequently, the verses in the Qur’an that refer to the water cycle seem to express ideas that are now totally self-evident. But if we consider the ideas prevalent at that time, they appear to be based more on myth and philosophical speculation than on observed fact, even though useful practical knowledge on soil irrigation was current at that period.
Let us examine, for example, the following verse in chapter az-Zumar:
“Have you not seen that Allah sent rain down from the sky and caused it to penetrate the ground and come forth as springs, then He caused crops of different colors to grow...” Qur’an,39:21
Such notions seem quite natural to us today, but we should not forget that, not so long ago, they were not prevalent. It was not until the sixteenth century, with Bernard Palissy, that we gained the first coherent description of the water cycle. Prior to this, people believed that the waters of the oceans, under the effect of winds, were thrust towards the interior of the continents. They then returned to the oceans via the great abyss, which, since Plato’s time was called the Tartarus .In the seventeenth century, great thinkers such as Descartes still believed in this myth. Even in the nineteenth century there were still those who believed in Aristotle’s theory that water was condensed in cool mountain caverns and formed underground lakes that fed springs. Today, we know that it is the infiltration of rain water into the ground that is responsible for this. If one compares the facts of modern hydrology with the data found in numerous verses of the Qur’an on this subject, one cannot fail to notice the remarkable degree of agreement between the two.
Mountains
In geology, modern science has recently discovered the phenomenon of folding which formed the mountain ranges. The earth’s crust is like a solid shell, while the deeper layers are hot and fluid, and thus inhospitable to any form of life. It has also been discovered that the stability of mountains is linked to the phenomenon of folding. The process of mountain formation by folding drove the earth’s crust down into the lower layers and provided foundations for the mountains.
Let us now compare modern ideas with one verse among many in the Qur’an that deals with this subject. It is taken from chapter an-Naba’:
“Have We not made the earth an expanse and the mountains stakes?”
Qur’an, 78:6-7
Stakes ( awtaad ), which are driven into the ground like those used to anchor a tent, are the deep foundations of geological folds.
Here, as in the case of all the other topics presented, the objective observer cannot fail to notice the absence of any contradiction to modern knowledge.
GEOLOGY
Let us now return to earth to discover some of the many amazing statements contained in Qur’anic reflections about our own planet. They deal, not only with the physical phenomena observed here on earth, but also with details concerning the living organisms that inhabit it.
As in the case of everything we have discussed so far, we shall see that the Qur’an also expresses concepts in the field of geology that were way ahead of those current at the time of its revelation.
At this point, we must ask ourselves the following question: How could an uneducated man in the middle of the desert accurately tackle so many and such varied subjects at a time when mythology and superstition reigned supreme? How could he so skillfully avoid every belief that was proven to be totally inaccurate many centuries later?
Water Cycle
The verses dealing with the earthly systems are a case in point. I have quoted a large number of them in my book, The Bible, The Qur’an and Science, and have paid special attention to those that deal with the water cycle in nature. This is a topic which is well known today. Consequently, the verses in the Qur’an that refer to the water cycle seem to express ideas that are now totally self-evident. But if we consider the ideas prevalent at that time, they appear to be based more on myth and philosophical speculation than on observed fact, even though useful practical knowledge on soil irrigation was current at that period.
Let us examine, for example, the following verse in chapter az-Zumar:
“Have you not seen that Allah sent rain down from the sky and caused it to penetrate the ground and come forth as springs, then He caused crops of different colors to grow...” Qur’an,39:21
Such notions seem quite natural to us today, but we should not forget that, not so long ago, they were not prevalent. It was not until the sixteenth century, with Bernard Palissy, that we gained the first coherent description of the water cycle. Prior to this, people believed that the waters of the oceans, under the effect of winds, were thrust towards the interior of the continents. They then returned to the oceans via the great abyss, which, since Plato’s time was called the Tartarus .In the seventeenth century, great thinkers such as Descartes still believed in this myth. Even in the nineteenth century there were still those who believed in Aristotle’s theory that water was condensed in cool mountain caverns and formed underground lakes that fed springs. Today, we know that it is the infiltration of rain water into the ground that is responsible for this. If one compares the facts of modern hydrology with the data found in numerous verses of the Qur’an on this subject, one cannot fail to notice the remarkable degree of agreement between the two.
Mountains
In geology, modern science has recently discovered the phenomenon of folding which formed the mountain ranges. The earth’s crust is like a solid shell, while the deeper layers are hot and fluid, and thus inhospitable to any form of life. It has also been discovered that the stability of mountains is linked to the phenomenon of folding. The process of mountain formation by folding drove the earth’s crust down into the lower layers and provided foundations for the mountains.
Let us now compare modern ideas with one verse among many in the Qur’an that deals with this subject. It is taken from chapter an-Naba’:
“Have We not made the earth an expanse and the mountains stakes?”
Qur’an, 78:6-7
Stakes ( awtaad ), which are driven into the ground like those used to anchor a tent, are the deep foundations of geological folds.
Here, as in the case of all the other topics presented, the objective observer cannot fail to notice the absence of any contradiction to modern knowledge.
THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE ( III ) - ASTRONOMY
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille
ASTRONOMY
Whenever I describe to Westerners the details the Qur’an contains on certain points of astronomy, it is common for someone to reply that there is nothing unusual in this since the Arabs made important discoveries in the field of astronomy long before the Europeans. But, this is a mistaken idea resulting from an ignorance of history. In the first place, science developed in the Arab World at a considerable time after the Qur’anic revelation had occurred. Secondly, the scientific knowledge prevalent at the highpoint of Islamic civilization would have made it impossible for any human being to have written statements on the heavens comparable to those in the Qur’an. The material on this subject is so vast that I can only provide a brief outline of it here.
The Sun and Moon.
Whereas the Bible talks of the sun and the moon as two lights differing only in size, the Qur’an distinguishes between them by the use of different terms: light (noor) for the moon, and lamp (siraaj) for the sun.
"Did you see how Allah created seven heavens, one above the other, and made in them the moon a light and the sun a lamp?" Qur’an, 78:12-13
The moon is an inert body which reflects light, whereas the sun is a celestial body in a state of permanent combustion producing both light and heat.
Stars and Planets
The word ‘star’ (najm) in the Qur’an ( 86:3 ) is accompanied by the adjective thaaqib which indicates that it burns and consumes itself as it pierces through the shadows of the night. It was much later discovered that stars are heavenly bodies producing their own light like the sun.
In the Qur’an, a different word, kawkab, is used to refer to the planets which are celestial bodies that reflect light and do not produce their own light like the sun.
“We have adorned the lowest heaven with ornaments, the planets.” Qur’an, 37:6
Orbits
Today, the laws governing the celestial systems are well known. Galaxies are balanced by the position of stars and planets in well-defined orbits, as well as the interplay of gravitational forces produced by their masses and the speed of their movements. But is this not what the Qur’an describes in terms which have only become comprehensible in modern times. In chapter al-Ambiyaa we find:
“(God is) the one who created the night, the day, the sun and the moon. Each one is traveling in an orbit with its own motion.” Qur’an,21:33
The Arabic word which expresses this movement is the verb yasbahoon which implies the idea of motion produced by a moving body, whether it is the movement of one’s legs running on the ground, or the action of swimming in water. In the case of a celestial body, one is forced to translate it, according to its original meaning, as ‘to travel with its own motion.’
In my book, The Bible, The Qur'an and Science, I have given the precise scientific data corresponding to the motion of celestial bodies. They are well known for the moon, but less widely known for the sun.
The Day and Night
The Qur’anic description of the sequence of day and night would, in itself, be rather commonplace were it not for the fact that it is expressed in terms that are today highly appropriate. The Qur’an uses the verb kawwara in chapter az-Zumar to describe the way the night ‘winds’ or ‘coils’ itself around the day and the day around the night.
“He coils the night upon the day and the day upon the night.” Qur’an, 39:5
The original meaning of the verb kis to coil a turban around the head. This is a totally valid comparison; yet at the time the Qur’an was revealed, the astronomical data necessary to make this comparison were unknown. It is not until man landed on the moon and observed the earth spinning on its axis, that the dark half of the globe appeared to wind itself around the light and the light half appeared to wind itself around the dark.
The Solar Apex
The notion of a settled place for the sun is vividly described in chapter Yaa Seen of the Qur’an:
"The sun runs its coarse to a settled place That is the decree of the Almighty, the All Knowing.” Qur’an, 36:38
“Settled place” is the translation of the word mustaqarr which indicates an exact appointed place and time. Modern astronomy confirms that the solar system is indeed moving in space at a rate of 12 miles per second towards a point situated in the constellation of Hercules ( alpha lyrae ) whose exact location has been precisely calculated. Astronomers have even give it a name, the solar apex.
Expansion of the Universe
Chapter ath-Thaariyaat of the Qur’an also seems to allude to one of the most imposing discoveries of modern science, the expansion of the Universe.
“I built the heaven with power and it is I, who am expanding it.” Qur’an,51:47
The expansion of the universe was first suggested by the general theory of relativity and is supported by the calculations of astrophysics. The regular movement of the galactic light towards the red section of the spectrum is explained by the distancing of one galaxy from another. Thus, the size of the universe appears to be progressively increasing.
Conquest of Space
Among the achievements of modern science is the “conquest” of space which has resulted in mans journey to the moon. The prediction of this event surely springs to mind when we read the chapter ar-Rahmaan in the Qur’an:
“O assembly of Jinns and men, if you can penetrate the regions of the heavens and the earth, then penetrate them! You will not penetrate them except with authority.”
Qur’an,55:33
Authority to travel in space can only come from the Creator of the laws which govern movement and space. The whole of this Qur’anic chapter invites humankind to recognize God’s beneficence.
ASTRONOMY
Whenever I describe to Westerners the details the Qur’an contains on certain points of astronomy, it is common for someone to reply that there is nothing unusual in this since the Arabs made important discoveries in the field of astronomy long before the Europeans. But, this is a mistaken idea resulting from an ignorance of history. In the first place, science developed in the Arab World at a considerable time after the Qur’anic revelation had occurred. Secondly, the scientific knowledge prevalent at the highpoint of Islamic civilization would have made it impossible for any human being to have written statements on the heavens comparable to those in the Qur’an. The material on this subject is so vast that I can only provide a brief outline of it here.
The Sun and Moon.
Whereas the Bible talks of the sun and the moon as two lights differing only in size, the Qur’an distinguishes between them by the use of different terms: light (noor) for the moon, and lamp (siraaj) for the sun.
"Did you see how Allah created seven heavens, one above the other, and made in them the moon a light and the sun a lamp?" Qur’an, 78:12-13
The moon is an inert body which reflects light, whereas the sun is a celestial body in a state of permanent combustion producing both light and heat.
Stars and Planets
The word ‘star’ (najm) in the Qur’an ( 86:3 ) is accompanied by the adjective thaaqib which indicates that it burns and consumes itself as it pierces through the shadows of the night. It was much later discovered that stars are heavenly bodies producing their own light like the sun.
In the Qur’an, a different word, kawkab, is used to refer to the planets which are celestial bodies that reflect light and do not produce their own light like the sun.
“We have adorned the lowest heaven with ornaments, the planets.” Qur’an, 37:6
Orbits
Today, the laws governing the celestial systems are well known. Galaxies are balanced by the position of stars and planets in well-defined orbits, as well as the interplay of gravitational forces produced by their masses and the speed of their movements. But is this not what the Qur’an describes in terms which have only become comprehensible in modern times. In chapter al-Ambiyaa we find:
“(God is) the one who created the night, the day, the sun and the moon. Each one is traveling in an orbit with its own motion.” Qur’an,21:33
The Arabic word which expresses this movement is the verb yasbahoon which implies the idea of motion produced by a moving body, whether it is the movement of one’s legs running on the ground, or the action of swimming in water. In the case of a celestial body, one is forced to translate it, according to its original meaning, as ‘to travel with its own motion.’
In my book, The Bible, The Qur'an and Science, I have given the precise scientific data corresponding to the motion of celestial bodies. They are well known for the moon, but less widely known for the sun.
The Day and Night
The Qur’anic description of the sequence of day and night would, in itself, be rather commonplace were it not for the fact that it is expressed in terms that are today highly appropriate. The Qur’an uses the verb kawwara in chapter az-Zumar to describe the way the night ‘winds’ or ‘coils’ itself around the day and the day around the night.
“He coils the night upon the day and the day upon the night.” Qur’an, 39:5
The original meaning of the verb kis to coil a turban around the head. This is a totally valid comparison; yet at the time the Qur’an was revealed, the astronomical data necessary to make this comparison were unknown. It is not until man landed on the moon and observed the earth spinning on its axis, that the dark half of the globe appeared to wind itself around the light and the light half appeared to wind itself around the dark.
The Solar Apex
The notion of a settled place for the sun is vividly described in chapter Yaa Seen of the Qur’an:
"The sun runs its coarse to a settled place That is the decree of the Almighty, the All Knowing.” Qur’an, 36:38
“Settled place” is the translation of the word mustaqarr which indicates an exact appointed place and time. Modern astronomy confirms that the solar system is indeed moving in space at a rate of 12 miles per second towards a point situated in the constellation of Hercules ( alpha lyrae ) whose exact location has been precisely calculated. Astronomers have even give it a name, the solar apex.
Expansion of the Universe
Chapter ath-Thaariyaat of the Qur’an also seems to allude to one of the most imposing discoveries of modern science, the expansion of the Universe.
“I built the heaven with power and it is I, who am expanding it.” Qur’an,51:47
The expansion of the universe was first suggested by the general theory of relativity and is supported by the calculations of astrophysics. The regular movement of the galactic light towards the red section of the spectrum is explained by the distancing of one galaxy from another. Thus, the size of the universe appears to be progressively increasing.
Conquest of Space
Among the achievements of modern science is the “conquest” of space which has resulted in mans journey to the moon. The prediction of this event surely springs to mind when we read the chapter ar-Rahmaan in the Qur’an:
“O assembly of Jinns and men, if you can penetrate the regions of the heavens and the earth, then penetrate them! You will not penetrate them except with authority.”
Qur’an,55:33
Authority to travel in space can only come from the Creator of the laws which govern movement and space. The whole of this Qur’anic chapter invites humankind to recognize God’s beneficence.
THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE ( II ) - AUTHENTICITY OF QUR’AN
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille
AUTHENTICITY OF QUR’AN
Before getting to the essence of the subject, there is a very important point which must be considered: the authenticity of the Qur’anic text.
It is known that the text of the Qur’an was both recited from memory, during the time it was revealed, by the Prophet and the believers who surrounded him, and written down by designated scribes among his followers. This process lasted for roughly twenty-three years during which many unofficial copies were made. An official copy was made within one year after the Prophet’s death at the instruction of Caliph Abu Bakr.
Here we must note a highly important point. The present text of the Qur’an benefited in its original preparation from the advantage of having its authenticity cross-checked by the text recited from memory as well as the unofficial written texts. The memorized text was of paramount importance at a time when not everyone could read and write, but everybody could memorize. Moreover, the need for a written record was included in the text of the Qur’an itself. The first five verses of chapter al-‘Alaq, which happen to constitute the first revelation made to the Prophet (S), express this quite clearly:
“Read: In the name of your Lord who created. Who created man from a clinging entity. Read! Your Lord is the most Noble, Who taught by the pen. Who taught man what he did not know.” Qur’an, 96:1-5
These are surely words in “praise of the pen as a means of human knowledge”, to use Professor Hamidullah’s expression.
Then came the Caliphate of ‘Uthman (which lasted from the twelfth to the twenty-fourth year following Muhammad’s death). Within the first two years of Caliph ‘Uthman’s rule, seven official copies were reproduced from the official text and distributed throughout a large area of the world which had already come under Islamic rule. All unofficial copies existing at that time were destroyed and all future copies were made from the official seven copies.
In my book, The Bible, the Qur’an and Science, I have quoted passages from the Qur’an which came from the period prior to the Hijrah (the Prophet’s emigration from Makkah to Madeenah in the year 622) and which allude to the writing of the Qur’an before the Prophet’s departure from Makkah.
There were, moreover, many witnesses to the immediate transcription of the Qur’anic revelation.
Professor Jacques Berque has told me of the great importance he attaches to it in comparison with the long gap separating the writing down of the Judeo-Christian revelation from the facts and events which it relates. Let us not forget that today we also have a number of manuscripts of the first written versions of the Qur’an which were from a time period very close to the time of revelation.
I shall also mention another fact of great importance. We shall examine statements in the Qur’an which today appear to merely record scientific truth, but of which men in former times were only able to grasp the apparent meaning. In some cases, these statements were totally incomprehensible. It is impossible to imagine that, if there were any alterations to the texts, these obscure passages scattered throughout the text of the Qur’an, were all able to escape human manipulation. The slightest alteration to the text would have automatically destroyed the remarkable coherence which is characteristic to them. Change in any text would have prevented us from establishing their total conformity with modern knowledge. The presence of these statements spread throughout the Qur’an looks (to the impartial observer ) like an obvious hallmark of its authenticity.
The Qur’an is a revelation made known to humans in the course of twenty-three years. It spanned two periods of almost equal length on either side of the Hijrah. In view of this, it was natural for reflections having a scientific aspect to be scattered throughout the Book. In a study, such as the one we have made, we had to regroup the verses according to subject matter, collecting them chapter by chapter.
How should they be classified? I could not find any indications in the Qur’an suggesting any particular classification, so I decided present them according to my own personal one.
It would seem to me, that the first subject to deal with is Creation. Here it is possible to compare the verses referring to this topic with the general ideas prevalent today on the formation of the Universe. Next, I divided up verses under the following general headings: Astronomy, the Earth, the Animal and Vegetable Kingdoms, Humans, and Human Reproduction in particular. Furthermore, I thought it useful to make a comparison between Qur’anic and Biblical narrations on the same topics from the point of view of modern knowledge. This has been done in the cases of Creation, the Flood and the Exodus. The reason that these topics were chosen is that knowledge acquired today can be used in the interpretation of the texts.
CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE
From an examination of creation as described in the Qur’an, an extremely important general concept emerges: The Qur’anic narration is quite different from the Biblical narration. This idea contradicts the parallels which are often wrongly drawn by Western authors to emphasize the resemblance between the two texts. To stress only the similarities, while silently ignoring the obvious dissimilarities, is to distort reality. There is, perhaps, a reason for this.
When talking about creation, there is a strong tendency in the West to claim that Muhammad copied the general outlines mentioned in the Qur’an from the Bible. Certainly it is possible to compare the six days of creation as described in the Bible, plus an extra day for rest on God’s Sabbath, with this verse from chapter al-A‘raaf.
“Your Lord is God who created the heavens and the earth in six days.” Qur’an, 7:54
However, it must be pointed out that modern commentators stress the interpretation of the Arabic word ayyaam, (one translation of which is ‘days’), as meaning ‘long periods’ or ‘ages’ rather than periods of twenty-four hours.
What appears to be of fundamental importance to me is that, in contrast to the narration contained in the Bible, the Qur’an does not lay down a sequence for creation of the earth and heavens. It refers both to the heavens before the earth and the earth before the heavens, when it talks of creation in general, as in this verse of chapter Taa Haa:
“(God) who created the earth and heavens above." Qur’an, 20:4
In fact, the notion derived from the Qur’an is one of a parallelism in the celestial and terrestrial evolutions. There are also basic pieces of information concerning the existence of an initial gaseous mass ( dukhaan ) which are unique to the Qur’an. As well as descriptions of the elements which, although at first were fused together ( ratq ), they subsequently became separated (fatq). These ideas are expressed in chapters Fussilat and al-Anbiyaa:
“God then rose turning towards the heaven when it was smoke” Qur’an, 41:11
“Do the disbelievers not see that the heavens and the earth were joined together, then I split them apart?” Qur’an, 21:30
According to modern science, the separation process resulted in the formation of multiple worlds, a concept which appears dozens of times in the Qur’an. For example, look at the first chapter of the Qur’an, al-Faatihah:( “Praise be to God, the Lord of the Worlds.” Qur’an, 1:1 ). These Qur’anic references are a11 in perfect agreement with modern ideas on the existence of primary nebula (galactic dust), followed by the separation of the elements which resulted in the formation of galaxies and then stars from which the planets were born. Reference is also made in the Qur’an to an intermediary creation between the heavens and the earth, as seen in chapter al-Furqaan:
“God is the one who created the heavens, the earth and what is between them...” Qur’an, 25:59
It would seem that this intermediary creation corresponds to the modern discovery of bridges of matter which are present outside organized astronomical systems.
This brief survey of Qur’anic references to creation clearly shows us how modern scientific data and statements in the Qur’an consistently agree on a large number of points. In contrast, the successive phases of creation mentioned in the Biblical text are totally unacceptable. For example, in Genesis 1:9-19 the creation of the earth (on the 3rd day) is placed before that of the heavens (on the 4th day). It is a well known fact that our planet came from its own star, the sun. In such circumstances, how could anyone claim that Muhammad, the supposed author of the Qur’an, drew his inspiration from the Bible. Such a claim would mean that, of his own accord, he corrected the Biblical text to arrive at the correct concept concerning the formation of the Universe. Yet the correct concept was reached by scientists many centuries after his death.
AUTHENTICITY OF QUR’AN
Before getting to the essence of the subject, there is a very important point which must be considered: the authenticity of the Qur’anic text.
It is known that the text of the Qur’an was both recited from memory, during the time it was revealed, by the Prophet and the believers who surrounded him, and written down by designated scribes among his followers. This process lasted for roughly twenty-three years during which many unofficial copies were made. An official copy was made within one year after the Prophet’s death at the instruction of Caliph Abu Bakr.
Here we must note a highly important point. The present text of the Qur’an benefited in its original preparation from the advantage of having its authenticity cross-checked by the text recited from memory as well as the unofficial written texts. The memorized text was of paramount importance at a time when not everyone could read and write, but everybody could memorize. Moreover, the need for a written record was included in the text of the Qur’an itself. The first five verses of chapter al-‘Alaq, which happen to constitute the first revelation made to the Prophet (S), express this quite clearly:
“Read: In the name of your Lord who created. Who created man from a clinging entity. Read! Your Lord is the most Noble, Who taught by the pen. Who taught man what he did not know.” Qur’an, 96:1-5
These are surely words in “praise of the pen as a means of human knowledge”, to use Professor Hamidullah’s expression.
Then came the Caliphate of ‘Uthman (which lasted from the twelfth to the twenty-fourth year following Muhammad’s death). Within the first two years of Caliph ‘Uthman’s rule, seven official copies were reproduced from the official text and distributed throughout a large area of the world which had already come under Islamic rule. All unofficial copies existing at that time were destroyed and all future copies were made from the official seven copies.
In my book, The Bible, the Qur’an and Science, I have quoted passages from the Qur’an which came from the period prior to the Hijrah (the Prophet’s emigration from Makkah to Madeenah in the year 622) and which allude to the writing of the Qur’an before the Prophet’s departure from Makkah.
There were, moreover, many witnesses to the immediate transcription of the Qur’anic revelation.
Professor Jacques Berque has told me of the great importance he attaches to it in comparison with the long gap separating the writing down of the Judeo-Christian revelation from the facts and events which it relates. Let us not forget that today we also have a number of manuscripts of the first written versions of the Qur’an which were from a time period very close to the time of revelation.
I shall also mention another fact of great importance. We shall examine statements in the Qur’an which today appear to merely record scientific truth, but of which men in former times were only able to grasp the apparent meaning. In some cases, these statements were totally incomprehensible. It is impossible to imagine that, if there were any alterations to the texts, these obscure passages scattered throughout the text of the Qur’an, were all able to escape human manipulation. The slightest alteration to the text would have automatically destroyed the remarkable coherence which is characteristic to them. Change in any text would have prevented us from establishing their total conformity with modern knowledge. The presence of these statements spread throughout the Qur’an looks (to the impartial observer ) like an obvious hallmark of its authenticity.
The Qur’an is a revelation made known to humans in the course of twenty-three years. It spanned two periods of almost equal length on either side of the Hijrah. In view of this, it was natural for reflections having a scientific aspect to be scattered throughout the Book. In a study, such as the one we have made, we had to regroup the verses according to subject matter, collecting them chapter by chapter.
How should they be classified? I could not find any indications in the Qur’an suggesting any particular classification, so I decided present them according to my own personal one.
It would seem to me, that the first subject to deal with is Creation. Here it is possible to compare the verses referring to this topic with the general ideas prevalent today on the formation of the Universe. Next, I divided up verses under the following general headings: Astronomy, the Earth, the Animal and Vegetable Kingdoms, Humans, and Human Reproduction in particular. Furthermore, I thought it useful to make a comparison between Qur’anic and Biblical narrations on the same topics from the point of view of modern knowledge. This has been done in the cases of Creation, the Flood and the Exodus. The reason that these topics were chosen is that knowledge acquired today can be used in the interpretation of the texts.
CREATION OF THE UNIVERSE
From an examination of creation as described in the Qur’an, an extremely important general concept emerges: The Qur’anic narration is quite different from the Biblical narration. This idea contradicts the parallels which are often wrongly drawn by Western authors to emphasize the resemblance between the two texts. To stress only the similarities, while silently ignoring the obvious dissimilarities, is to distort reality. There is, perhaps, a reason for this.
When talking about creation, there is a strong tendency in the West to claim that Muhammad copied the general outlines mentioned in the Qur’an from the Bible. Certainly it is possible to compare the six days of creation as described in the Bible, plus an extra day for rest on God’s Sabbath, with this verse from chapter al-A‘raaf.
“Your Lord is God who created the heavens and the earth in six days.” Qur’an, 7:54
However, it must be pointed out that modern commentators stress the interpretation of the Arabic word ayyaam, (one translation of which is ‘days’), as meaning ‘long periods’ or ‘ages’ rather than periods of twenty-four hours.
What appears to be of fundamental importance to me is that, in contrast to the narration contained in the Bible, the Qur’an does not lay down a sequence for creation of the earth and heavens. It refers both to the heavens before the earth and the earth before the heavens, when it talks of creation in general, as in this verse of chapter Taa Haa:
“(God) who created the earth and heavens above." Qur’an, 20:4
In fact, the notion derived from the Qur’an is one of a parallelism in the celestial and terrestrial evolutions. There are also basic pieces of information concerning the existence of an initial gaseous mass ( dukhaan ) which are unique to the Qur’an. As well as descriptions of the elements which, although at first were fused together ( ratq ), they subsequently became separated (fatq). These ideas are expressed in chapters Fussilat and al-Anbiyaa:
“God then rose turning towards the heaven when it was smoke” Qur’an, 41:11
“Do the disbelievers not see that the heavens and the earth were joined together, then I split them apart?” Qur’an, 21:30
According to modern science, the separation process resulted in the formation of multiple worlds, a concept which appears dozens of times in the Qur’an. For example, look at the first chapter of the Qur’an, al-Faatihah:( “Praise be to God, the Lord of the Worlds.” Qur’an, 1:1 ). These Qur’anic references are a11 in perfect agreement with modern ideas on the existence of primary nebula (galactic dust), followed by the separation of the elements which resulted in the formation of galaxies and then stars from which the planets were born. Reference is also made in the Qur’an to an intermediary creation between the heavens and the earth, as seen in chapter al-Furqaan:
“God is the one who created the heavens, the earth and what is between them...” Qur’an, 25:59
It would seem that this intermediary creation corresponds to the modern discovery of bridges of matter which are present outside organized astronomical systems.
This brief survey of Qur’anic references to creation clearly shows us how modern scientific data and statements in the Qur’an consistently agree on a large number of points. In contrast, the successive phases of creation mentioned in the Biblical text are totally unacceptable. For example, in Genesis 1:9-19 the creation of the earth (on the 3rd day) is placed before that of the heavens (on the 4th day). It is a well known fact that our planet came from its own star, the sun. In such circumstances, how could anyone claim that Muhammad, the supposed author of the Qur’an, drew his inspiration from the Bible. Such a claim would mean that, of his own accord, he corrected the Biblical text to arrive at the correct concept concerning the formation of the Universe. Yet the correct concept was reached by scientists many centuries after his death.
THE QUR’AN AND MODERN SCIENCE ( I ) - INTRODUCTION
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille
INTRODUCTION
On the 9th of November, 1976, an unusual lecture was given at the French Academy of Medicine. Its title was “Physiological and Embryological data in the Qur’an”. I presented the study based on the existence of certain statements concerning physiology and reproduction in the Qur’an. My reason for presenting this lecture was because it is impossible to explain how a text produced in the seventh century could have contained ideas that have only been discovered in modern times.
For the first time, I spoke to members of a learned medical society on subjects whose basic concepts they all knew well, but I could, just as easily, have pointed out statements of a scientific nature contained in the Qur’an and other subjects to specialists from other disciplines. Astronomers, zoologists, geologists and specialists in the history of the earth would all have been struck, just as forcibly as medical doctors, by the presence in the Qur’an of highly accurate reflections on natural phenomena. These reflections are particularly astonishing when we consider the history of science, and can only lead us to the conclusion that they are a challenge to human explanation.
There is no human work in existence that contains statements as far beyond the level of knowledge of its time as the Qur’an. Scientific opinions comparable to those in the Qur’an are the result of modern knowledge. In the commentaries to translations of the Qur’an that have appeared in European languages, I have only been able to find scattered and vague references to them. Nor do commentators writing in Arabic provide a complete study of the aspects of the Qur’an that deal with scientific matters. This is why the idea of a comprehensive study of the problem appealed to me.
In addition to this, a comparative study of similar data contained in the Bible (Old Testament and Gospels) seemed desirable. Thus, a research project was developed from the comparison of certain passages in the Holy Scriptures of each monotheistic religion with modern scientific knowledge. The project resulted in the publication of a book entitled, The Bible, the Qur'an and Science. The first French edition appeared in May 1976. English and Arabic editions have since been published.
RELIGION AND SCIENCE
There is, perhaps, no better illustration of the close links between Islam and science than the Prophet Muhammad’s often-quoted statements:
“Seeking knowledge is compulsory on every Muslim.”
“wisdom is the lost property of the believer.”
“whoever follows a path seeking knowledge, Allah will make his path to paradise easy.”
These statements and many others are veritable invitations to humanity to enrich their knowledge from all sources. It comes as no surprise, therefore, to learn that in Islam religion and science have always been considered as twin sisters and that today, at a time when science has taken such great strides, they still continue to be associated. Nor is it a surprise to learn that certain scientific data are used for the better understanding of the Qur’anic text. What is more, in a century where, for many people, scientific truth has dealt a deathblow to religious belief, it is precisely the discoveries of science that, in an objective examination of the Islamic scripture, have highlighted the supernatural nature of revelation and the authenticity of the religion which it taught.
When all is said and done, scientific knowledge seems, in spite of what many people may say or think, to be highly conducive to reflection on the existence of God. Once we begin to ask ourselves, in an unbiased or unprejudiced way, about the metaphysical lessons to be derived from some of today’s knowledge, (for example our evolving knowledge of the smallest components of matter or the questions surrounding the origin of life within inanimate matter), we indeed discover many reasons for thinking about God. When we think about the remarkable organization presiding over the birth and maintenance of life, it becomes clear that the likelihood of it being the result of chance lessens quite considerably.
As our knowledge of science in the various fields expands, certain concepts must seem increasingly unacceptable. For example, the idea enthusiastically expressed by the recent French winner of the Nobel prize for medicine, that living matter was self-created from simple chemical elements due to chance circumstances. Then from this point it is claimed that living organisms evolved, leading to the remarkably complex being called man. To me, it would seem that the scientific advancements made in understandithe fantastic complexity of higher beings provides stronger arguments in favor of the opposite theory: that the existence of an extraordinarily methodical organization presiding over the remarkable arrangement of the phenomena of life necessitates the existence of a Creator.
In many parts of the Book, the Qur’an, encourages this kind of general reflection but also contains infinitely more precise data which are directly related to facts discovered by modern science. It is precisely this data which exercise a magnetic attraction for today’s scientists.
The Qur’an And Science
For many centuries, humankind was unable to study certain data contained in the verses of the Qur’an because they did not possess sufficient scientific means. It is only today that numerous verses of the Qur’an dealing with natural phenomena have become comprehensible. A reading of old commentaries on the Qur’an, however knowledgeable their authors may have been in their day, bears solemn witness to a total inability to grasp the depth of meaning in such verses. I could even go so far as to say that, in the 20th century, with its compartmentalization of ever-increasing knowledge, it is still not easy for the average scientist to understand everything he reads in the Qur’an on such subjects, without having recourse to specialized research. This means that to understand all such verses of the Qur’an, one is nowadays required to have an absolutely encyclopedic knowledge embracing many scientific disciplines.
I should like to stress, that I use the word science to mean knowledge which has been soundly established. It does not include the theories which, for a time, help to explain a phenomenon or a series of phenomena, only to be abandoned later on in favor of other explanations. These newer explanations have become more plausible thanks to scientific progress. I only intend to deal with comparisons between statements in the Qur’an and scientific knowledge which are not likely to be subject to further discussion. Wherever I introduce scientific facts which are not yet 100% established, I will make it quite clear.
There are also some very rare examples of statements in the Qur’an which have not, as yet, been confirmed by modern science. I shall refer to these by pointing out that all the evidence available today leads scientists to regard them as being highly probable. An example of this is the statement in the Qur’an that life has an aquatic origin ( “And I created every living thing out of water” Qur’an, 21:30 ).
These scientific considerations should not, however, make us forget that the Qur’an remains a religious book par excellence and that it cannot be expected to have a scientific purpose per se. In the Qur’an, whenever humans are invited to reflect upon the wonders of creation and the numerous natural phenomena, they can easily see that the obvious intention is to stress Divine Omnipotence. The fact that, in these reflections, we can find allusions to data connected with scientific knowledge is surely another of God’s gifts whose value must shine out in an age where scientifically based atheism seeks to gain control of society at the expense of the belief in God. But the Qur’an does not need unusual characteristics like this to make its supernatural nature felt. Scientific statements such as these are only one specific aspect of the Islamic revelation which the Bible does not share.
Throughout my research I have constantly tried to remain totally objective. I believe I have succeeded in approaching the study of the Qur’an with the same objectivity that a doctor has when opening a file on a patient. In other words, only by carefully analyzing all the symptoms can one arrive at an accurate diagnosis. I must admit that it was certainly not faith in Islam that first guided my steps, but simply a desire to search for the truth. This is how I see it today. It was mainly the facts which, by the time I had finished my study, led me to see the Qur’an as the divinely-revealed text it really is.
On the 9th of November, 1976, an unusual lecture was given at the French Academy of Medicine. Its title was “Physiological and Embryological data in the Qur’an”. I presented the study based on the existence of certain statements concerning physiology and reproduction in the Qur’an. My reason for presenting this lecture was because it is impossible to explain how a text produced in the seventh century could have contained ideas that have only been discovered in modern times.
For the first time, I spoke to members of a learned medical society on subjects whose basic concepts they all knew well, but I could, just as easily, have pointed out statements of a scientific nature contained in the Qur’an and other subjects to specialists from other disciplines. Astronomers, zoologists, geologists and specialists in the history of the earth would all have been struck, just as forcibly as medical doctors, by the presence in the Qur’an of highly accurate reflections on natural phenomena. These reflections are particularly astonishing when we consider the history of science, and can only lead us to the conclusion that they are a challenge to human explanation.
There is no human work in existence that contains statements as far beyond the level of knowledge of its time as the Qur’an. Scientific opinions comparable to those in the Qur’an are the result of modern knowledge. In the commentaries to translations of the Qur’an that have appeared in European languages, I have only been able to find scattered and vague references to them. Nor do commentators writing in Arabic provide a complete study of the aspects of the Qur’an that deal with scientific matters. This is why the idea of a comprehensive study of the problem appealed to me.
In addition to this, a comparative study of similar data contained in the Bible (Old Testament and Gospels) seemed desirable. Thus, a research project was developed from the comparison of certain passages in the Holy Scriptures of each monotheistic religion with modern scientific knowledge. The project resulted in the publication of a book entitled, The Bible, the Qur'an and Science. The first French edition appeared in May 1976. English and Arabic editions have since been published.
RELIGION AND SCIENCE
There is, perhaps, no better illustration of the close links between Islam and science than the Prophet Muhammad’s often-quoted statements:
“Seeking knowledge is compulsory on every Muslim.”
“wisdom is the lost property of the believer.”
“whoever follows a path seeking knowledge, Allah will make his path to paradise easy.”
These statements and many others are veritable invitations to humanity to enrich their knowledge from all sources. It comes as no surprise, therefore, to learn that in Islam religion and science have always been considered as twin sisters and that today, at a time when science has taken such great strides, they still continue to be associated. Nor is it a surprise to learn that certain scientific data are used for the better understanding of the Qur’anic text. What is more, in a century where, for many people, scientific truth has dealt a deathblow to religious belief, it is precisely the discoveries of science that, in an objective examination of the Islamic scripture, have highlighted the supernatural nature of revelation and the authenticity of the religion which it taught.
When all is said and done, scientific knowledge seems, in spite of what many people may say or think, to be highly conducive to reflection on the existence of God. Once we begin to ask ourselves, in an unbiased or unprejudiced way, about the metaphysical lessons to be derived from some of today’s knowledge, (for example our evolving knowledge of the smallest components of matter or the questions surrounding the origin of life within inanimate matter), we indeed discover many reasons for thinking about God. When we think about the remarkable organization presiding over the birth and maintenance of life, it becomes clear that the likelihood of it being the result of chance lessens quite considerably.
As our knowledge of science in the various fields expands, certain concepts must seem increasingly unacceptable. For example, the idea enthusiastically expressed by the recent French winner of the Nobel prize for medicine, that living matter was self-created from simple chemical elements due to chance circumstances. Then from this point it is claimed that living organisms evolved, leading to the remarkably complex being called man. To me, it would seem that the scientific advancements made in understandithe fantastic complexity of higher beings provides stronger arguments in favor of the opposite theory: that the existence of an extraordinarily methodical organization presiding over the remarkable arrangement of the phenomena of life necessitates the existence of a Creator.
In many parts of the Book, the Qur’an, encourages this kind of general reflection but also contains infinitely more precise data which are directly related to facts discovered by modern science. It is precisely this data which exercise a magnetic attraction for today’s scientists.
The Qur’an And Science
For many centuries, humankind was unable to study certain data contained in the verses of the Qur’an because they did not possess sufficient scientific means. It is only today that numerous verses of the Qur’an dealing with natural phenomena have become comprehensible. A reading of old commentaries on the Qur’an, however knowledgeable their authors may have been in their day, bears solemn witness to a total inability to grasp the depth of meaning in such verses. I could even go so far as to say that, in the 20th century, with its compartmentalization of ever-increasing knowledge, it is still not easy for the average scientist to understand everything he reads in the Qur’an on such subjects, without having recourse to specialized research. This means that to understand all such verses of the Qur’an, one is nowadays required to have an absolutely encyclopedic knowledge embracing many scientific disciplines.
I should like to stress, that I use the word science to mean knowledge which has been soundly established. It does not include the theories which, for a time, help to explain a phenomenon or a series of phenomena, only to be abandoned later on in favor of other explanations. These newer explanations have become more plausible thanks to scientific progress. I only intend to deal with comparisons between statements in the Qur’an and scientific knowledge which are not likely to be subject to further discussion. Wherever I introduce scientific facts which are not yet 100% established, I will make it quite clear.
There are also some very rare examples of statements in the Qur’an which have not, as yet, been confirmed by modern science. I shall refer to these by pointing out that all the evidence available today leads scientists to regard them as being highly probable. An example of this is the statement in the Qur’an that life has an aquatic origin ( “And I created every living thing out of water” Qur’an, 21:30 ).
These scientific considerations should not, however, make us forget that the Qur’an remains a religious book par excellence and that it cannot be expected to have a scientific purpose per se. In the Qur’an, whenever humans are invited to reflect upon the wonders of creation and the numerous natural phenomena, they can easily see that the obvious intention is to stress Divine Omnipotence. The fact that, in these reflections, we can find allusions to data connected with scientific knowledge is surely another of God’s gifts whose value must shine out in an age where scientifically based atheism seeks to gain control of society at the expense of the belief in God. But the Qur’an does not need unusual characteristics like this to make its supernatural nature felt. Scientific statements such as these are only one specific aspect of the Islamic revelation which the Bible does not share.
Throughout my research I have constantly tried to remain totally objective. I believe I have succeeded in approaching the study of the Qur’an with the same objectivity that a doctor has when opening a file on a patient. In other words, only by carefully analyzing all the symptoms can one arrive at an accurate diagnosis. I must admit that it was certainly not faith in Islam that first guided my steps, but simply a desire to search for the truth. This is how I see it today. It was mainly the facts which, by the time I had finished my study, led me to see the Qur’an as the divinely-revealed text it really is.
Essential Features of the Islamic Political System
By Abul Ala Maududi
The political system of Islam is based on three principles: Tawhid (unity of Allah), Risalat (Prophethood) and Khilafat (vicegerency). It is difficult to appreciate the different aspects of Islamic polity without fully understanding these three principles. I will therefore begin with a brief exposition of what they are.
Tawhid means that only Allah is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it, organic or inorganic. The sovereignty of this kingdom is vested only in Him. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone, no one and nothing else shares it in any way. Life, in all its forms, our physical organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over nearly everything in our lives and the things themselves, none of them has been created or acquired by us in our own right. They have been bestowed on us entirely by Allah. Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our authority; nor is anyone else entitled to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah, who has created us, endowed us with mental and physical faculties, and provided material things for our use. Tawhid means that only Allah is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it, organic or inorganic. The sovereignty of this kingdom is vested only in Him. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone, no one and nothing else shares it in any way. Life, in all its forms, our physical organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over nearly everything in our lives and the things themselves, none of them has been created or acquired by us in our own right. They have been bestowed on us entirely by Allah. Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our authority; nor is anyone else entitled to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah, who has created us, endowed us with mental and physical faculties, and provided material things for our use. Tawhid means that only Allah is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it, organic or inorganic. The sovereignty of this kingdom is vested only in Him. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone, no one and nothing else shares it in any way. Life, in all its forms, our physical organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over nearly everything in our lives and the things themselves, none of them has been created or acquired by us in our own right. They have been bestowed on us entirely by Allah. Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our authority; nor is anyone else entitled to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah, who has created us, endowed us with mental and physical faculties, and provided material things for our use.
This principle of the unity of Allah totally negates the concept of the legal and political independence of human beings, individually or collectively. No individual, family, class or race can set themselves above Allah. Allah alone is the Ruler and His commandments are the Law.
The medium through which we receive the law of Allah is known as Risalat. We have received two things from this source: the Book in which Allah has set out His law, and the authoritative interpretation and exemplification of the Book by the Prophet, blessings and peace be on him through word and deed, in his capacity as the representative of Allah. The Prophet, blessings and peace be on him, has also, in accordance with the intention of the Divine Book, given us a model for the Islamic way of life by himself implementing the law and providing necessary details where required. The combination of these two elements is called the Shari‘ah.
Now consider Khilafat. According to the Arabic lexicon, it means ‘representation’. Man, according to Islam, is the representative of Allah on earth, His vicegerent. That is to say, by virtue of the powers delegated to him by Allah, he is required to exercise his Allah-given authority in this world within the limits prescribed by Allah.
Take, for example, the case of an estate which someone has been appointed to administer on your behalf. You will see that four conditions are invariably met. First, the real ownership of the estate remains vested in you and not in the administrator; second, he administers your property only in accordance with your instructions; third, he exercises his authority within the limits prescribed by you; and fourth, in the administration of the trust he executes your will and not his own. These four conditions are so inherent in the concept of ‘representation’ that if any representative fails to observe them he will rightly be blamed for breaking the covenant which was implied in the concept of ‘representation’. This is exactly what Islam means when it affirms that man is the vicegerent of Allah on earth. Hence, these four conditions are also involved in the concept of Khilafat.
A state that is established in accordance with this political theory will in fact be a human caliphate under the sovereignty of Allah and will do Allah’s will by working within the limits prescribed by Him and in accordance with His instructions and injunctions.
This is a new and revised translation of a talk given by the author on Radio Pakistan, Lahore, on 20th January, 1948.
Democracy in Islam
The above explanation of the term Khilafat also makes it abundantly clear that no individual or dynasty or class can be Khilafah, but that the authority of caliphate is bestowed on any community which accepts the principles of Tawhid and Risalat. In such a society, each individual shares the Allah-given caliphate. This is the point where democracy begins in Islam.
Every person in an Islamic society enjoys the rights and powers of the caliphate of Allah and in this respect all individuals are equal. No one can deprive anyone of his rights and powers. The agency for running the affairs of the state will be established in accordance with the will of these individuals, and the authority of the state will only be an extension of the powers of the individual delegated to it. Their opinion will be decisive in the formation of the Government, which will be run with their advice and in accordance with their wishes. Whoever gains their confidence will carry out the duties of the caliphate on their behalf; and when he loses this confidence he will have to relinquish his office. In this respect the political system in Islam is as perfect a democracy as ever can be.
What distinguishes Islamic democracy from Western democracy is that while the latter is based on the concept of popular sovereignty the former rests on the principle of popular Khilafat. In Western democracy the people are sovereign, in Islam sovereignty is vested in Allah and the people are His caliphs or representatives. In the former the people make their own laws; in the latter they have to follow and obey the laws (Shari‘ah) given by Allah through His Prophet. In one the Government undertakes to fulfil the will of the people; in the other Government and the people alike have to do the will of Allah. Western democracy is a kind of absolute authority which exercises its powers in a free and uncontrolled manner, whereas Islamic democracy is subservient to the Divine Law and exercises its authority in accordance with the injunctions of Allah and within the limits prescribed by Him.
Purpose of the Islamic State
The Holy Qur’an clearly states that the aim and purpose of this state, built on the foundation of Tawhid, Risalat and Khilafat, is the establishment, maintenance and development of those virtues which the Creator of the universe wishes human life to be enriched by, and the prevention and eradication of those evils which are abhorrent to Allah. The state in Islam is not intended for political administration only nor for the fulfilment through it of the collective will of any particular set of people. Rather, Islam places a high ideal before the state for the achievement of which it must use all the means at its disposal. The aim is to encourage the qualities of purity, beauty, goodness, virtue, success and prosperity which Allah wants to flourish in the life of His people and to suppress all kinds of exploitation and injustice. As well as placing before us this high ideal, Islam clearly states the desired virtues and the undesirable evils. The Islamic state can thus plan its welfare programmes in every age and in any environment.
The constant demand made by Islam is that the principles of morality must be observed at all costs and in all walks of life. Hence, it lays down an unalterable requirement for the state to base its politics on justice, truth and honesty. It is not prepared, under any circumstances, to tolerate fraud, falsehood and injustice for the sake of political, administrative or national expediency. Whether it be relations between the rulers and the ruled within the state, or relations of the state with other states, precedence must always be given to truth, honesty and justice. It imposes obligations on the state similar to those it imposes on the individual: to fulfil all contracts and obligations; to have consistent standards in all dealings; to remember obligations as well as rights and not to forget the rights of others when expecting them to fulfil their obligations; to use power and authority for the establishment for justice and not for the perpetration of injustice; to look on duty as a sacred obligation; and to regard power as a trust from Allah to be used in the belief that one has to render an account of one’s actions to Him in the Hereafter.
Fundamental Rights
Although an Islamic state may be set up anywhere on earth, Islam does not seek to restrict human rights or privileges to the geographical limits of its own state. Islam has laid down universal fundamental rights for humanity as a whole, which are to be observed and respected in all circumstances irrespective of whether a person lives on the territory of the Islamic state or outside it and whether he is at peace with the state or at war. For example, human blood is sacred and may not be spilled without justification; it is not permissible to oppress women, children, old people, the sick or the wounded; woman’s honour and chastity must be respected in all circumstances; and the hungry must be fed, the naked clothed, and the wounded or diseased treated medically.
These, and a few other provisions, have been laid down by Islam as fundamental rights for every man by virtue of his status as a human being, to be enjoyed under the constitution of an Islamic state.
The rights of citizenship in Islam, however, are not confined to persons born within the limits of its state but are granted to every Muslim irrespective of his place of birth. A Muslim ipso facto becomes the citizen of an Islamic state as soon as he sets foot on its territory with the intention of living there; he thus enjoys equal rights of citizenship with those who are its citizens by birth. Citizenship must therefore be common to all the citizens of all the Islamic states that exist in the world; a Muslim will not need a passport for entry or exit from any of them. And every Muslim must be regarded as eligible for positions of the highest responsibility in an Islamic state without distinction of race, colour or class.
Islam has also laid down certain rights for non-Muslims who may be living within the boundaries of an Islamic state, and these rights must necessarily form part of the Islamic constitution. According to Islamic terminology such non-Muslims are called dhimmis (the covenanted), implying that the Islamic state has entered into a covenant with them and guaranteed their rights.
The life, property and honour of a dhimmi is to be respected and protected in exactly the same way as that of a Muslim citizen. There is no difference between Muslim and non-Muslim citizens in respect of civil or criminal law; and the Islamic state shall not interfere with the personal law of non-Muslims. They will have full freedom of conscience and belief and will be entitled to perform their religious rites and ceremonies. As well as being able to practise their religion, they are entitled to criticise Islam. However the rights given in this respect are not unlimited: the civil law of the country has to be fully respected and all criticism has to be made within its framework.
These rights are irrevocable and non-Muslims can only be deprived of them if they renounce the convenant which grants them citizenship. However much a non-Muslim state may oppress its Muslim citizens, it is not permissible for an Islamic state to retaliate against its non-Muslim subjects. This injunction holds good even if all the Muslims outside the boundaries of an Islamic state are massacred.
Executive and Legislature
The responsibility for the administration of the Government in an Islamic state is entrusted to an Amir (leader) who may be likened to the President or the Prime Minister in a Western democratic state. All adult men and women who accept the fundamentals of the constitution are entitled to vote in the election for the leader.
The basic qualifications for the election of an Amir are that he should command the confidence of the largest number of people in respect of his knowledge and grasp of the spirit of Islam; he should possess the Islamic attribute of fear of Allah; he should be endowed with the quality of statesmanship. In short, he should be both able and virtuous.
A Shura (consultative council), elected by the people, will assist and guide the Amir. It is obligatory for the Amir to administer the country with the advice of his Shura. The Amir can retain office only so long as he enjoys the confidence of the people, and must resign when he loses this confidence. Every citizen has the right to criticise the Amir and his Government, and all responsible means for the expression of public opinion should be available.
Legislation in an Islamic state should be within the limits prescribed by the Shari‘ah. The injunctions of Allah and His Prophet are to be accepted and obeyed and no legislative body can alter or modify them or make any new laws which are contrary to their spirit. The duty of ascertaining the real intent of those commandments which are open to more than one interpretation should devolve on people possessing a specialised knowledge of the law of Shari‘ah. Hence, such matters may have to be referred to a sub-committee of the Shã r~ comprising men learned in Islamic law. Great scope would still be available for legislation on questions not covered by any specific injunctions of the Shari‘ah, and the advisory council or legislature is free to legislate in regard to these matters.
In Islam the judiciary is not placed under the control of the executive. It derives its authority directly from the Shari‘ah and is answerable to Allah. The judges will obviously be appointed by the Government but, once appointed, will have to administer justice impartially according to the law of Allah. All the organs and functionaries of the Government should come within their jurisdiction: even the highest executive authority of the Government will be liable to be called upon to appear in a court of law as a plaintiff or defendant. Rulers and ruled are subject to the same law and there can be no discrimination on the basis of position, power or privilege. Islam stands for equality and scrupulously adheres to this principle in the social, economic and political realms alike.
The political system of Islam is based on three principles: Tawhid (unity of Allah), Risalat (Prophethood) and Khilafat (vicegerency). It is difficult to appreciate the different aspects of Islamic polity without fully understanding these three principles. I will therefore begin with a brief exposition of what they are.
Tawhid means that only Allah is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it, organic or inorganic. The sovereignty of this kingdom is vested only in Him. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone, no one and nothing else shares it in any way. Life, in all its forms, our physical organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over nearly everything in our lives and the things themselves, none of them has been created or acquired by us in our own right. They have been bestowed on us entirely by Allah. Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our authority; nor is anyone else entitled to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah, who has created us, endowed us with mental and physical faculties, and provided material things for our use. Tawhid means that only Allah is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it, organic or inorganic. The sovereignty of this kingdom is vested only in Him. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone, no one and nothing else shares it in any way. Life, in all its forms, our physical organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over nearly everything in our lives and the things themselves, none of them has been created or acquired by us in our own right. They have been bestowed on us entirely by Allah. Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our authority; nor is anyone else entitled to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah, who has created us, endowed us with mental and physical faculties, and provided material things for our use. Tawhid means that only Allah is the Creator, Sustainer and Master of the universe and of all that exists in it, organic or inorganic. The sovereignty of this kingdom is vested only in Him. He alone has the right to command or forbid. Worship and obedience are due to Him alone, no one and nothing else shares it in any way. Life, in all its forms, our physical organs and faculties, the apparent control which we have over nearly everything in our lives and the things themselves, none of them has been created or acquired by us in our own right. They have been bestowed on us entirely by Allah. Hence, it is not for us to decide the aim and purpose of our existence or to set the limits of our authority; nor is anyone else entitled to make these decisions for us. This right rests only with Allah, who has created us, endowed us with mental and physical faculties, and provided material things for our use.
This principle of the unity of Allah totally negates the concept of the legal and political independence of human beings, individually or collectively. No individual, family, class or race can set themselves above Allah. Allah alone is the Ruler and His commandments are the Law.
The medium through which we receive the law of Allah is known as Risalat. We have received two things from this source: the Book in which Allah has set out His law, and the authoritative interpretation and exemplification of the Book by the Prophet, blessings and peace be on him through word and deed, in his capacity as the representative of Allah. The Prophet, blessings and peace be on him, has also, in accordance with the intention of the Divine Book, given us a model for the Islamic way of life by himself implementing the law and providing necessary details where required. The combination of these two elements is called the Shari‘ah.
Now consider Khilafat. According to the Arabic lexicon, it means ‘representation’. Man, according to Islam, is the representative of Allah on earth, His vicegerent. That is to say, by virtue of the powers delegated to him by Allah, he is required to exercise his Allah-given authority in this world within the limits prescribed by Allah.
Take, for example, the case of an estate which someone has been appointed to administer on your behalf. You will see that four conditions are invariably met. First, the real ownership of the estate remains vested in you and not in the administrator; second, he administers your property only in accordance with your instructions; third, he exercises his authority within the limits prescribed by you; and fourth, in the administration of the trust he executes your will and not his own. These four conditions are so inherent in the concept of ‘representation’ that if any representative fails to observe them he will rightly be blamed for breaking the covenant which was implied in the concept of ‘representation’. This is exactly what Islam means when it affirms that man is the vicegerent of Allah on earth. Hence, these four conditions are also involved in the concept of Khilafat.
A state that is established in accordance with this political theory will in fact be a human caliphate under the sovereignty of Allah and will do Allah’s will by working within the limits prescribed by Him and in accordance with His instructions and injunctions.
This is a new and revised translation of a talk given by the author on Radio Pakistan, Lahore, on 20th January, 1948.
Democracy in Islam
The above explanation of the term Khilafat also makes it abundantly clear that no individual or dynasty or class can be Khilafah, but that the authority of caliphate is bestowed on any community which accepts the principles of Tawhid and Risalat. In such a society, each individual shares the Allah-given caliphate. This is the point where democracy begins in Islam.
Every person in an Islamic society enjoys the rights and powers of the caliphate of Allah and in this respect all individuals are equal. No one can deprive anyone of his rights and powers. The agency for running the affairs of the state will be established in accordance with the will of these individuals, and the authority of the state will only be an extension of the powers of the individual delegated to it. Their opinion will be decisive in the formation of the Government, which will be run with their advice and in accordance with their wishes. Whoever gains their confidence will carry out the duties of the caliphate on their behalf; and when he loses this confidence he will have to relinquish his office. In this respect the political system in Islam is as perfect a democracy as ever can be.
What distinguishes Islamic democracy from Western democracy is that while the latter is based on the concept of popular sovereignty the former rests on the principle of popular Khilafat. In Western democracy the people are sovereign, in Islam sovereignty is vested in Allah and the people are His caliphs or representatives. In the former the people make their own laws; in the latter they have to follow and obey the laws (Shari‘ah) given by Allah through His Prophet. In one the Government undertakes to fulfil the will of the people; in the other Government and the people alike have to do the will of Allah. Western democracy is a kind of absolute authority which exercises its powers in a free and uncontrolled manner, whereas Islamic democracy is subservient to the Divine Law and exercises its authority in accordance with the injunctions of Allah and within the limits prescribed by Him.
Purpose of the Islamic State
The Holy Qur’an clearly states that the aim and purpose of this state, built on the foundation of Tawhid, Risalat and Khilafat, is the establishment, maintenance and development of those virtues which the Creator of the universe wishes human life to be enriched by, and the prevention and eradication of those evils which are abhorrent to Allah. The state in Islam is not intended for political administration only nor for the fulfilment through it of the collective will of any particular set of people. Rather, Islam places a high ideal before the state for the achievement of which it must use all the means at its disposal. The aim is to encourage the qualities of purity, beauty, goodness, virtue, success and prosperity which Allah wants to flourish in the life of His people and to suppress all kinds of exploitation and injustice. As well as placing before us this high ideal, Islam clearly states the desired virtues and the undesirable evils. The Islamic state can thus plan its welfare programmes in every age and in any environment.
The constant demand made by Islam is that the principles of morality must be observed at all costs and in all walks of life. Hence, it lays down an unalterable requirement for the state to base its politics on justice, truth and honesty. It is not prepared, under any circumstances, to tolerate fraud, falsehood and injustice for the sake of political, administrative or national expediency. Whether it be relations between the rulers and the ruled within the state, or relations of the state with other states, precedence must always be given to truth, honesty and justice. It imposes obligations on the state similar to those it imposes on the individual: to fulfil all contracts and obligations; to have consistent standards in all dealings; to remember obligations as well as rights and not to forget the rights of others when expecting them to fulfil their obligations; to use power and authority for the establishment for justice and not for the perpetration of injustice; to look on duty as a sacred obligation; and to regard power as a trust from Allah to be used in the belief that one has to render an account of one’s actions to Him in the Hereafter.
Fundamental Rights
Although an Islamic state may be set up anywhere on earth, Islam does not seek to restrict human rights or privileges to the geographical limits of its own state. Islam has laid down universal fundamental rights for humanity as a whole, which are to be observed and respected in all circumstances irrespective of whether a person lives on the territory of the Islamic state or outside it and whether he is at peace with the state or at war. For example, human blood is sacred and may not be spilled without justification; it is not permissible to oppress women, children, old people, the sick or the wounded; woman’s honour and chastity must be respected in all circumstances; and the hungry must be fed, the naked clothed, and the wounded or diseased treated medically.
These, and a few other provisions, have been laid down by Islam as fundamental rights for every man by virtue of his status as a human being, to be enjoyed under the constitution of an Islamic state.
The rights of citizenship in Islam, however, are not confined to persons born within the limits of its state but are granted to every Muslim irrespective of his place of birth. A Muslim ipso facto becomes the citizen of an Islamic state as soon as he sets foot on its territory with the intention of living there; he thus enjoys equal rights of citizenship with those who are its citizens by birth. Citizenship must therefore be common to all the citizens of all the Islamic states that exist in the world; a Muslim will not need a passport for entry or exit from any of them. And every Muslim must be regarded as eligible for positions of the highest responsibility in an Islamic state without distinction of race, colour or class.
Islam has also laid down certain rights for non-Muslims who may be living within the boundaries of an Islamic state, and these rights must necessarily form part of the Islamic constitution. According to Islamic terminology such non-Muslims are called dhimmis (the covenanted), implying that the Islamic state has entered into a covenant with them and guaranteed their rights.
The life, property and honour of a dhimmi is to be respected and protected in exactly the same way as that of a Muslim citizen. There is no difference between Muslim and non-Muslim citizens in respect of civil or criminal law; and the Islamic state shall not interfere with the personal law of non-Muslims. They will have full freedom of conscience and belief and will be entitled to perform their religious rites and ceremonies. As well as being able to practise their religion, they are entitled to criticise Islam. However the rights given in this respect are not unlimited: the civil law of the country has to be fully respected and all criticism has to be made within its framework.
These rights are irrevocable and non-Muslims can only be deprived of them if they renounce the convenant which grants them citizenship. However much a non-Muslim state may oppress its Muslim citizens, it is not permissible for an Islamic state to retaliate against its non-Muslim subjects. This injunction holds good even if all the Muslims outside the boundaries of an Islamic state are massacred.
Executive and Legislature
The responsibility for the administration of the Government in an Islamic state is entrusted to an Amir (leader) who may be likened to the President or the Prime Minister in a Western democratic state. All adult men and women who accept the fundamentals of the constitution are entitled to vote in the election for the leader.
The basic qualifications for the election of an Amir are that he should command the confidence of the largest number of people in respect of his knowledge and grasp of the spirit of Islam; he should possess the Islamic attribute of fear of Allah; he should be endowed with the quality of statesmanship. In short, he should be both able and virtuous.
A Shura (consultative council), elected by the people, will assist and guide the Amir. It is obligatory for the Amir to administer the country with the advice of his Shura. The Amir can retain office only so long as he enjoys the confidence of the people, and must resign when he loses this confidence. Every citizen has the right to criticise the Amir and his Government, and all responsible means for the expression of public opinion should be available.
Legislation in an Islamic state should be within the limits prescribed by the Shari‘ah. The injunctions of Allah and His Prophet are to be accepted and obeyed and no legislative body can alter or modify them or make any new laws which are contrary to their spirit. The duty of ascertaining the real intent of those commandments which are open to more than one interpretation should devolve on people possessing a specialised knowledge of the law of Shari‘ah. Hence, such matters may have to be referred to a sub-committee of the Shã r~ comprising men learned in Islamic law. Great scope would still be available for legislation on questions not covered by any specific injunctions of the Shari‘ah, and the advisory council or legislature is free to legislate in regard to these matters.
In Islam the judiciary is not placed under the control of the executive. It derives its authority directly from the Shari‘ah and is answerable to Allah. The judges will obviously be appointed by the Government but, once appointed, will have to administer justice impartially according to the law of Allah. All the organs and functionaries of the Government should come within their jurisdiction: even the highest executive authority of the Government will be liable to be called upon to appear in a court of law as a plaintiff or defendant. Rulers and ruled are subject to the same law and there can be no discrimination on the basis of position, power or privilege. Islam stands for equality and scrupulously adheres to this principle in the social, economic and political realms alike.
Cherokee Native Indian Muslims
Digging for the Red Roots
by Mahir Abdal-Razzaaq El
My name is Mahir Abdal-Razzaaq El and I am a Cherokee Blackfoot American Indian who is Muslim. I am known as Eagle Sun Walker. I serve as a Pipe Carrier Warrior for the Northeastern Band of Cherokee Indians in New York City.
There are other Muslims in our group. For the most part, not many people are aware of the Native American contact with Islam that began over one thousand years ago by some of the early Muslim travelers who visited us. Some of these Muslim travelers ended up living among our people.
For most Muslims and non-Muslims of today, this type of information is unknown and has never been mentioned in any of the history books. There are many documents, treaties, legislation and resolutions that were passed between 1600s and 1800s that show that Muslims were in fact here and were very active in the comunities in which they lived. Treaties such as Peace and Friendship that was signed on the Delaware River in the year 1787 bear the signatures of Abdel-Khak and Muhammad Ibn Abdullah. This treaty details our continued right to exist as a community in the areas of commerce, maritime shipping, current form of government at that time which was in accordance with Islam. According to a federal court case from the Continental Congress, we help put the breath of life in to the newly framed constitution. All of the documents are presently in the National Archives as well as the Library of Congress.
If you have access to records in the state of South Carolina, read the Moors Sundry Act of 1790. In a future article, Inshallah, I will go in to more details about the various tribes, their languages; in which some are influenced by Arabic, Persian, Hebrew words. Almost all of the tribes vocabulary include the word Allah. The traditional dress code for Indian women includes the kimah and long dresses. For men, standard fare is turbans and long tops that come down to the knees. If you were to look at any of the old books on Cherokee clothing up until the time of 1832, you will see the men wearing turbans and the women wearing long head coverings. The last Cherokee chief who had a Muslim name was Ramadhan Ibn Wati of the Cherokees in 1866.
Cities across the United States and Canada bear names that are of Indian and Islamic derivation. Have you ever wondered what the name Tallahassee means? It means that He Allah will deliver you sometime in the future.
Article Taken from:
The MESSAGE, July 1996
(Copyright: The Message Magazine as long as proper acknowledgement has been
stated, and a link to the site is retained, it can be reproduced)
by Mahir Abdal-Razzaaq El
My name is Mahir Abdal-Razzaaq El and I am a Cherokee Blackfoot American Indian who is Muslim. I am known as Eagle Sun Walker. I serve as a Pipe Carrier Warrior for the Northeastern Band of Cherokee Indians in New York City.
There are other Muslims in our group. For the most part, not many people are aware of the Native American contact with Islam that began over one thousand years ago by some of the early Muslim travelers who visited us. Some of these Muslim travelers ended up living among our people.
For most Muslims and non-Muslims of today, this type of information is unknown and has never been mentioned in any of the history books. There are many documents, treaties, legislation and resolutions that were passed between 1600s and 1800s that show that Muslims were in fact here and were very active in the comunities in which they lived. Treaties such as Peace and Friendship that was signed on the Delaware River in the year 1787 bear the signatures of Abdel-Khak and Muhammad Ibn Abdullah. This treaty details our continued right to exist as a community in the areas of commerce, maritime shipping, current form of government at that time which was in accordance with Islam. According to a federal court case from the Continental Congress, we help put the breath of life in to the newly framed constitution. All of the documents are presently in the National Archives as well as the Library of Congress.
If you have access to records in the state of South Carolina, read the Moors Sundry Act of 1790. In a future article, Inshallah, I will go in to more details about the various tribes, their languages; in which some are influenced by Arabic, Persian, Hebrew words. Almost all of the tribes vocabulary include the word Allah. The traditional dress code for Indian women includes the kimah and long dresses. For men, standard fare is turbans and long tops that come down to the knees. If you were to look at any of the old books on Cherokee clothing up until the time of 1832, you will see the men wearing turbans and the women wearing long head coverings. The last Cherokee chief who had a Muslim name was Ramadhan Ibn Wati of the Cherokees in 1866.
Cities across the United States and Canada bear names that are of Indian and Islamic derivation. Have you ever wondered what the name Tallahassee means? It means that He Allah will deliver you sometime in the future.
Article Taken from:
The MESSAGE, July 1996
(Copyright: The Message Magazine as long as proper acknowledgement has been
stated, and a link to the site is retained, it can be reproduced)
The Utility of Islamic Imagery in the West
An American Case Study
By: J. A. Progler
The long history of encounters between Western civilization and Islam has produced a tradition of portraying, in largely negative and self-serving ways, the Islamic religion and Muslim cultures. There is a lot of literature cataloguing (and sometimes correcting) these stereotypes.
It is not my intention to rehash this corpus here, though I do rely upon some of the more important works. What I want to do instead is focus on a particular dimension of these encounters, and examine why the West has consistently constructed and perpetuated negative images of Islam and Muslims. My focus will be on the utility of Islamic imagery in Western civilization.
Most people seem to be familiar with stereotypes and negative imagery of Arabs and Muslims-indeed, some are so firmly entrenched that the consumers of these images are unable to distinguish them from reality.
At the same time, many people have an idea how these images come about (books, television, speeches). But by looking at the cultural history of Islamic-Western encounters from the perspective of utility, I am able to locate the correlations between imagery and political economy. Western image-makers, including religious authorities, political establishments, and corporate-media conglomerates, conceptualize for their consumers images of Muslims and/or Arabs in sometimes amusing and other tunes cruel or tragic ways. Upon closer examination, these images seem to serve essential purposes throughout the history of Western civilization. At times these purposes are benign, at others quite sinister. Often, there are tragic consequences for Muslims resulting from the socio-political climate fostered by images. Focusing on the dimension of utility can help to reveal some
ties between imagery and action.
At the same time, I am aware that focusing solely on imagery misses the important dimensions of intention and power. Though I reserve a careful look at these dimensions for another study, I do recognize the need to consider here some of those people who have the power to provide public conceptualizations of Muslims, such as religious figures, academics, policy pundits, journalists, and entertainment conglomerates. Drawing upon the historical and cultural catalogue of assumptions and perceptions about Islam, these experts and spokespeople pick and choose the appropriate images to serve their purposes. Many times, they are seemingly unaware of using an image, which is indicative of how deeply entrenched they have become. The stories of those with the power to present need to be told, but they are beyond the scope of this article. Similarly, fruitful research may also reveal the degree to which Muslims contribute to their own images. That, too, I will reserve for another study. The purpose here, then, is to suggest some of the broader utilitarian dimensions of Islamic imagery in the West.
A recurring theme in the present study is the idea of packaging the complexities of Islam and Muslim cultures into easily comprehensible categories-good and bad, beautiful and dangerous, desirable and repulsive - and I look at these in terms of their utility in Western cultural history and political economy. Academic culture is an important site to reveal the utility of imagery, since these are the studies that inform policy makers and politicians; this is also where Western ideas are introduced into native cultures. But it is also necessary to focus on popular culture, especially news and entertainment, because this is where many people in the West get their impressions of Islam and Muslims.
The 'Other' in Western Colonial Discourse
Images of the Other are prevalent in Western civilization, and have become firmly ensconced in the discourse of colonization and conquest, whoever the victims may be. Some images are rooted in Greek notions of barbarians, others born of the Middle Ages. They have been carried through the Reconquista and Inquisition, picked up during the age of colonial expansion, developed by Orientalists in the 19th and early 20th century, and continue on into the age of mass media and globalized political economy. But images don't exist in a vacuum. They have uses.
For example, in their invasion and colonization of the Americas Europeans brought with them - in addition to muskets and cannons - a great deal of cultural baggage, including rigid and preconceived notions of the Other. These images, intertwined with religious and political conflicts, all found their way into the new world, and eventually entangled Native peoples In fact, historians have shown that American legal traditions regarding Native peoples are based on legal traditions of the Holy Roman Empire which were born of the Crusades against Muslims. [1] For that reason, it will be instructive to spend some time looking at images of Native Americans in the West.
The American scholar Berkhofer carefully analyzes the rationale for images of the "Indian". Particularly striking is his observation that there is a dual image, of "good" or "noble" Indians and "bad" or "ignoble" Indians, and how this developed from pre-conception to image to fact He nicely summarizes the elements of the image: [2]
1. generalizing from one tribe's society and culture to all Indians
2. conceiving of Indians in terms of their deficiencies according to White ideals rather than in terms of their own various cultures
3. using moral evaluation as description of Indians
Berkhofer suggests that "since Whites primarily understood the Indian as an antithesis to themselves, then civilization and Indianness as they defined them would forever be opposites." [3] He believes that while some researchers have uncovered one or another element of the Indian image, most have failed to put it all together.
Images of Indians are usually treated by scholars in two ways. Some have studied "what changed, what persisted, and why," while others studied "what images were held by whom, when, where, and why." [4] Some scholars see them "as a reflection of White cultures and as the primary explanation of White behaviour vis-a-vis Native Americans", while others see them "to be dependent upon the political and economic relationships prevailing in White societies at various times." [5] While each approach is useful in its own way, I agree with Berkhofer's suggestion that any comprehensive understanding of Western images has to consider both aspects, asking not only what the images were and how they continue, but also who holds them and why. He combines the two approaches into a useful and broadly applicable methodology for analyzing images and their utility. Berkhofer's methodology helps us to ask questions like who benefits from these images, and how are they manipulated and perpetuated? I want to look at European images of Muslims in this framework, and consider in particular the way images change to suit particular historical circumstances.
Framing the Ubiquitous Orient
A growing body of critical literature examines the formation, utilization and perpetuation of images in the context of European conceptualization and colonization of the Muslim. [6] Critics generally agree that Orientalist pursuits of knowledge are inextricably tied to colonial and imperial power, and that the West's self-image has been cultivated in a binary relationship with Islamic culture. The literature in this area is quite detailed, and there is no need to repeat all of it here. What I want to do is first look briefly at some of the factors in the development and maintenance of this binary vision from the Crusades through the modern period, and then apply the same method to more recent examples.
According to Norman Daniel, "luxury" and "bellicosity" formed a dual image of Islam in Medieval Western Europe. This nexus is intertwined with a second ignorance and malice. In considering how the dual image of Islam persists, Daniel suggests that in some cases the reason is ignorance and in others it is malice. Ignorance and malice can work together, as in, for example, when a malicious campaign directed by state power toward a scapegoat is explained by using images that rely on the general ignorance of the state's subjects and constituents. This is an important factor in the maintenance of imagery, especially in democratic societies, and I will return to it later.
Edward Said was one of the first to make explicit connections between Western colonization and images of the Muslim world. Said shows how the discourse of Orientalism gave itself legitimacy, revealing that what Orientalists were really talking about was creating the levers of power. Said's general premise is that knowledge is inextricably tied to power, and that pure scholarship does not exist. Drawing upon textual criticism from selected British and French Orientalists of the 19th and 20th centuries, he summarizes the "principle dogmas" of Orientalism.
One is the absolute and systematic difference between the West, which is rational, developed, humane, superior, and the Orient, which is aberrant, undeveloped, inferior. Another dogma is that abstractions about the Orient, particularly those based on texts representing a "classical" Oriental civilization, are always preferable to direct evidence drawn from modern Oriental realities. A third dogma is that the Orient is eternal, uniform, and incapable of defining itself; therefore it is assumed that a highly generalized and systematic vocabulary for describing the Orient from a Western standpoint is inevitable, and even scientifically "objective". A fourth dogma is that the Orient is at bottom something either to be feared (the Yellow Peril, the Mongol hordes, the brown dominions) or to be controlled (by pacification, research and development, outright occupation whenever possible). [7]
After noting that these dogmas "persist without significant challenge in the academic and governmental study of the modern Near Orient," Said argues that "the Orient" is itself a constituted entity, and that the notion that there are "geographical spaces with indigenous, radically different inhabitants who can be defined on the basis of some religion, culture, or racial essence proper to that geographical space is equally a highly debatable idea." [8] While there are numerous institutions in the West engaging in the study of the Orient, there are few if any in the Orient, and those are invariably run by Westerners (for example, the American Universities of Beirut and Cairo, or the Robert College in Turkey), and consequently, little if any study of the West is done by Orientals.
Building upon the foundation of classical Orientalism, a new breed of Orientalist emerged out of Cold War concerns. Characterized by a fusion of classic Orientalism with post-World War II social science, the new discourse was put at the service of foreign policy makers who emphasized prediction and control. However, with all the new techniques, as Said shows, most have not escaped the 4 dogmas of what we might call the orthodox discourse. Neo-Orientalists replace philology with a more anomalous expertise, which, like philology, is still based on language skills, but is more oriented toward strategic and business interests. This new Orientalism is practiced with an almost mystical authority by experts and Area Studies specialists who have mastered the necessary languages. The usual rationale for continuing Orientalism is that "we" can get to know another people, their way of life, thought, etc. To this end, the new Orientals (many trained at the feet of the orthodox masters) are sometimes allowed to speak for themselves, but only to a limited degree. The Oriental becomes useful as a direct source of information, but the Orientalist still remains the source of all knowledge.
As a way to avoid reconfiguring Orientalist discourse in new contexts, and to diffuse pre-existing truths, Said recommends some questions to keep in mind when approaching the Other: [9]
1. How does one represent other cultures?
2. What is another culture?
3. Is the notion of a distinct culture (or race, or religion, or civilization) a useful one, or does it always get involved either in self-congratulation (when one discusses one's own) or hostility and aggression (when one discusses the "other")?
4. Do cultural, religious, and racial differences matter more than socio-economic categories, or politico-historical ones?
5. How do ideas acquire authority, "normality," and even the status of "natural" truth?
6. What is the role of the intellectual?
7. Is he there to validate the culture and state of which he is a part?
8. What importance must he give to an independent critical consciousness, an oppositional critical consciousness?
Said concludes with a warning to guard against accepting handed down notions of the other, and incorporating them into one's work without first subjecting them to critical analysis.
Thierry Hentsch incorporates and complicates most earlier studies of Orientalism. [10] He believes that Western images of the Muslim world are projections of Western insecurities about Self onto the Other, and that as long as the Other is a mirror for the Self, there will always be conflict. I think this is becoming evident in the recent usage of images of Muslims and Islam, built upon not only centuries of images but in particular upon very carefully constructed images of Arabs from the 1960s and 1970s. I will return to this in due time.
To Hentsch, Western images of a sensual yet violent Orient are self-telling myths. Like Bernal, [11] Hentsch believes that racist myths of Western supremacy were fabricated in the 17th and 18th centuries and projected backward to explain contemporary realities. As Said pointed out, collating these myths became the job of the Orientalists. But Hentsch's sweep is far wider and more inclusive than Said. He considers pre-Orientalist cultural factors, and brings his treatment right up to the 1990-91 Persian Gulf Oil War. Hentsch believes that the West's myth of the Orient will continue to serve its explanatory functions right on into the next century.
Hentsch's essential hypothesis is that the area we call the Middle East (which he defines as the nations from Morocco to Iran; Said's Orient) has been a self-reflecting mirror for Western civilization, in which the West defines itself by constructing an Other who is everything the West is not. Hentsch's thesis is that the "Orient" is an "immense repository of our own imagined world" and that "we reveal ourselves through our way of seeing." [12]
His "capital supposition" is that "any study of the Other is futile unless we first observe ourselves face to face with it, and in particular, unless we attempt to understand how, and why, we have studied and represented this self-same Other down to the present day." [13] Speaking on ethnocentrism, Hentsch asserts that it "is not a flaw to be simply set aside, nor is it a sin to be expunged through repentance. It is the precondition of our vision of the Other. Far from offering us absolution, this precondition compels us constantly to return to our point of departure, if only to grasp the internal and external imperatives which shape our curiosity about the Other." [14] I want to continue with Hentsch's analysis, and look in particular at the genesis and continuation of images as they relate to the emerging European colonizing enterprise.
Races debased and Unities Sundered
In November of 1095, Pope Urban II initiated the first European attempt at colonizing the Muslim world - known in the West as the Crusades - by drawing this fateful picture:
For you must hasten to carry aid to your brethren dwelling in the East, who need your help, which they have often asked. For the Turks, a Persian people, have attacked them I exhort you with earnest prayer - not I, but God - that, as heralds of Christ, you urge men by frequent exhortation, men of all ranks, knights as well as foot soldiers, rich as well as poor, to hasten to exterminate this vile race from the lands of your brethren Christ commands it. And if those who set out thither should lose their lives on the way by land, or in crossing the sea, or in fighting the pagans, their sins shall be remitted. Oh what a disgrace, if a race so despised, base, and the instrument of demons, should so overcome a people endowed with faith in the all-powerful God, and resplendent with the name of Christ. Let those who have been accustomed to make private war against the faithful carry on to a successful issue a war against the infidels. Let those who for a long time have been robbers now become soldiers of Christ. Let those who fought against brothers and relatives now fight against these barbarians. Let them zealously undertake the journey under the guidance of the Lord. [15]
The Pope's words lay out many of the themes that would characterize this mass colonial movement East for the next two centuries. In one reading of the Crusading venture, restless knights and small-tune princes are enticed by their lords with tales of land and wealth, fuel the hopes of turning their swords away from the increasingly nervous feudal establishment, or what the Pope calls the faihful brethren. Landless folks and the poor - euphemized by the Pope as criminals - can also be turned Eastward with enticements of land and Divine forgiveness. But what is most interesting here is that the Pope conceptualizes his Oriental Other in racial terms. The enemy, for now, is the debased races of Turks and Persians, and Islam is not yet a part of the Western conceptual matrix.
There is also an overlap here with Christian treatment of Jews as the "instruments of demons", one of the key tenets of anti-Semitic white supremacy. In Christian Europe, Jews and Muslims suffered the wrath of an increasingly rabid and intolerant resurgent. Christianity, culminating in the expulsion of both from Muslim Spain in the 15th century, at the dawn of the expansionist age while this is not the place to trace this legacy in detail, this is also the period in which the religion of rationalism replaced Christianity, with the images of the other traveling full circle from Pope Urban's 11th century "debased races" to the Age of Enlightenment, with its biological explanation for colonization and genocide.
As Hentsch shows, [16] the uses of Islam continued to change according to European internal and external political and economic situations. In the 16th century, when Ottoman Empire was consolidating its control over Mediterranean trade routes, the resulting "rift" was projected back to the first centuries of Islam, making a contemporary economic problem seem to be the result of "age-old" conflict. Any rift in the Mediterranean was there long before Muslims came on the scene. There was never any trans-Mediterranean unity. The Catholic Church, which inherited the decaying Roman Empire, soon split into its Eastern and Western branches. Conventional history, such as is found in World Civilization textbooks, overlooks this and continues to frame Muslims for sundering the imaginary unity of European civilization. Religious imagery had its uses as well. Christian disunity, which began long before Muslims came on the scene, was blamed on Muslim hordes that exploded from Arabia, forever sundering the unity of the Church.
When the Ottomans were at the peak of their power in the 17th century, European princes viewed them as a respected and powerful rival. However, with the waning of Ottoman power, the Muslim world was seen as a place of exotic trials and espionage. This newly exoticized Orient began to be loved for its objects, while its people were despised or belittled by the 19th century, race-based explanations for colonization had fully re-emerged. As Hentsch suggests, [17] some Muslims were considered by Europeans to be civilized according to their criteria, but this was explained by the presence of Aryan blood in some Muslim races. In fact, as French travelers saw it, the problem with Persians was that, despite their pure Aryan roots, their blood was tainted because of mixing with lesser, darker skinned breeds. Before continuing this trend into the modern period, I want to go back over this terrain and look at Christian and European obsessions and insecurities with sex and violence, and the ways they provided particularly fertile ground for images of Muslims.
Medieval Phantasms of Sex and Violence
And, if you desire to know what was done about the enemy whom we found there, know that in the portico of Solomon and his Temple, our men rode in the blood of the Saracens up to the knees of the horses.
(Daimbert, Official Summary of the 1st Crusade) [18]
Those amongst the Saracens are considered most religious who can make the most women pregnant they lie with their concubines and wives often in times of fast, because they suppose making love and desire are so meritorious, either to satisfy lust or to generate many sons to strengthen the defense of their religion.
(Bishop Jacques de Vitry on the 5th Crusade) [19]
Count Roland gripped his sword dripping with gore he strikes his valiant blows, shivering shafts of spears and bucklers, too, cleaving through feet and fists, saddles and sides. To see him hack the limbs from Saracens, pile them upon the earth, corpse upon corpse, would call to mind a very valiant knight.
(Verse from the Song of Roland, 12th century minstrelsy) [20]
Nor did Mahomet teach anything of great austerity. . . indeed, he even allowed many pleasurable things, to do with a multitude of women, abuse of them, and suchlike. . . many Christians change and will change to the Saracen religion.
(Dominican Friar Humbert of Lyons, c. 1300) [21]
These quotes are instructive in their presentation of Western Christian foundational attitudes toward Islam. In Medieval Europe, the Popes began to use Islam as a proxy to convince backsliding Christians to return to the fold and to convince themselves that Christians were chaste, denouncing Islam as a sexually liberal and even licentious religion. Once the Europeans gained a foothold in West Asia, one of the areas of greatest concern was miscegenation. In the Crusader mind, even sex with one's own wife was a carnal sin; sex with an infidel woman was punished by "castration for the Crusader and facial mutilation for the woman." Muslim women were "viewed as defiled and wanton whores and seductresses." To Christians, Muslim ease with sexuality was seen as "offensively non-ascetic behavior." [22]
In fact, it seems that Medieval Christians could do nothing but condemn the Muslim appreciation of sexuality, and
. . . therefore they attacked "Islam" as a religion that had been directly set up to encourage promiscuity and lust. . . Biographies of Mohammed by Christians describe the Prophet's sex life in a manner that reveals far more about their own sexual problems than about the facts of the Prophet's life. The Koran was said, quite incorrectly, to condone homosexuality and to encourage unnatural forms of intercourse. One scholar claimed that the foulness of lust among Muslims was inexpressible; they were deep in this filth from the soles of their feet to the crown of the head. Soon the Church would accuse any out-group in Christendom of excessive and unnatural sexual practices and twelfth century Christians stigmatized "heresy" of Islam by cursing what they considered its sexual laxity. [23]
To really grasp the utility of this imagery, we need to look at sexuality in European history. In his discussion of human sexuality, Foucault describes Arab-Muslim societies as among those "which have endowed themselves with an ars erotica" in which "truth is drawn from pleasure itself, understood as a practice and accumulated as experience." [24] Western civilization, on the other hand, possesses a scientia sexualis, the "procedures for telling the truth of sex which are geared to a form of knowledge - power strictly opposed to the art of initiations and the masterful secret." In the West, the confession is "one of the main rituals we rely on for the production of truth" and "Western man has become a confessing animal." [25] What needs confessing is the sin of enjoyment.
European discomfort with sexuality in Medieval times gradually gives way to a new outlook, still rooted, as Foucault stresses [26], in the old insecurities, but now at least with an outward expression of enjoyment. By the twentieth century, the alterity of sexuality has now been reversed, suggests Karen Armstrong, with the post-Christian West seeing itself as sexually liberated vis-a-vis a sexually repressed Islam:
At a time when many people in the West are liberating themselves from the sexual repressions of their Christian past, Islam is constantly denigrated as a sexually repressive religion. We have completely reversed the old stereotype and not many people seem interested in the truth of the matter or wish to find out about Islam itself. They simply want to bolster their own needs against their long established counter-image: Sex and violence continue to be juxtaposed in disturbing ways in American culture. For example, American pilots watched porno movies while preparing to carpet bomb Baghdad in the 1991 Persian Gulf Oil war, and they scribbled sexually explicit graffiti on the bombs, labeling them as "Mrs. Saddam's sex toy" or "a suppository for Saddam." [27]
George Bush purposefully mispronounced "Saddam" (which in Arabic has a heavy accent on the last syllable) so that it sounded more like Sodom, evoking the Biblical city of wanton sexual depravity, and thus sodomy. A wartime propaganda book produced by an American public relations firm hired by the Kuwaitis was entitled The Rape of Kuwait, adding another facet to the highly sexualized justification for what amounts to a firebomb lynch-party of Iraqis reminiscent of the same charge leveled at African Americans to justify racist brutality. I'll come back to some of these themes in a moment, but I first want to consider further some unique elements of the American conceptualization of the Muslim other.
Orientalizing the American Way
Most of the literature on Orientalist pursuits focuses on European forms of Orientalism. Comparatively little has been written about the peculiarities of American Orientalism. The latter is worth careful attention, since the United States seems obsessed with becoming the leader in a unipolar world, and some official policy circles list Islam as a "new" but qualified threat to that supposed inevitability.
17th through 19th century American writings illustrates how Europeans who invaded North America believed that they were God's chosen people, that the land they were colonizing was the promised land, and that Native people's were God-less heathen who were to be driven from their homes and burned. [28] Sha'ban points out that religiously driven settlers, Puritans in particular, imagined parallels between themselves and the wandering tribes of Israel. These early roots were bolstered by an emerging and increasingly strong, literal, and exclusive sense of a relationship with their God, who had ordained pre-United States settlers to be "a light in the West" that would shine over the rest of the world. This expansionary, violent, and millennial sense of a divine mission became known as "manifest destiny." [29]
In practice, manifest destiny initially meant bringing the "light" of American style Protestant Christianity to the rest of the world. Americans saw themselves as being placed in the "center of the world" by Providence in order to carry out a Divine mission, as a writer in the American Theological Review put it in 1859:
Indeed, radii drawn from our eastern, western, and southern shores, reach almost all Pagan, Mohammedan, and Papal lands, or rather most of them can be reached by nearly direct water communication. [30]
The American missionary enterprise - the vanguard of manifest destiny - required information on "barbarians," "heathens," "savages," and "pagans," and especially "Mohammedans,* "Turks," and "Saracens." Beginning in the early 19th century, particularly when manifest destiny turned cast as well as west, American writers took a strong interest in Islam and the Prophet. In various treatises, they dwell on the Prophet (upon whom be peace) as an impostor and portray Islam as a deviant Christian heresy. Some of the very few instances where this does not apply tend to romanticize the Prophet as a hero, but these views also had at bottom the intention to defeat Islam and convert Muslims to Christianity. An equally important goal of 19th century religious writings on Islam, as Sha'ban notes, was to describe the alleged depravity of Islam in order to assert the imagined purity of Christianity, a tendency inherited from Medieval European Christianity.
Commercial, diplomatic, and military contacts with Mediterranean Muslim lands, coupled with evangelical revivalism in the late 18th and early 19th century, led to a "shift of the American myth of God's Israel from the New World to the Holy Land." [31] But the imaginary world of Biblical Zion constructed in the parlors and parishes of the United States soon had to be reconciled with the realities on the ground in Palestine. Unfortunately, this reconciliation did not entail rethinking the vision of Zion - it meant imposing that vision on Muslims and non-Protestant Christians who happened to be in the way of the American sense of Providence.
Americans were also motivated in their dealings with Islam and Muslims by a complex amalgam of Oriental fairy tales. Making use of a body of literature largely ignored by other critics of Orientalism, Sha'ban takes a particular interest in Orientalism as found in popular American literature.
He notes that one of the most often printed books in the 19th century United States was a translation of the Arabian Nights. That collection of fables and fairy tales, often translated in the West subject to the sexual whims of the translator and marketed to titillate readers, was taken as an accurate portrayal of a timeless, exotic, and mystical East. Tales of harems, genies, and magic carpets found their way into most American homes and libraries. These stories often provided the criteria by which secular travelers to the East would judge their own experiences.
Sha'ban's detailed analysis of travel literature reveals that, time after time, American men traveling to the East were both aroused and repulsed by Muslim culture. One American traveler to Istanbul in 1858 was so mystified and aroused by a veiled Muslim woman that he offered $50 to buy her, but soon realized it was not possible since he "was no Mohammedan." [32]
While often envying the Turks for their "harems," some travelers also looked for signs of distress so that they might heroically rescue "oppressed" women from the clutches of the Turkish "barbarians." These expectations were founded upon what Sha'ban calls the "dream of Baghdad", and he aptly demonstrates that such dreams abound in early American Orientalism. This dream of Oriental splendour was picked up by Hollywood in its early years, with Rudolph Valentino epitomizing the Romantic lover in Arab garb. Similar Oriental fantasies permeated American entertainment all through the 20th century, ranging from cartoons like "Popeye meets Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves," to "The Adventures of Sindbad" and "Lawrence of Arabia," and right on up to the 1989 Disney Orientalist extravaganza "Aladdin."
Corporate American Phantasms
The dual image of luxury and bellicosity, as suggested by Daniel above, can be iilustrated through looking at the incredible popularity of the Arabian Nights-type themes in American corporate culture. Though its use as literature has declined somewhat in recent times, the Arabian Nights, as noted above, was once among the most popular books in America. Hollywood has capitalized on this American obsession with things Oriental in its recent production of "Aladdin," a phantasmagoria of Orientalist cliche, complete with a menagerie of harems, genies, magic carpets, and, of course, murderous barbarians.
A promotional documentary about the making of Aladdin boasts of authenticity in its producers' emulation of "Islamic design" and "Persian architecture," showing scenes of animators carefully drawing images of mosques and calligraphy from photographs; they appear to use great care in detailing their drawings to the minutest degree. But one thing is missing from all this careful attention to detail - people. Characters in Hollywood's Aladdin are compound stereotypes, grossly racist caricatures of the worst Western phantasms - villainous sorcerers in turbans, sensuous harems, sumptuous feasts, hordes of fat ugly thugs with swords (ready to chop off hands for stealing bread), flying carpets, genies. All this is an alterity of the hero, Aladdin, who speaks and acts as if straight out of an American suburban high school. [33]
Sometimes, American media wizards ram together luxurious and bellicose images to create the classic American phantasm. A recent example is the 1995 American football Super Bowl half-time antics, an extended commercial-like foray. First, crooner Tony Bennett sings "Desert Caravan" against a backdrop resembling a mosque. Then Indiana Jones (who shot up many a Muslim barbarian in his Hollywood films) swings into the scene and rescues the football-shaped Super Bowl trophy from hordes of turbaned Muslims with swords (or were they Arabs? or Turks? Moors?). Jones makes short work of these generic barbarians, retrieving the trophy, along with a blonde heroine for good measure. This is followed by a song and dance routine, featuring gyrating women wearing costumes right out of the 1960s American Orientalist situation comedy "I Dream of Jeannie." Other women are draped in black or white chadors; some of these women doff their veils and swing them along with their hips, as if reveling in their new found "liberation." Of course, it is the American hero Jones who has rescued them from their oppressive Muslim masters. The show climaxes with a flashy display of fireworks, and the fans erupt into a jingoistic frenzy, the likes of which rivals similar outbursts when the national anthem is played. Clearly, such Oriental fantasies are part of America's national heritage, which can be utilized by production designers for all sorts of entertainment and commercial purposes.
Commercial television and its corporate advertising conglomerates from time to time intensify their utilization of Islamic exotica in Popular American culture. Interestingly, this often takes place side by side with an increase in the vilification of Muslims and Islam. American corporate news is full of talk about "Islamic terror," "Muslim suicide bombers," "the warriors of Allah," "the holy war of Islam," or "Iranian backed radical extremist Moslem fundamentalist terrorists." Examples abound, including a notorious programme in the Fall of 1994 called "Jihad in America," which described a centrally controlled, top-down international Islamic conspiracy to carry out terror in the US, or the more recent rush to blame the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing on Muslims. These public displays of jingoistic fury have real repercussions on the ground, with a series of mosque-burnings and increased hate and bias crimes against Muslims, including the tragic case of a new mosque in Yuba City, California, burned to the ground by arsonists on the eve of its opening to the community in September 1994. Imagery creates a climate within which such acts seem to make sense.
Images of Muslims seem to ebb and flow with the American political tides, and close examination reveals some connections. Following the violent orgy of death and mayhem popularly known to Americans as "Desert Storm," American corporate television began to feature advertisements with an Arabian Nights motif. For example, a commercial aired on corporate TV throughout 1991 and 1992 for "Near East Rice Pilaf" features scenes in a Middle Eastern bazaar. The ad segues to an American family preparing to gorge themselves on an exotic dish, as if eating Near East Rice Pilaf will somehow transport the consumer into an Eastern fantasy world. IBM computers, as part of its globalized campaign of superficial multicultural inclusion, produced a similar commercial, which utilizes Arabic dialogue and racist caricatures. In an exotic bazaar setting, two natives thoughtfully extol the virtues of the latest American techno-excesses. A similar commercial was produced by Isuzu automobiles, taking place somewhere in North Africa, also with Arabic (as well as French) speaking natives. It begins with a call from a minaret, a pseudo adhan (which has always been an aural symbol for Islam in American film and TV), and ends with the natives being dazzled by expensive leather seats and the corporation's newest mobile contraption. These and other commercials share the common theme of a utilizing a timeless fantasy world that is backwards yet ready for the salvation of American consumer culture. Not intended to sell computers and cars to aulyone but Americans, these utilizations of Orientalist imagery serve to make powerful connections for consumers, especially between tradition and progress.
With increasing numbers of American corporations hopping on the Oriental bandwagon, American Muslims have tried to form collective responses. According to a series of press releases beginning in November 1994, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has mounted several campaigns against greeting card corporations for cards that objectify veiled Muslim women in degrading ways, or which feature nude women juxtaposed with verses from the Qur'an. There have been beer commercials featuring actresses with verses of the Qur'an emblazoned across their chests, and the fashion industry has suddenly discovered the beauty of Islamic calligraphy, using it in clothing designs modeled by voluptuous women in public pageants. CAIR has also worked on a number of bias incidents, many involving women barred from working because they choose to wear the Islamic modest dress. It seems that in American corporate culture, veils and other Oriental exotica are widely utilized to titillate buyers, but that real women who wear the Muslim modest dress are despised and rejected. Another phenomenon has also emerged since the Persian Gulf Oil War. There is an increasing number of corporate news media programmes about Muslims living in the US. Some no doubt grew out of wartime public relations on behalf of "good Muslims," like the Kuwaiti royals, who hired one of the biggest US public relations firms to manage their wartime propaganda. [34] Most juxtapose two images there is a "terrorist fringe" among US Muslims (the "bad Muslims"), but most other Muslims are peace-loving and eager to be assimilated to the American way of life (the "good Muslims") The American corporate news pundits continually remind consumers that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the US; at the same time, they tell Americans that "Islamic terror cells" are on the rise in the US Muslims in such stories are usually defined by their politics and class.
While the media assure Americans that most Muslims are dutiful middle-class citizens, the "terrorist fringe" is always laying at the wait, a threat to the very core of American interests and values. Such images have been utilized by politicians and corporate leaders to frighten American citizen-consumers into accepting all sorts of barbarous immigration and security laws.
Closer scrutiny reveals that, in most cases, the Muslims profiled on corporate TV programmes are Palestinians. One insidious implication is that Palestinians are somehow inherently irrational, though this is not always made explicit. The misogynist character of dominant media imagery of Muslims in the US is underlined, for example, when the corporate news shows images of Palestinian or other Muslim men crying, perhaps after another Israeli raid on their homes. Since "real men" don't cry, it becomes hard for Americans to imagine other people's grief expressed in that way, and it is seen instead as an expression of rage or insanity. The point is that some images are heightened by the inability of television to portray anything but the most extreme expressions of emotion, causing some to label TV as best suited to portray death. [35] This technical inadequacy is something that even good PR can't fix. It also heightens the effectiveness of television as a medium to utilize deep-seated American visions of sex and violence in Islam.
US corporate news features often use Islamic religious symbols to frame stories about violent political events. For example, a 1994 story about the end of the disastrous American intervention in Somalia begins with the reporter intoning ominously "night falls on Mogadishu" over the Islamic call to prayer and a backdrop of a mosque silhouetted by a dark, cloudy sky.
The report segues to picture bites of destroyed American helicopters and corpses of US marines. The call to prayer in this case, as in many others, forebodes death and terror. Furthermore, this is the only Somali voice in the piece.
Some media portrayals of Muslims are reminiscent of the contrived sense of inevitability that Native American scholar Ward Churchill brings out in his comments about the Orientalist extravaganza epic film, Lawrence of Arabia:
Its major impact was to put a 'tragic' but far more humane face upon the nature of Britain's imperial pretensions in the region, making colonization of the Arabs seem more acceptable - or at least more inevitable - than might have otherwise been the case. [36]
The US media often rely on pre-existing images of Muslim barbarity in order to explain the need for intervention or to help the US military save face when things don't come out as planned. When the US Marines were escorting members of the UN out of Somalia in February 1995, ABC News televised a report of a multiple amputation, featuring a man who presumably had just been convicted of theft in an Islamic law court. The piece was pure emotion and imagery, seeming to say, with Churchill's tragic self-righteousness, "look how easily the natives revert to their barbarity once we leave."
Despite its pervasiveness in the media, imagery that I have described above is far removed from the daily experiences of most American citizen-consumers. But lately, some media producers have tried to bring these images closer to home.
TV Holy War
In the Fall of 1994, PBS aired a documentary by journalist Steve Emerson. Titled "Jihad in America," it followed on the heels of other recent works that put forth the thesis of an elaborate, secret, and centralized network of "Islamic terrorists," who take orders from Iran, and who are mounting a violent war against their hated enemy, the mighty Great Satan. [37]
Evidence within the programme suggests that Emerson has access to official government intelligence. Most of the programme either consists of interviews staged by Emerson, or clips from Muslim conferences (which are available publicly from the organizations that sponsor conferences).
However, some clips appear to be from other sources, such as home videos confiscated from Muslims in FBI sweeps during the Oil War and in the wake of the World Trade Center incident, or surreptitiously taped surveillance videos. Using "former" FBI and State Department officials as informants is only a smoke screen to cover the access Emerson has to official intelligence. Concurrent with the debut of his program, Emerson was invited to appear on news and talk shows as an "expert on terrorism." A year or so of this kind of programming set the climate for what became a rush to judge Muslims for crimes they did not commit.
Within hours after a truck bomb blew up the Alfred P Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on Wednesday 19 April 1995, word was out that "Islamic extremists" were responsible. Talking heads on all the major corporate news outlets made immediate parallels to the World Trade Center bombing, or to the car bombing of the American Marine barracks in Beirut Programmes sporting logos like "Terror in the Heartland" popped up on all the major networks. Speculations ran wild: an international cartel of terrorists were retaliating for the abduction from Pakistan of their leader, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef; fanatical followers of Shaykh Omar Abdel Rahman were protesting his trial in New York; Muslim extremists intended to show that even America's heartland was not safe from Mideast terror; religious and political "zealots" from the Middle East were lashing out at the US.
That night, Steve Emerson, along with CBS Mideast expert Fuad Ajami, asserted on a CBS news programme that the bombing had "all the earmarks of Islamic radical extremists," and that Muslim terrorists were now "wreaking havoc in the land they loathe." Former FBI agent and Pan Am flight 203 bombing investigator Oliver "Buck" Revell, who rose to public prominence after appearing in Emerson's anti-Muslim tirade "Jihad in America," was once again wheeled out of obscurity, spewing theories about how vulnerable the US was to attacks by Islamic militants.
It was not only the corporate news media that jumped to such conclusions about Muslims. The same accusations and speculations could be heard from other corners of US officialdom. For example, the director of the House Republican Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, Yossef Bodansky, well known for his conspiracy theories about a centrally controlled Islamic "holy war" against the West, assured viewers that "we have a host of enemies that have vowed to strike at the heart of the Great Satan" and called upon law enforcement agencies to take preventative measures that amount to severe curtailments of civil liberties. [38] The tirades by assorted "terrorism experts" continued into Thursday 20 April, when World Trade Center investigator Michael Cherkasky told CNN that "we've got to know what's going on in these fanatical terrorist groups," and called for beefed up intelligence against immigrants.
Politicians worked quickly to capitalize on the tragedy, quickly realizing its utility for pushing new anti-immigration laws and wiretap legislation. Then Republican Senate Majority Leader, and later Presidential candidate, Bob Dole reminded the President that the Senate was ready to pass a new "counter-terrorism" bill, the Omnibus Counter-terrorism Act of 1995, which had provisions for enabling the use of "secret evidence" to deport immigrants, allowed for the banning of fundraising by "suspected terrorist" organizations, and lessened or eliminated restrictions for conducting phone taps. Similarly, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde emphasized that the US had to identify "potentially dangerous foreigners" and that "we should keep them from getting into the country in the first place," while Florida congresswoman Ileana Ros Lehtinen cried that "the radical Islamic movement has penetrated America and presents a real threat to our national security and serenity." Summing up the general tone of most reporting up to this point, James Wooten, an expert on terrorism at the Congressional Research Service, asserted that "it's no longer to be looked at from afar, it's come home to roost."
As if a vast contingency plan were set in motion, other Federal agencies quickly joined the fray, and there was even talk of possible "retaliation" against a Middle Eastern state. The Pentagon detailed several Arabic language interpreters to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for possible use in interrogating suspects, and the FBI began to question Arab and Muslim groups in the Oklahoma City area. A Jordanian-American was detained in London and returned to the US for questioning because his luggage contained "possible bombmaking equipment," but which later turned out to be a telephone and other innocuous items. When the man's identity was announced publicly, his property in Oklahoma was vandalized and his wife spat upon. [39]
Though the mainstream media ignored repercussions, the independent Muslim press reported hate crimes related to these incidents. [40] A Muslim woman in Oklahoma city miscarried her late term child when an angry mob besieged her home with bricks and stones. Muslims and Arabs were harassed and many organizations received death and bomb threats and phone calls demanding that they get out of the US. All of this abuse was further exacerbated by continuing reports, such as one that the Immigration and Naturalization Service was on the lookout for men of "Middle Eastern appearance" and that they had detained several suspicious men of "Middle Eastern origin." [41]
All of this occurred within less than 48 hours after the blast. However, when the composite sketches of "two white males" were released in the late afternoon of 20 April, people began to ask if this reduced the possibility that the bombing was carried out by "Middle Eastern terrorists." News services started mentioning a possible "lone kook" or a "disgruntled employee.' When a suspect with ties to American ultra-nationalists was arrested, attention shifted to the "militia" phenomenon. Although resurgent white supremacy had been seething for years, and despite the warnings of watchdog groups, the mainstream media acted as if the militias had come out of nowhere.
The lesson here is that, while a white American Christian acts alone Muslims always work together. In such a discourse, Muslims are guilty merely by association with the vast menagerie of imagery that government and corporate outlets use to sell products and ideas to Americans. The cruel ironies of American domestic problems began to pile up for Muslims: once it was announced that a man with possible ties to the militias was arrested for the Oklahoma City bombing and emphasis shifted away from "Islamic terror", some branches of the corporate news media insisted on clinging to the hope that there might still be an "Islamic connection," since "our boys" don't do such things; once a white Christian American "good old boy" stood accused of the crime, programmes entitled "Terror in the Heartland" were replaced by those with titles like "Tragedy in Oklahoma;" once it was
clear that there were no "Islamic extremists" to blame, the tone of public discourse softened remarkably, with less talk of "retaliation" and more about "forgiveness." Despite the obvious haste with which American officialdom was set to blame Muslims, there were no public apologies to Muslims once it was clear that they could not be blamed.
The Utility if "Muslim Terror" in Israeli-American Relations
In the 1970s, Arab American academics like Edmund Ghareeb, Jack Shaheen, and Michael Suleiman made strong connections between stereotypes of Arabs in corporate culture and the issue of Palestine. [42] They concluded that in order for the dispossession of Palestinians to be supported by ordinary Americans, Arabs had to be written off as either backward barbarians (who don't understand that colonization is in their best interests) or violent terrorists (who deserve to be eliminated). This was a time when no one used the term "Muslim fundamentalist." Even the Islamic revolution in Iran was seen as some kind of wild and crazy Persian phenomenon.
At the same time, with the gradual acquiescence of Arab regimes to either American or Israeli demands throughout the 1980s and 1990s, there was a shift from "Arab terror" to "Muslim terror." The infrastructure of imagery, already in place from decades of anti-Arab propaganda, simply had to be transferred to Muslims, the new "enemies of peace." In fact, many of the same political problems still persist, but the "terrorists" are now conceptualized as Muslims, since Arab regimes were now obedient allies. Although the Persian Gulf Oil War was a successful test case for enframing the Muslim world into "good" and "bad" parties, Zionist colonization of Palestine still remains one of the core issues contributing to conflict in West Asia.
American scholar Edward S. Herman believes that anti-Muslim racism in US corporate culture is closely related to the issue of Palestine. He sees an "enormous pro-Israel (and anti-Arab) bias of the mainstream media and intelligentsia," and gives four sources of this bias:
1. Israel's strategic value to the US.
2. the influence of the pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC.
3. Western feelings of guilt toward Jews.
4. anti-Arab racism.
Herman clarifies what he means by anti-Arab racism:
This racism is mainly an effect and reflection of interest and policy rather than a casual factor. . . Arabs who cooperate with the West. . . are not subject to racist epithets and stereotypes. This suggests that if other Arabs were more tractable and responsive to Western demands they would cease to be negatively stereotyped. Scapegoating is a function of power and interest. [43]
While his remarks on anti-Arab racism illustrate my point about the utility of imagery, I want to take another one of Herman's observations - the pervasiveness of the Israeli lobby in framing American policy - and look at the utility of Muslim terror in that context.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) held a conference on the "Middle East Peace Process" in Washington DC on 7 May 1995, which was aired live on CSPAN. The guests of honour included US president Bill Clinton and Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin. In his speech, Rabin warned that "extremist radical Islamic fundamentalists" are the "enemies of peace" and that "Khomeinism without Khomeini is the greatest danger to stability, tranquillity and peace in the Middle East and the world." The "scourge of Khomeinism" has replaced the "scourge of communism," and even as the Israelis "consolidate peace with Jordan," the forces of "terror" are seeking to "destroy peace between peoples of our area." He called for the "free world," which successfully mobilized itself against communism, to mobilized itself against "Khomeinism." Rabin concluded by stressing that "only a strong Israel can guarantee stability in the Mideast" and that, therefore, US foreign aid "must remain a key pillar of the peace process." But the aid Rabin demands is about more than "peace" and "stability."
Israel cannot survive without continuous transfusions of American dollars, both from US government aid ($4-5 billion in American tax dollars annually), and private contributions, making Israel one of the few states in the world whose economic viability relies almost entirely on foreign donations and charity. (Despite this, it has never been economically viable, with even the World Bank considering Israel to be a weak financial risk.) This is meaningful because recently the US Congress has been threatening to cut foreign aid. While the Cold War provided the impetus for supporting aid for Israel as the ''first line of defense" against the "communist threat," it seems that the "Islamic threat" is now being utilized for the same purpose by Israeli politicians and their proxies in the US Congress.
After Rabin concluded his speech, AIPAC president Steve Grossman introduced US president Bill Clinton by emphasizing that Clinton has raised the "strategic partnership between the US and Israel to new levels." Clinton began his speech by emphasizing that the US role in the "peace process" was to "minimize the risks taken for peace." He then noted that Russia's cooperation with Iran was a "prime concern" of the US because Iran is "bent on building nuclear weapons." Clinton ignored another "prime concern" of people living in the region, the long standing Israeli nuclear weapons programme and its cooperation with South Africa in detonating a several nuclear weapons, or its kidnapping and imprisonment of Mordecai Vanunu, an Israeli technician who revealed the existence of the long-denied Israeli nuclear weapons programme to the outside world.
Clintons rationale for preventing Iranian-Russian cooperation was that since Iran has "ample oil reserves" it cannot possibly need nuclear technology for peaceful energy purposes. He warned that while Iran haunts the Mideast," the US will seek to "contain Iran as the principle sponsor of terrorism in the world," reminding his audience that Iran undermines the West and its values." He also thanked the Israelis for "drawing our attention to Iran's history of supporting terrorism." But the utility of this imagery became clearer when Clinton next asked for AIPAC to help out with the floundering American embargo against Iran. American attempts at convincing the Europeans and Japanese to sever their economic ties with Iran have been met with little international support, and he seemed to think the Israelis would have some sway over European politicians.
Clinton stated that US support for Israel was "absolute" and that all forms of current assistance will be continued. He chastised the US Congress as a bunch of "budget cutting back door isolationists" for daring to suggest that the US discontinue its bloated but politically selective foreign aid programs, emphasizing that the US "did not win the Cold War to blow the peace" on budgetary issues. But the kind of peace that Clinton and his cohorts support is clear from the ensuing promises he made to the AIPAC congregation.
Clinton revealed that the once closed American space launcher vehicle market would now be open to the Israeli arms industry, along with other previously unavailable high-tech US weaponry. He also noted that the US would escalate its pre-positioning of weaponry in Israel, and that it would buy $3 billion worth of Israeli made military products. Since the US already has the largest military-industrial complex in the world, buying weapons from Israel is another thinly disguised form of economic aid.
As with other aid, US taxpayers are slated to foot the bill in the name of "national security." Clinton explained the need for all of this wheeling and dealing about war and weapons of mass destruction as necessary because "Israel is on the front line of the battle for freedom and peace." Again seeming to assume that they held some sway over public opinion, this time domestically, Clinton suggested that AIPAC help to "lobby" the American
people about budgetary matters.
Israel needs more than military aid. Clinton also assured his audience that the US will continue to support-loan guarantees for the "settlement of 600,000 immigrants from the former Soviet Union." This is perhaps the most intractable problem in the Middle East conflict, and one of the main causes of tension, since many Russian emigres are given inducements (and military training) to settle in West BanK areas, in and around Palestinian
towns. But in the official conceptualization of this issue, when people who live there resist in any way, they do so because they are inherently "terrorists," not because of any machinations of state power. This contradiction is worth a closer look.
Rabin used the word "terrorist," and its by product "terror," more than "peace" in his speeches like the one at the AIPAC conference. Bernard Nietschmann attempts to provide clarification of the utility of language used to describe conflict and war. [44] He concludes that most wars and conflicts in the world today are of the state-versus-nation variety, and in most cases the state is able to frame the nation they are trying to subdue as "terrorists" or "extremists." Those states, in many cases clients of larger states like the US, are generally supported by the major Western corporate news media. Nietschmann believes that a term like "terrorist" is in most cases a non-word in the struggle for normative issues: the aggressors have always provided the definitions of words used to explain their actions. [45] As we have seen above, words provide the climate for actions.
Especially useful is the assertion that "terrorist" is basically a non-word, because it is always used from a position of power to describe those who struggle against the status quo, or the emerging neo-colonial world order. (One could add to this the term "fundamentalist," which came into vogue after the Islamic Revolution in Iran; similarly, the French use "integriste.") State terminology defines struggles and these terminologies are used to undermine nations that want to have their own vision. More often than not, the nations under state domination are indigenous peoples - Native Americans, Palestinians, South Africans, Australian Aboriginals - who were displaced by European invaders.
Nietschmann reminds his fellow Western political scientists that state systems set up boundaries and that all peoples within those boundaries become subjects. The present historical moment does tell us that states result in hierarchy and violence, that lines on a map make the world, that history has become the history of lines. States define land masses, and most defy logic. The state system serves transnational corporations, which need to be able to deal with a head man. In addition to facilitating transfer of goods, states also allow use of force within their borders. Usually, the violence is explained as a police action against terrorists, who are portrayed as acting out of some kind of irrational, religious fanaticism. Occasionally, states will even cross borders into another state to attack "terrorists" without actually declaring war on that state, as in repeated Israeli invasions of southern Lebanon, or the recent Turkish incursions into northern Iraq.
There are parallels to this discussion in US history. When Mexicans resisted US expansion in the 19th century, they were called "bandits." Texans had a policy to shoot on sight any bandits, and sometimes marched as far as Mexico City to root out banditry. However, the "war against banditry" was accompanied by a systematic process of enclosure and depopulation, followed by mass ranch ownership. Within 2 years, over a million acres were conquered, while the "bandits" were relegated to the realm of American popular culture. Similar stories could be told about racism toward Native Americans. Returning to Berkhofer's discussion of whites stereotyping Native Americans, he notes that warlike images of Indians prevailed when Indians were a threat to US interests, and that the nostalgic images prevailed when they were seen as a vanishing race. When the US was involved with military action against Haiti around the turn of the century, American newspapers featured stories about stereotypical Haitians, drawing upon a previously constructed repertoire of images and tales of cannibalism and barbarous voodoo rituals.
Nietschmann's distinction between "state" and "nation" is useful, but it suffers from some glaring omissions, particularly in his list of nation/state conflicts. Israeli incursions into Lebanon since the early 1970s are not mentioned, nor is Indian domination over Kashmir. While the Timorese struggle against the Indonesian state is stressed, the struggle of the Achenese is ignored. These Muslim peoples have been struggling against oppression and domination since the 19th century, first against Dutch imperialism and later against its Indonesian surrogate state. Can the Shi'ites of Iraq and Bahrain (where they are oppressed majorities) and in Saudi Arabia (where they are an oppressed minority) be classified as "nations"? Or are religious distinctions not acceptable? There are other shortcomings in this short work on a long topic, but the overall point is instructive.
Conventional American public discourse utilizes images of Islamic resistant movements as intolerant and predisposed toward violence. While many contemporary movements do have a strong anti-Western sentiment, it is often qualified and in any case is a fairly recent phenomenon. If Arabs and Muslims are extremists in anything, I believe that it is in the patience and tolerance they have shown toward persistent Western interventions until very recently. Islamic movements have much more important characteristics than intolerance and violence. A central concept is social justice. In the West, where it is fashionable to be anti-social under the pretense that socialism is obsolete, it is easy to overlook calls for social justice and fixate instead on violent struggle. But seeing social movements only in terms of violence, real or imagined, is seeing them only in terms that are important to a narrow set of strategic interests.
I became deeply interested in this line of research around the time of the Persian Gulf Oil War in 1990-91. I was amazed at how readily the government and the corporate news media were able to rally public support for that senseless and destructive war. I was sickened by the grotesqueness of the war and the way academic experts and journalists self-righteously mimicked each other's stereotypes and biases in their inhuman depictions of "bad" Arabs and Muslims, while slavishly parroting the official public relations - fueled imagery of the "good" ones. I found it absolutely incredible that the persona of Saddam Hussein could be reworked from loyal proxy, during his murderous war against Iran, to Hitlerian demon after he became too big for his American britches. I thought to myself, Americans must be brain dead if they buy this. Many did. Not content with that as the sole
explanation, I set out to see how imagery could be reworked to expedite a shifting political econony. This article is largely about what I found.
One of the points I have tried to make is that Western civilization maintains a shifting array of images about Islam and Muslims. These images can be called upon as needed to explain, justify or simplify complex political, social and economic problems, whether they be international or domestic.
Notes
1. The best comprehensive discussion on the lineage of Western legal thought from the Crusades through modern legal treatment of Native Americans is Robert A. Williams, The American Indian in Western Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).
2. Robert F. Berkhofer, The White Man's Indian: Images of the American Indian from Columbus to the Present (New York: Vintage, 1979).
3. Ibid., 29.
4. Ibid., 30.
5. Ibid., 30-31.
6. For example: Norman Daniel, Islam and the West: The Making of an Image (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1961); Hichem Djait, Europe and Islam (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985); Thierry Hentsch, Imagining the Middle East (Montreal: Black Rose, 1992); Edward Said, Orientalism, (New York: Vintage, 1979).
7. Edward Said, Orientalism (New York: Vintage, 1979).
8. Ibid., 301 and 322.
9. Ibid., 325-326.
10. Thierry Hentsch, Imagining the Middle East (Montreal: Black Rose, 1992).
11. Martin Bernal, Black Athena. The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1987).
12. Hentsch, op. cit., ix.
13. Ibid., x.
14. Ibid., xiv, emphasis in the original.
15. The passage appears in August C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eye Witnesses and Participants (Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1958).
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid., and cf. Marshall Hodgson, Rethinking World History: Essays on Europe, Islam and World History (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993).
18. In Krey, op. cit., 275.
19. In Norman Daniel, Heroes and Saracens: An Interpretation of the Chansons de Geste (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1984).
20. In D.D.R. Owen, ed., The Song of Roland: The Oxford Text (London: Allen & Unwin, 1972), 75.
21. In Daniel, 1984, op. cit., 70.
22. These quotes are from David E. Stannard, American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 179. Stannard provides a particularly useful overview of the relationship between sex and violence in Western colonial discourse, especially in the section on "Sex, Race, and Holy War."
23. Karen Armstrong, Holy War: The Crusades and their Impact on Today's World (NewYork: Anchor, 1992), 230.
24. Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality: An Introduction (New York: Vintage, 1990).
25. Ibid., 58-59.
26. Ibid., 230.
27. In Stannard, op. cit., 253, cf. Douglas Kellner, The Persian Gulf TV War (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1992).
28. This story, including a case study of Puritan violence toward Indians, is well told by Francis Jennings, The Invasion of America: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest (New York: Norton, 1976).
29. Fuad Sha'ban, Islam and Arabs in Early American Thought: The Roots of Orientalism in America (Durham, North Carolina: The Acorn Press, 1991), 23-26.
30. In ibid., 20.
31. Ibid., 149.
32. Ibid., 183.
33. Henry Giroux provides a useful analysis of Aladdin and other Disney films as they relate to child development in America, in his essay "Are Disney Movies Good for Your Kids?" which can be found in the collection of essays edited by Shirley R. Steinberg and Joe L. Kinchloe, Kinderculture: The Corporate Construction of Cllildhood (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1997), 53-67.
34. Kellner, op. cit., 68-70.
35. For an explication of this thesis, see Joyce Nelson, The Perfect Machine: TV in the Nuclear Age (Toronto: Between the Lines, 1987).
36. Ward Churchill, Fantasies of the Master Race: Literature, Cinema and the Colonization of American Indians (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1992), 245.
37. There is a growing genre of conspiracy literature espousing this thesis in the US, which has been recently heightened by an Israeli scholar working on a Congressional task force under President Bill Clinton, Yossef Bodansky. See in particular his book Target America: Terrorism in the U.S. Today (New York: Shapolsky, 1993). The same book with identical text is marketed outside the US under the title Target the West.
38. This was reported by Reuters on 20 April 1995. All quotes in this paragraph and the next were taken from this report.
39. This was reported in a series of news releases by the Associated Press on 20 April 1995.
40. See, for example, Crescent Intennational 1-15 May 1995.
41. This was reported by Reuters 20 April 1995; for a fuller account of the media circus, see the July/August 1995 issue of Extra!, the magazine of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting).
42. For a representative sample of this work, see the following: Edmund Ghareeb, ed. Split Vision: The Portrayal of Arabs in the American Media (Washington, DC: The American-Arab Affairs Council, 1983); Jack Shaheen, The TV Arab (Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1984); Michael W. Suleiman, The Arabs in the Mind of America (Brattleboro, Vermont: Amana Books, 1988).
43. Herman's statements are taken from a piece he wrote in the November 1994 issue of Z Magazine.
44. Bernard Nietschmann, "The Third World War," Cultural Survival Quarterly 11, no. 3 (1987).
45. The relationship between language and politics, and especially the struggle over normative issues, is nicely detailed by Franke Wilmer, The Indigenous Voice in World Politics: From Time Immemorial (London: Sage Publications, 1993).
J. A. Progler, Winter 1997.
-----------------------------
[He is the Assistant Professor of Social Studies, School of Education, Brooklyn College at CUNY]
Acknowledgments:
This page is taken from http://ireland.iol.ie/~afifi/Articles/image.htm
By: J. A. Progler
The long history of encounters between Western civilization and Islam has produced a tradition of portraying, in largely negative and self-serving ways, the Islamic religion and Muslim cultures. There is a lot of literature cataloguing (and sometimes correcting) these stereotypes.
It is not my intention to rehash this corpus here, though I do rely upon some of the more important works. What I want to do instead is focus on a particular dimension of these encounters, and examine why the West has consistently constructed and perpetuated negative images of Islam and Muslims. My focus will be on the utility of Islamic imagery in Western civilization.
Most people seem to be familiar with stereotypes and negative imagery of Arabs and Muslims-indeed, some are so firmly entrenched that the consumers of these images are unable to distinguish them from reality.
At the same time, many people have an idea how these images come about (books, television, speeches). But by looking at the cultural history of Islamic-Western encounters from the perspective of utility, I am able to locate the correlations between imagery and political economy. Western image-makers, including religious authorities, political establishments, and corporate-media conglomerates, conceptualize for their consumers images of Muslims and/or Arabs in sometimes amusing and other tunes cruel or tragic ways. Upon closer examination, these images seem to serve essential purposes throughout the history of Western civilization. At times these purposes are benign, at others quite sinister. Often, there are tragic consequences for Muslims resulting from the socio-political climate fostered by images. Focusing on the dimension of utility can help to reveal some
ties between imagery and action.
At the same time, I am aware that focusing solely on imagery misses the important dimensions of intention and power. Though I reserve a careful look at these dimensions for another study, I do recognize the need to consider here some of those people who have the power to provide public conceptualizations of Muslims, such as religious figures, academics, policy pundits, journalists, and entertainment conglomerates. Drawing upon the historical and cultural catalogue of assumptions and perceptions about Islam, these experts and spokespeople pick and choose the appropriate images to serve their purposes. Many times, they are seemingly unaware of using an image, which is indicative of how deeply entrenched they have become. The stories of those with the power to present need to be told, but they are beyond the scope of this article. Similarly, fruitful research may also reveal the degree to which Muslims contribute to their own images. That, too, I will reserve for another study. The purpose here, then, is to suggest some of the broader utilitarian dimensions of Islamic imagery in the West.
A recurring theme in the present study is the idea of packaging the complexities of Islam and Muslim cultures into easily comprehensible categories-good and bad, beautiful and dangerous, desirable and repulsive - and I look at these in terms of their utility in Western cultural history and political economy. Academic culture is an important site to reveal the utility of imagery, since these are the studies that inform policy makers and politicians; this is also where Western ideas are introduced into native cultures. But it is also necessary to focus on popular culture, especially news and entertainment, because this is where many people in the West get their impressions of Islam and Muslims.
The 'Other' in Western Colonial Discourse
Images of the Other are prevalent in Western civilization, and have become firmly ensconced in the discourse of colonization and conquest, whoever the victims may be. Some images are rooted in Greek notions of barbarians, others born of the Middle Ages. They have been carried through the Reconquista and Inquisition, picked up during the age of colonial expansion, developed by Orientalists in the 19th and early 20th century, and continue on into the age of mass media and globalized political economy. But images don't exist in a vacuum. They have uses.
For example, in their invasion and colonization of the Americas Europeans brought with them - in addition to muskets and cannons - a great deal of cultural baggage, including rigid and preconceived notions of the Other. These images, intertwined with religious and political conflicts, all found their way into the new world, and eventually entangled Native peoples In fact, historians have shown that American legal traditions regarding Native peoples are based on legal traditions of the Holy Roman Empire which were born of the Crusades against Muslims. [1] For that reason, it will be instructive to spend some time looking at images of Native Americans in the West.
The American scholar Berkhofer carefully analyzes the rationale for images of the "Indian". Particularly striking is his observation that there is a dual image, of "good" or "noble" Indians and "bad" or "ignoble" Indians, and how this developed from pre-conception to image to fact He nicely summarizes the elements of the image: [2]
1. generalizing from one tribe's society and culture to all Indians
2. conceiving of Indians in terms of their deficiencies according to White ideals rather than in terms of their own various cultures
3. using moral evaluation as description of Indians
Berkhofer suggests that "since Whites primarily understood the Indian as an antithesis to themselves, then civilization and Indianness as they defined them would forever be opposites." [3] He believes that while some researchers have uncovered one or another element of the Indian image, most have failed to put it all together.
Images of Indians are usually treated by scholars in two ways. Some have studied "what changed, what persisted, and why," while others studied "what images were held by whom, when, where, and why." [4] Some scholars see them "as a reflection of White cultures and as the primary explanation of White behaviour vis-a-vis Native Americans", while others see them "to be dependent upon the political and economic relationships prevailing in White societies at various times." [5] While each approach is useful in its own way, I agree with Berkhofer's suggestion that any comprehensive understanding of Western images has to consider both aspects, asking not only what the images were and how they continue, but also who holds them and why. He combines the two approaches into a useful and broadly applicable methodology for analyzing images and their utility. Berkhofer's methodology helps us to ask questions like who benefits from these images, and how are they manipulated and perpetuated? I want to look at European images of Muslims in this framework, and consider in particular the way images change to suit particular historical circumstances.
Framing the Ubiquitous Orient
A growing body of critical literature examines the formation, utilization and perpetuation of images in the context of European conceptualization and colonization of the Muslim. [6] Critics generally agree that Orientalist pursuits of knowledge are inextricably tied to colonial and imperial power, and that the West's self-image has been cultivated in a binary relationship with Islamic culture. The literature in this area is quite detailed, and there is no need to repeat all of it here. What I want to do is first look briefly at some of the factors in the development and maintenance of this binary vision from the Crusades through the modern period, and then apply the same method to more recent examples.
According to Norman Daniel, "luxury" and "bellicosity" formed a dual image of Islam in Medieval Western Europe. This nexus is intertwined with a second ignorance and malice. In considering how the dual image of Islam persists, Daniel suggests that in some cases the reason is ignorance and in others it is malice. Ignorance and malice can work together, as in, for example, when a malicious campaign directed by state power toward a scapegoat is explained by using images that rely on the general ignorance of the state's subjects and constituents. This is an important factor in the maintenance of imagery, especially in democratic societies, and I will return to it later.
Edward Said was one of the first to make explicit connections between Western colonization and images of the Muslim world. Said shows how the discourse of Orientalism gave itself legitimacy, revealing that what Orientalists were really talking about was creating the levers of power. Said's general premise is that knowledge is inextricably tied to power, and that pure scholarship does not exist. Drawing upon textual criticism from selected British and French Orientalists of the 19th and 20th centuries, he summarizes the "principle dogmas" of Orientalism.
One is the absolute and systematic difference between the West, which is rational, developed, humane, superior, and the Orient, which is aberrant, undeveloped, inferior. Another dogma is that abstractions about the Orient, particularly those based on texts representing a "classical" Oriental civilization, are always preferable to direct evidence drawn from modern Oriental realities. A third dogma is that the Orient is eternal, uniform, and incapable of defining itself; therefore it is assumed that a highly generalized and systematic vocabulary for describing the Orient from a Western standpoint is inevitable, and even scientifically "objective". A fourth dogma is that the Orient is at bottom something either to be feared (the Yellow Peril, the Mongol hordes, the brown dominions) or to be controlled (by pacification, research and development, outright occupation whenever possible). [7]
After noting that these dogmas "persist without significant challenge in the academic and governmental study of the modern Near Orient," Said argues that "the Orient" is itself a constituted entity, and that the notion that there are "geographical spaces with indigenous, radically different inhabitants who can be defined on the basis of some religion, culture, or racial essence proper to that geographical space is equally a highly debatable idea." [8] While there are numerous institutions in the West engaging in the study of the Orient, there are few if any in the Orient, and those are invariably run by Westerners (for example, the American Universities of Beirut and Cairo, or the Robert College in Turkey), and consequently, little if any study of the West is done by Orientals.
Building upon the foundation of classical Orientalism, a new breed of Orientalist emerged out of Cold War concerns. Characterized by a fusion of classic Orientalism with post-World War II social science, the new discourse was put at the service of foreign policy makers who emphasized prediction and control. However, with all the new techniques, as Said shows, most have not escaped the 4 dogmas of what we might call the orthodox discourse. Neo-Orientalists replace philology with a more anomalous expertise, which, like philology, is still based on language skills, but is more oriented toward strategic and business interests. This new Orientalism is practiced with an almost mystical authority by experts and Area Studies specialists who have mastered the necessary languages. The usual rationale for continuing Orientalism is that "we" can get to know another people, their way of life, thought, etc. To this end, the new Orientals (many trained at the feet of the orthodox masters) are sometimes allowed to speak for themselves, but only to a limited degree. The Oriental becomes useful as a direct source of information, but the Orientalist still remains the source of all knowledge.
As a way to avoid reconfiguring Orientalist discourse in new contexts, and to diffuse pre-existing truths, Said recommends some questions to keep in mind when approaching the Other: [9]
1. How does one represent other cultures?
2. What is another culture?
3. Is the notion of a distinct culture (or race, or religion, or civilization) a useful one, or does it always get involved either in self-congratulation (when one discusses one's own) or hostility and aggression (when one discusses the "other")?
4. Do cultural, religious, and racial differences matter more than socio-economic categories, or politico-historical ones?
5. How do ideas acquire authority, "normality," and even the status of "natural" truth?
6. What is the role of the intellectual?
7. Is he there to validate the culture and state of which he is a part?
8. What importance must he give to an independent critical consciousness, an oppositional critical consciousness?
Said concludes with a warning to guard against accepting handed down notions of the other, and incorporating them into one's work without first subjecting them to critical analysis.
Thierry Hentsch incorporates and complicates most earlier studies of Orientalism. [10] He believes that Western images of the Muslim world are projections of Western insecurities about Self onto the Other, and that as long as the Other is a mirror for the Self, there will always be conflict. I think this is becoming evident in the recent usage of images of Muslims and Islam, built upon not only centuries of images but in particular upon very carefully constructed images of Arabs from the 1960s and 1970s. I will return to this in due time.
To Hentsch, Western images of a sensual yet violent Orient are self-telling myths. Like Bernal, [11] Hentsch believes that racist myths of Western supremacy were fabricated in the 17th and 18th centuries and projected backward to explain contemporary realities. As Said pointed out, collating these myths became the job of the Orientalists. But Hentsch's sweep is far wider and more inclusive than Said. He considers pre-Orientalist cultural factors, and brings his treatment right up to the 1990-91 Persian Gulf Oil War. Hentsch believes that the West's myth of the Orient will continue to serve its explanatory functions right on into the next century.
Hentsch's essential hypothesis is that the area we call the Middle East (which he defines as the nations from Morocco to Iran; Said's Orient) has been a self-reflecting mirror for Western civilization, in which the West defines itself by constructing an Other who is everything the West is not. Hentsch's thesis is that the "Orient" is an "immense repository of our own imagined world" and that "we reveal ourselves through our way of seeing." [12]
His "capital supposition" is that "any study of the Other is futile unless we first observe ourselves face to face with it, and in particular, unless we attempt to understand how, and why, we have studied and represented this self-same Other down to the present day." [13] Speaking on ethnocentrism, Hentsch asserts that it "is not a flaw to be simply set aside, nor is it a sin to be expunged through repentance. It is the precondition of our vision of the Other. Far from offering us absolution, this precondition compels us constantly to return to our point of departure, if only to grasp the internal and external imperatives which shape our curiosity about the Other." [14] I want to continue with Hentsch's analysis, and look in particular at the genesis and continuation of images as they relate to the emerging European colonizing enterprise.
Races debased and Unities Sundered
In November of 1095, Pope Urban II initiated the first European attempt at colonizing the Muslim world - known in the West as the Crusades - by drawing this fateful picture:
For you must hasten to carry aid to your brethren dwelling in the East, who need your help, which they have often asked. For the Turks, a Persian people, have attacked them I exhort you with earnest prayer - not I, but God - that, as heralds of Christ, you urge men by frequent exhortation, men of all ranks, knights as well as foot soldiers, rich as well as poor, to hasten to exterminate this vile race from the lands of your brethren Christ commands it. And if those who set out thither should lose their lives on the way by land, or in crossing the sea, or in fighting the pagans, their sins shall be remitted. Oh what a disgrace, if a race so despised, base, and the instrument of demons, should so overcome a people endowed with faith in the all-powerful God, and resplendent with the name of Christ. Let those who have been accustomed to make private war against the faithful carry on to a successful issue a war against the infidels. Let those who for a long time have been robbers now become soldiers of Christ. Let those who fought against brothers and relatives now fight against these barbarians. Let them zealously undertake the journey under the guidance of the Lord. [15]
The Pope's words lay out many of the themes that would characterize this mass colonial movement East for the next two centuries. In one reading of the Crusading venture, restless knights and small-tune princes are enticed by their lords with tales of land and wealth, fuel the hopes of turning their swords away from the increasingly nervous feudal establishment, or what the Pope calls the faihful brethren. Landless folks and the poor - euphemized by the Pope as criminals - can also be turned Eastward with enticements of land and Divine forgiveness. But what is most interesting here is that the Pope conceptualizes his Oriental Other in racial terms. The enemy, for now, is the debased races of Turks and Persians, and Islam is not yet a part of the Western conceptual matrix.
There is also an overlap here with Christian treatment of Jews as the "instruments of demons", one of the key tenets of anti-Semitic white supremacy. In Christian Europe, Jews and Muslims suffered the wrath of an increasingly rabid and intolerant resurgent. Christianity, culminating in the expulsion of both from Muslim Spain in the 15th century, at the dawn of the expansionist age while this is not the place to trace this legacy in detail, this is also the period in which the religion of rationalism replaced Christianity, with the images of the other traveling full circle from Pope Urban's 11th century "debased races" to the Age of Enlightenment, with its biological explanation for colonization and genocide.
As Hentsch shows, [16] the uses of Islam continued to change according to European internal and external political and economic situations. In the 16th century, when Ottoman Empire was consolidating its control over Mediterranean trade routes, the resulting "rift" was projected back to the first centuries of Islam, making a contemporary economic problem seem to be the result of "age-old" conflict. Any rift in the Mediterranean was there long before Muslims came on the scene. There was never any trans-Mediterranean unity. The Catholic Church, which inherited the decaying Roman Empire, soon split into its Eastern and Western branches. Conventional history, such as is found in World Civilization textbooks, overlooks this and continues to frame Muslims for sundering the imaginary unity of European civilization. Religious imagery had its uses as well. Christian disunity, which began long before Muslims came on the scene, was blamed on Muslim hordes that exploded from Arabia, forever sundering the unity of the Church.
When the Ottomans were at the peak of their power in the 17th century, European princes viewed them as a respected and powerful rival. However, with the waning of Ottoman power, the Muslim world was seen as a place of exotic trials and espionage. This newly exoticized Orient began to be loved for its objects, while its people were despised or belittled by the 19th century, race-based explanations for colonization had fully re-emerged. As Hentsch suggests, [17] some Muslims were considered by Europeans to be civilized according to their criteria, but this was explained by the presence of Aryan blood in some Muslim races. In fact, as French travelers saw it, the problem with Persians was that, despite their pure Aryan roots, their blood was tainted because of mixing with lesser, darker skinned breeds. Before continuing this trend into the modern period, I want to go back over this terrain and look at Christian and European obsessions and insecurities with sex and violence, and the ways they provided particularly fertile ground for images of Muslims.
Medieval Phantasms of Sex and Violence
And, if you desire to know what was done about the enemy whom we found there, know that in the portico of Solomon and his Temple, our men rode in the blood of the Saracens up to the knees of the horses.
(Daimbert, Official Summary of the 1st Crusade) [18]
Those amongst the Saracens are considered most religious who can make the most women pregnant they lie with their concubines and wives often in times of fast, because they suppose making love and desire are so meritorious, either to satisfy lust or to generate many sons to strengthen the defense of their religion.
(Bishop Jacques de Vitry on the 5th Crusade) [19]
Count Roland gripped his sword dripping with gore he strikes his valiant blows, shivering shafts of spears and bucklers, too, cleaving through feet and fists, saddles and sides. To see him hack the limbs from Saracens, pile them upon the earth, corpse upon corpse, would call to mind a very valiant knight.
(Verse from the Song of Roland, 12th century minstrelsy) [20]
Nor did Mahomet teach anything of great austerity. . . indeed, he even allowed many pleasurable things, to do with a multitude of women, abuse of them, and suchlike. . . many Christians change and will change to the Saracen religion.
(Dominican Friar Humbert of Lyons, c. 1300) [21]
These quotes are instructive in their presentation of Western Christian foundational attitudes toward Islam. In Medieval Europe, the Popes began to use Islam as a proxy to convince backsliding Christians to return to the fold and to convince themselves that Christians were chaste, denouncing Islam as a sexually liberal and even licentious religion. Once the Europeans gained a foothold in West Asia, one of the areas of greatest concern was miscegenation. In the Crusader mind, even sex with one's own wife was a carnal sin; sex with an infidel woman was punished by "castration for the Crusader and facial mutilation for the woman." Muslim women were "viewed as defiled and wanton whores and seductresses." To Christians, Muslim ease with sexuality was seen as "offensively non-ascetic behavior." [22]
In fact, it seems that Medieval Christians could do nothing but condemn the Muslim appreciation of sexuality, and
. . . therefore they attacked "Islam" as a religion that had been directly set up to encourage promiscuity and lust. . . Biographies of Mohammed by Christians describe the Prophet's sex life in a manner that reveals far more about their own sexual problems than about the facts of the Prophet's life. The Koran was said, quite incorrectly, to condone homosexuality and to encourage unnatural forms of intercourse. One scholar claimed that the foulness of lust among Muslims was inexpressible; they were deep in this filth from the soles of their feet to the crown of the head. Soon the Church would accuse any out-group in Christendom of excessive and unnatural sexual practices and twelfth century Christians stigmatized "heresy" of Islam by cursing what they considered its sexual laxity. [23]
To really grasp the utility of this imagery, we need to look at sexuality in European history. In his discussion of human sexuality, Foucault describes Arab-Muslim societies as among those "which have endowed themselves with an ars erotica" in which "truth is drawn from pleasure itself, understood as a practice and accumulated as experience." [24] Western civilization, on the other hand, possesses a scientia sexualis, the "procedures for telling the truth of sex which are geared to a form of knowledge - power strictly opposed to the art of initiations and the masterful secret." In the West, the confession is "one of the main rituals we rely on for the production of truth" and "Western man has become a confessing animal." [25] What needs confessing is the sin of enjoyment.
European discomfort with sexuality in Medieval times gradually gives way to a new outlook, still rooted, as Foucault stresses [26], in the old insecurities, but now at least with an outward expression of enjoyment. By the twentieth century, the alterity of sexuality has now been reversed, suggests Karen Armstrong, with the post-Christian West seeing itself as sexually liberated vis-a-vis a sexually repressed Islam:
At a time when many people in the West are liberating themselves from the sexual repressions of their Christian past, Islam is constantly denigrated as a sexually repressive religion. We have completely reversed the old stereotype and not many people seem interested in the truth of the matter or wish to find out about Islam itself. They simply want to bolster their own needs against their long established counter-image: Sex and violence continue to be juxtaposed in disturbing ways in American culture. For example, American pilots watched porno movies while preparing to carpet bomb Baghdad in the 1991 Persian Gulf Oil war, and they scribbled sexually explicit graffiti on the bombs, labeling them as "Mrs. Saddam's sex toy" or "a suppository for Saddam." [27]
George Bush purposefully mispronounced "Saddam" (which in Arabic has a heavy accent on the last syllable) so that it sounded more like Sodom, evoking the Biblical city of wanton sexual depravity, and thus sodomy. A wartime propaganda book produced by an American public relations firm hired by the Kuwaitis was entitled The Rape of Kuwait, adding another facet to the highly sexualized justification for what amounts to a firebomb lynch-party of Iraqis reminiscent of the same charge leveled at African Americans to justify racist brutality. I'll come back to some of these themes in a moment, but I first want to consider further some unique elements of the American conceptualization of the Muslim other.
Orientalizing the American Way
Most of the literature on Orientalist pursuits focuses on European forms of Orientalism. Comparatively little has been written about the peculiarities of American Orientalism. The latter is worth careful attention, since the United States seems obsessed with becoming the leader in a unipolar world, and some official policy circles list Islam as a "new" but qualified threat to that supposed inevitability.
17th through 19th century American writings illustrates how Europeans who invaded North America believed that they were God's chosen people, that the land they were colonizing was the promised land, and that Native people's were God-less heathen who were to be driven from their homes and burned. [28] Sha'ban points out that religiously driven settlers, Puritans in particular, imagined parallels between themselves and the wandering tribes of Israel. These early roots were bolstered by an emerging and increasingly strong, literal, and exclusive sense of a relationship with their God, who had ordained pre-United States settlers to be "a light in the West" that would shine over the rest of the world. This expansionary, violent, and millennial sense of a divine mission became known as "manifest destiny." [29]
In practice, manifest destiny initially meant bringing the "light" of American style Protestant Christianity to the rest of the world. Americans saw themselves as being placed in the "center of the world" by Providence in order to carry out a Divine mission, as a writer in the American Theological Review put it in 1859:
Indeed, radii drawn from our eastern, western, and southern shores, reach almost all Pagan, Mohammedan, and Papal lands, or rather most of them can be reached by nearly direct water communication. [30]
The American missionary enterprise - the vanguard of manifest destiny - required information on "barbarians," "heathens," "savages," and "pagans," and especially "Mohammedans,* "Turks," and "Saracens." Beginning in the early 19th century, particularly when manifest destiny turned cast as well as west, American writers took a strong interest in Islam and the Prophet. In various treatises, they dwell on the Prophet (upon whom be peace) as an impostor and portray Islam as a deviant Christian heresy. Some of the very few instances where this does not apply tend to romanticize the Prophet as a hero, but these views also had at bottom the intention to defeat Islam and convert Muslims to Christianity. An equally important goal of 19th century religious writings on Islam, as Sha'ban notes, was to describe the alleged depravity of Islam in order to assert the imagined purity of Christianity, a tendency inherited from Medieval European Christianity.
Commercial, diplomatic, and military contacts with Mediterranean Muslim lands, coupled with evangelical revivalism in the late 18th and early 19th century, led to a "shift of the American myth of God's Israel from the New World to the Holy Land." [31] But the imaginary world of Biblical Zion constructed in the parlors and parishes of the United States soon had to be reconciled with the realities on the ground in Palestine. Unfortunately, this reconciliation did not entail rethinking the vision of Zion - it meant imposing that vision on Muslims and non-Protestant Christians who happened to be in the way of the American sense of Providence.
Americans were also motivated in their dealings with Islam and Muslims by a complex amalgam of Oriental fairy tales. Making use of a body of literature largely ignored by other critics of Orientalism, Sha'ban takes a particular interest in Orientalism as found in popular American literature.
He notes that one of the most often printed books in the 19th century United States was a translation of the Arabian Nights. That collection of fables and fairy tales, often translated in the West subject to the sexual whims of the translator and marketed to titillate readers, was taken as an accurate portrayal of a timeless, exotic, and mystical East. Tales of harems, genies, and magic carpets found their way into most American homes and libraries. These stories often provided the criteria by which secular travelers to the East would judge their own experiences.
Sha'ban's detailed analysis of travel literature reveals that, time after time, American men traveling to the East were both aroused and repulsed by Muslim culture. One American traveler to Istanbul in 1858 was so mystified and aroused by a veiled Muslim woman that he offered $50 to buy her, but soon realized it was not possible since he "was no Mohammedan." [32]
While often envying the Turks for their "harems," some travelers also looked for signs of distress so that they might heroically rescue "oppressed" women from the clutches of the Turkish "barbarians." These expectations were founded upon what Sha'ban calls the "dream of Baghdad", and he aptly demonstrates that such dreams abound in early American Orientalism. This dream of Oriental splendour was picked up by Hollywood in its early years, with Rudolph Valentino epitomizing the Romantic lover in Arab garb. Similar Oriental fantasies permeated American entertainment all through the 20th century, ranging from cartoons like "Popeye meets Ali Baba and the 40 Thieves," to "The Adventures of Sindbad" and "Lawrence of Arabia," and right on up to the 1989 Disney Orientalist extravaganza "Aladdin."
Corporate American Phantasms
The dual image of luxury and bellicosity, as suggested by Daniel above, can be iilustrated through looking at the incredible popularity of the Arabian Nights-type themes in American corporate culture. Though its use as literature has declined somewhat in recent times, the Arabian Nights, as noted above, was once among the most popular books in America. Hollywood has capitalized on this American obsession with things Oriental in its recent production of "Aladdin," a phantasmagoria of Orientalist cliche, complete with a menagerie of harems, genies, magic carpets, and, of course, murderous barbarians.
A promotional documentary about the making of Aladdin boasts of authenticity in its producers' emulation of "Islamic design" and "Persian architecture," showing scenes of animators carefully drawing images of mosques and calligraphy from photographs; they appear to use great care in detailing their drawings to the minutest degree. But one thing is missing from all this careful attention to detail - people. Characters in Hollywood's Aladdin are compound stereotypes, grossly racist caricatures of the worst Western phantasms - villainous sorcerers in turbans, sensuous harems, sumptuous feasts, hordes of fat ugly thugs with swords (ready to chop off hands for stealing bread), flying carpets, genies. All this is an alterity of the hero, Aladdin, who speaks and acts as if straight out of an American suburban high school. [33]
Sometimes, American media wizards ram together luxurious and bellicose images to create the classic American phantasm. A recent example is the 1995 American football Super Bowl half-time antics, an extended commercial-like foray. First, crooner Tony Bennett sings "Desert Caravan" against a backdrop resembling a mosque. Then Indiana Jones (who shot up many a Muslim barbarian in his Hollywood films) swings into the scene and rescues the football-shaped Super Bowl trophy from hordes of turbaned Muslims with swords (or were they Arabs? or Turks? Moors?). Jones makes short work of these generic barbarians, retrieving the trophy, along with a blonde heroine for good measure. This is followed by a song and dance routine, featuring gyrating women wearing costumes right out of the 1960s American Orientalist situation comedy "I Dream of Jeannie." Other women are draped in black or white chadors; some of these women doff their veils and swing them along with their hips, as if reveling in their new found "liberation." Of course, it is the American hero Jones who has rescued them from their oppressive Muslim masters. The show climaxes with a flashy display of fireworks, and the fans erupt into a jingoistic frenzy, the likes of which rivals similar outbursts when the national anthem is played. Clearly, such Oriental fantasies are part of America's national heritage, which can be utilized by production designers for all sorts of entertainment and commercial purposes.
Commercial television and its corporate advertising conglomerates from time to time intensify their utilization of Islamic exotica in Popular American culture. Interestingly, this often takes place side by side with an increase in the vilification of Muslims and Islam. American corporate news is full of talk about "Islamic terror," "Muslim suicide bombers," "the warriors of Allah," "the holy war of Islam," or "Iranian backed radical extremist Moslem fundamentalist terrorists." Examples abound, including a notorious programme in the Fall of 1994 called "Jihad in America," which described a centrally controlled, top-down international Islamic conspiracy to carry out terror in the US, or the more recent rush to blame the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing on Muslims. These public displays of jingoistic fury have real repercussions on the ground, with a series of mosque-burnings and increased hate and bias crimes against Muslims, including the tragic case of a new mosque in Yuba City, California, burned to the ground by arsonists on the eve of its opening to the community in September 1994. Imagery creates a climate within which such acts seem to make sense.
Images of Muslims seem to ebb and flow with the American political tides, and close examination reveals some connections. Following the violent orgy of death and mayhem popularly known to Americans as "Desert Storm," American corporate television began to feature advertisements with an Arabian Nights motif. For example, a commercial aired on corporate TV throughout 1991 and 1992 for "Near East Rice Pilaf" features scenes in a Middle Eastern bazaar. The ad segues to an American family preparing to gorge themselves on an exotic dish, as if eating Near East Rice Pilaf will somehow transport the consumer into an Eastern fantasy world. IBM computers, as part of its globalized campaign of superficial multicultural inclusion, produced a similar commercial, which utilizes Arabic dialogue and racist caricatures. In an exotic bazaar setting, two natives thoughtfully extol the virtues of the latest American techno-excesses. A similar commercial was produced by Isuzu automobiles, taking place somewhere in North Africa, also with Arabic (as well as French) speaking natives. It begins with a call from a minaret, a pseudo adhan (which has always been an aural symbol for Islam in American film and TV), and ends with the natives being dazzled by expensive leather seats and the corporation's newest mobile contraption. These and other commercials share the common theme of a utilizing a timeless fantasy world that is backwards yet ready for the salvation of American consumer culture. Not intended to sell computers and cars to aulyone but Americans, these utilizations of Orientalist imagery serve to make powerful connections for consumers, especially between tradition and progress.
With increasing numbers of American corporations hopping on the Oriental bandwagon, American Muslims have tried to form collective responses. According to a series of press releases beginning in November 1994, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) has mounted several campaigns against greeting card corporations for cards that objectify veiled Muslim women in degrading ways, or which feature nude women juxtaposed with verses from the Qur'an. There have been beer commercials featuring actresses with verses of the Qur'an emblazoned across their chests, and the fashion industry has suddenly discovered the beauty of Islamic calligraphy, using it in clothing designs modeled by voluptuous women in public pageants. CAIR has also worked on a number of bias incidents, many involving women barred from working because they choose to wear the Islamic modest dress. It seems that in American corporate culture, veils and other Oriental exotica are widely utilized to titillate buyers, but that real women who wear the Muslim modest dress are despised and rejected. Another phenomenon has also emerged since the Persian Gulf Oil War. There is an increasing number of corporate news media programmes about Muslims living in the US. Some no doubt grew out of wartime public relations on behalf of "good Muslims," like the Kuwaiti royals, who hired one of the biggest US public relations firms to manage their wartime propaganda. [34] Most juxtapose two images there is a "terrorist fringe" among US Muslims (the "bad Muslims"), but most other Muslims are peace-loving and eager to be assimilated to the American way of life (the "good Muslims") The American corporate news pundits continually remind consumers that Islam is the fastest growing religion in the US; at the same time, they tell Americans that "Islamic terror cells" are on the rise in the US Muslims in such stories are usually defined by their politics and class.
While the media assure Americans that most Muslims are dutiful middle-class citizens, the "terrorist fringe" is always laying at the wait, a threat to the very core of American interests and values. Such images have been utilized by politicians and corporate leaders to frighten American citizen-consumers into accepting all sorts of barbarous immigration and security laws.
Closer scrutiny reveals that, in most cases, the Muslims profiled on corporate TV programmes are Palestinians. One insidious implication is that Palestinians are somehow inherently irrational, though this is not always made explicit. The misogynist character of dominant media imagery of Muslims in the US is underlined, for example, when the corporate news shows images of Palestinian or other Muslim men crying, perhaps after another Israeli raid on their homes. Since "real men" don't cry, it becomes hard for Americans to imagine other people's grief expressed in that way, and it is seen instead as an expression of rage or insanity. The point is that some images are heightened by the inability of television to portray anything but the most extreme expressions of emotion, causing some to label TV as best suited to portray death. [35] This technical inadequacy is something that even good PR can't fix. It also heightens the effectiveness of television as a medium to utilize deep-seated American visions of sex and violence in Islam.
US corporate news features often use Islamic religious symbols to frame stories about violent political events. For example, a 1994 story about the end of the disastrous American intervention in Somalia begins with the reporter intoning ominously "night falls on Mogadishu" over the Islamic call to prayer and a backdrop of a mosque silhouetted by a dark, cloudy sky.
The report segues to picture bites of destroyed American helicopters and corpses of US marines. The call to prayer in this case, as in many others, forebodes death and terror. Furthermore, this is the only Somali voice in the piece.
Some media portrayals of Muslims are reminiscent of the contrived sense of inevitability that Native American scholar Ward Churchill brings out in his comments about the Orientalist extravaganza epic film, Lawrence of Arabia:
Its major impact was to put a 'tragic' but far more humane face upon the nature of Britain's imperial pretensions in the region, making colonization of the Arabs seem more acceptable - or at least more inevitable - than might have otherwise been the case. [36]
The US media often rely on pre-existing images of Muslim barbarity in order to explain the need for intervention or to help the US military save face when things don't come out as planned. When the US Marines were escorting members of the UN out of Somalia in February 1995, ABC News televised a report of a multiple amputation, featuring a man who presumably had just been convicted of theft in an Islamic law court. The piece was pure emotion and imagery, seeming to say, with Churchill's tragic self-righteousness, "look how easily the natives revert to their barbarity once we leave."
Despite its pervasiveness in the media, imagery that I have described above is far removed from the daily experiences of most American citizen-consumers. But lately, some media producers have tried to bring these images closer to home.
TV Holy War
In the Fall of 1994, PBS aired a documentary by journalist Steve Emerson. Titled "Jihad in America," it followed on the heels of other recent works that put forth the thesis of an elaborate, secret, and centralized network of "Islamic terrorists," who take orders from Iran, and who are mounting a violent war against their hated enemy, the mighty Great Satan. [37]
Evidence within the programme suggests that Emerson has access to official government intelligence. Most of the programme either consists of interviews staged by Emerson, or clips from Muslim conferences (which are available publicly from the organizations that sponsor conferences).
However, some clips appear to be from other sources, such as home videos confiscated from Muslims in FBI sweeps during the Oil War and in the wake of the World Trade Center incident, or surreptitiously taped surveillance videos. Using "former" FBI and State Department officials as informants is only a smoke screen to cover the access Emerson has to official intelligence. Concurrent with the debut of his program, Emerson was invited to appear on news and talk shows as an "expert on terrorism." A year or so of this kind of programming set the climate for what became a rush to judge Muslims for crimes they did not commit.
Within hours after a truck bomb blew up the Alfred P Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City on Wednesday 19 April 1995, word was out that "Islamic extremists" were responsible. Talking heads on all the major corporate news outlets made immediate parallels to the World Trade Center bombing, or to the car bombing of the American Marine barracks in Beirut Programmes sporting logos like "Terror in the Heartland" popped up on all the major networks. Speculations ran wild: an international cartel of terrorists were retaliating for the abduction from Pakistan of their leader, Ramzi Ahmed Yousef; fanatical followers of Shaykh Omar Abdel Rahman were protesting his trial in New York; Muslim extremists intended to show that even America's heartland was not safe from Mideast terror; religious and political "zealots" from the Middle East were lashing out at the US.
That night, Steve Emerson, along with CBS Mideast expert Fuad Ajami, asserted on a CBS news programme that the bombing had "all the earmarks of Islamic radical extremists," and that Muslim terrorists were now "wreaking havoc in the land they loathe." Former FBI agent and Pan Am flight 203 bombing investigator Oliver "Buck" Revell, who rose to public prominence after appearing in Emerson's anti-Muslim tirade "Jihad in America," was once again wheeled out of obscurity, spewing theories about how vulnerable the US was to attacks by Islamic militants.
It was not only the corporate news media that jumped to such conclusions about Muslims. The same accusations and speculations could be heard from other corners of US officialdom. For example, the director of the House Republican Task Force on Terrorism and Unconventional Warfare, Yossef Bodansky, well known for his conspiracy theories about a centrally controlled Islamic "holy war" against the West, assured viewers that "we have a host of enemies that have vowed to strike at the heart of the Great Satan" and called upon law enforcement agencies to take preventative measures that amount to severe curtailments of civil liberties. [38] The tirades by assorted "terrorism experts" continued into Thursday 20 April, when World Trade Center investigator Michael Cherkasky told CNN that "we've got to know what's going on in these fanatical terrorist groups," and called for beefed up intelligence against immigrants.
Politicians worked quickly to capitalize on the tragedy, quickly realizing its utility for pushing new anti-immigration laws and wiretap legislation. Then Republican Senate Majority Leader, and later Presidential candidate, Bob Dole reminded the President that the Senate was ready to pass a new "counter-terrorism" bill, the Omnibus Counter-terrorism Act of 1995, which had provisions for enabling the use of "secret evidence" to deport immigrants, allowed for the banning of fundraising by "suspected terrorist" organizations, and lessened or eliminated restrictions for conducting phone taps. Similarly, House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde emphasized that the US had to identify "potentially dangerous foreigners" and that "we should keep them from getting into the country in the first place," while Florida congresswoman Ileana Ros Lehtinen cried that "the radical Islamic movement has penetrated America and presents a real threat to our national security and serenity." Summing up the general tone of most reporting up to this point, James Wooten, an expert on terrorism at the Congressional Research Service, asserted that "it's no longer to be looked at from afar, it's come home to roost."
As if a vast contingency plan were set in motion, other Federal agencies quickly joined the fray, and there was even talk of possible "retaliation" against a Middle Eastern state. The Pentagon detailed several Arabic language interpreters to the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) for possible use in interrogating suspects, and the FBI began to question Arab and Muslim groups in the Oklahoma City area. A Jordanian-American was detained in London and returned to the US for questioning because his luggage contained "possible bombmaking equipment," but which later turned out to be a telephone and other innocuous items. When the man's identity was announced publicly, his property in Oklahoma was vandalized and his wife spat upon. [39]
Though the mainstream media ignored repercussions, the independent Muslim press reported hate crimes related to these incidents. [40] A Muslim woman in Oklahoma city miscarried her late term child when an angry mob besieged her home with bricks and stones. Muslims and Arabs were harassed and many organizations received death and bomb threats and phone calls demanding that they get out of the US. All of this abuse was further exacerbated by continuing reports, such as one that the Immigration and Naturalization Service was on the lookout for men of "Middle Eastern appearance" and that they had detained several suspicious men of "Middle Eastern origin." [41]
All of this occurred within less than 48 hours after the blast. However, when the composite sketches of "two white males" were released in the late afternoon of 20 April, people began to ask if this reduced the possibility that the bombing was carried out by "Middle Eastern terrorists." News services started mentioning a possible "lone kook" or a "disgruntled employee.' When a suspect with ties to American ultra-nationalists was arrested, attention shifted to the "militia" phenomenon. Although resurgent white supremacy had been seething for years, and despite the warnings of watchdog groups, the mainstream media acted as if the militias had come out of nowhere.
The lesson here is that, while a white American Christian acts alone Muslims always work together. In such a discourse, Muslims are guilty merely by association with the vast menagerie of imagery that government and corporate outlets use to sell products and ideas to Americans. The cruel ironies of American domestic problems began to pile up for Muslims: once it was announced that a man with possible ties to the militias was arrested for the Oklahoma City bombing and emphasis shifted away from "Islamic terror", some branches of the corporate news media insisted on clinging to the hope that there might still be an "Islamic connection," since "our boys" don't do such things; once a white Christian American "good old boy" stood accused of the crime, programmes entitled "Terror in the Heartland" were replaced by those with titles like "Tragedy in Oklahoma;" once it was
clear that there were no "Islamic extremists" to blame, the tone of public discourse softened remarkably, with less talk of "retaliation" and more about "forgiveness." Despite the obvious haste with which American officialdom was set to blame Muslims, there were no public apologies to Muslims once it was clear that they could not be blamed.
The Utility if "Muslim Terror" in Israeli-American Relations
In the 1970s, Arab American academics like Edmund Ghareeb, Jack Shaheen, and Michael Suleiman made strong connections between stereotypes of Arabs in corporate culture and the issue of Palestine. [42] They concluded that in order for the dispossession of Palestinians to be supported by ordinary Americans, Arabs had to be written off as either backward barbarians (who don't understand that colonization is in their best interests) or violent terrorists (who deserve to be eliminated). This was a time when no one used the term "Muslim fundamentalist." Even the Islamic revolution in Iran was seen as some kind of wild and crazy Persian phenomenon.
At the same time, with the gradual acquiescence of Arab regimes to either American or Israeli demands throughout the 1980s and 1990s, there was a shift from "Arab terror" to "Muslim terror." The infrastructure of imagery, already in place from decades of anti-Arab propaganda, simply had to be transferred to Muslims, the new "enemies of peace." In fact, many of the same political problems still persist, but the "terrorists" are now conceptualized as Muslims, since Arab regimes were now obedient allies. Although the Persian Gulf Oil War was a successful test case for enframing the Muslim world into "good" and "bad" parties, Zionist colonization of Palestine still remains one of the core issues contributing to conflict in West Asia.
American scholar Edward S. Herman believes that anti-Muslim racism in US corporate culture is closely related to the issue of Palestine. He sees an "enormous pro-Israel (and anti-Arab) bias of the mainstream media and intelligentsia," and gives four sources of this bias:
1. Israel's strategic value to the US.
2. the influence of the pro-Israel lobby, AIPAC.
3. Western feelings of guilt toward Jews.
4. anti-Arab racism.
Herman clarifies what he means by anti-Arab racism:
This racism is mainly an effect and reflection of interest and policy rather than a casual factor. . . Arabs who cooperate with the West. . . are not subject to racist epithets and stereotypes. This suggests that if other Arabs were more tractable and responsive to Western demands they would cease to be negatively stereotyped. Scapegoating is a function of power and interest. [43]
While his remarks on anti-Arab racism illustrate my point about the utility of imagery, I want to take another one of Herman's observations - the pervasiveness of the Israeli lobby in framing American policy - and look at the utility of Muslim terror in that context.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) held a conference on the "Middle East Peace Process" in Washington DC on 7 May 1995, which was aired live on CSPAN. The guests of honour included US president Bill Clinton and Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin. In his speech, Rabin warned that "extremist radical Islamic fundamentalists" are the "enemies of peace" and that "Khomeinism without Khomeini is the greatest danger to stability, tranquillity and peace in the Middle East and the world." The "scourge of Khomeinism" has replaced the "scourge of communism," and even as the Israelis "consolidate peace with Jordan," the forces of "terror" are seeking to "destroy peace between peoples of our area." He called for the "free world," which successfully mobilized itself against communism, to mobilized itself against "Khomeinism." Rabin concluded by stressing that "only a strong Israel can guarantee stability in the Mideast" and that, therefore, US foreign aid "must remain a key pillar of the peace process." But the aid Rabin demands is about more than "peace" and "stability."
Israel cannot survive without continuous transfusions of American dollars, both from US government aid ($4-5 billion in American tax dollars annually), and private contributions, making Israel one of the few states in the world whose economic viability relies almost entirely on foreign donations and charity. (Despite this, it has never been economically viable, with even the World Bank considering Israel to be a weak financial risk.) This is meaningful because recently the US Congress has been threatening to cut foreign aid. While the Cold War provided the impetus for supporting aid for Israel as the ''first line of defense" against the "communist threat," it seems that the "Islamic threat" is now being utilized for the same purpose by Israeli politicians and their proxies in the US Congress.
After Rabin concluded his speech, AIPAC president Steve Grossman introduced US president Bill Clinton by emphasizing that Clinton has raised the "strategic partnership between the US and Israel to new levels." Clinton began his speech by emphasizing that the US role in the "peace process" was to "minimize the risks taken for peace." He then noted that Russia's cooperation with Iran was a "prime concern" of the US because Iran is "bent on building nuclear weapons." Clinton ignored another "prime concern" of people living in the region, the long standing Israeli nuclear weapons programme and its cooperation with South Africa in detonating a several nuclear weapons, or its kidnapping and imprisonment of Mordecai Vanunu, an Israeli technician who revealed the existence of the long-denied Israeli nuclear weapons programme to the outside world.
Clintons rationale for preventing Iranian-Russian cooperation was that since Iran has "ample oil reserves" it cannot possibly need nuclear technology for peaceful energy purposes. He warned that while Iran haunts the Mideast," the US will seek to "contain Iran as the principle sponsor of terrorism in the world," reminding his audience that Iran undermines the West and its values." He also thanked the Israelis for "drawing our attention to Iran's history of supporting terrorism." But the utility of this imagery became clearer when Clinton next asked for AIPAC to help out with the floundering American embargo against Iran. American attempts at convincing the Europeans and Japanese to sever their economic ties with Iran have been met with little international support, and he seemed to think the Israelis would have some sway over European politicians.
Clinton stated that US support for Israel was "absolute" and that all forms of current assistance will be continued. He chastised the US Congress as a bunch of "budget cutting back door isolationists" for daring to suggest that the US discontinue its bloated but politically selective foreign aid programs, emphasizing that the US "did not win the Cold War to blow the peace" on budgetary issues. But the kind of peace that Clinton and his cohorts support is clear from the ensuing promises he made to the AIPAC congregation.
Clinton revealed that the once closed American space launcher vehicle market would now be open to the Israeli arms industry, along with other previously unavailable high-tech US weaponry. He also noted that the US would escalate its pre-positioning of weaponry in Israel, and that it would buy $3 billion worth of Israeli made military products. Since the US already has the largest military-industrial complex in the world, buying weapons from Israel is another thinly disguised form of economic aid.
As with other aid, US taxpayers are slated to foot the bill in the name of "national security." Clinton explained the need for all of this wheeling and dealing about war and weapons of mass destruction as necessary because "Israel is on the front line of the battle for freedom and peace." Again seeming to assume that they held some sway over public opinion, this time domestically, Clinton suggested that AIPAC help to "lobby" the American
people about budgetary matters.
Israel needs more than military aid. Clinton also assured his audience that the US will continue to support-loan guarantees for the "settlement of 600,000 immigrants from the former Soviet Union." This is perhaps the most intractable problem in the Middle East conflict, and one of the main causes of tension, since many Russian emigres are given inducements (and military training) to settle in West BanK areas, in and around Palestinian
towns. But in the official conceptualization of this issue, when people who live there resist in any way, they do so because they are inherently "terrorists," not because of any machinations of state power. This contradiction is worth a closer look.
Rabin used the word "terrorist," and its by product "terror," more than "peace" in his speeches like the one at the AIPAC conference. Bernard Nietschmann attempts to provide clarification of the utility of language used to describe conflict and war. [44] He concludes that most wars and conflicts in the world today are of the state-versus-nation variety, and in most cases the state is able to frame the nation they are trying to subdue as "terrorists" or "extremists." Those states, in many cases clients of larger states like the US, are generally supported by the major Western corporate news media. Nietschmann believes that a term like "terrorist" is in most cases a non-word in the struggle for normative issues: the aggressors have always provided the definitions of words used to explain their actions. [45] As we have seen above, words provide the climate for actions.
Especially useful is the assertion that "terrorist" is basically a non-word, because it is always used from a position of power to describe those who struggle against the status quo, or the emerging neo-colonial world order. (One could add to this the term "fundamentalist," which came into vogue after the Islamic Revolution in Iran; similarly, the French use "integriste.") State terminology defines struggles and these terminologies are used to undermine nations that want to have their own vision. More often than not, the nations under state domination are indigenous peoples - Native Americans, Palestinians, South Africans, Australian Aboriginals - who were displaced by European invaders.
Nietschmann reminds his fellow Western political scientists that state systems set up boundaries and that all peoples within those boundaries become subjects. The present historical moment does tell us that states result in hierarchy and violence, that lines on a map make the world, that history has become the history of lines. States define land masses, and most defy logic. The state system serves transnational corporations, which need to be able to deal with a head man. In addition to facilitating transfer of goods, states also allow use of force within their borders. Usually, the violence is explained as a police action against terrorists, who are portrayed as acting out of some kind of irrational, religious fanaticism. Occasionally, states will even cross borders into another state to attack "terrorists" without actually declaring war on that state, as in repeated Israeli invasions of southern Lebanon, or the recent Turkish incursions into northern Iraq.
There are parallels to this discussion in US history. When Mexicans resisted US expansion in the 19th century, they were called "bandits." Texans had a policy to shoot on sight any bandits, and sometimes marched as far as Mexico City to root out banditry. However, the "war against banditry" was accompanied by a systematic process of enclosure and depopulation, followed by mass ranch ownership. Within 2 years, over a million acres were conquered, while the "bandits" were relegated to the realm of American popular culture. Similar stories could be told about racism toward Native Americans. Returning to Berkhofer's discussion of whites stereotyping Native Americans, he notes that warlike images of Indians prevailed when Indians were a threat to US interests, and that the nostalgic images prevailed when they were seen as a vanishing race. When the US was involved with military action against Haiti around the turn of the century, American newspapers featured stories about stereotypical Haitians, drawing upon a previously constructed repertoire of images and tales of cannibalism and barbarous voodoo rituals.
Nietschmann's distinction between "state" and "nation" is useful, but it suffers from some glaring omissions, particularly in his list of nation/state conflicts. Israeli incursions into Lebanon since the early 1970s are not mentioned, nor is Indian domination over Kashmir. While the Timorese struggle against the Indonesian state is stressed, the struggle of the Achenese is ignored. These Muslim peoples have been struggling against oppression and domination since the 19th century, first against Dutch imperialism and later against its Indonesian surrogate state. Can the Shi'ites of Iraq and Bahrain (where they are oppressed majorities) and in Saudi Arabia (where they are an oppressed minority) be classified as "nations"? Or are religious distinctions not acceptable? There are other shortcomings in this short work on a long topic, but the overall point is instructive.
Conventional American public discourse utilizes images of Islamic resistant movements as intolerant and predisposed toward violence. While many contemporary movements do have a strong anti-Western sentiment, it is often qualified and in any case is a fairly recent phenomenon. If Arabs and Muslims are extremists in anything, I believe that it is in the patience and tolerance they have shown toward persistent Western interventions until very recently. Islamic movements have much more important characteristics than intolerance and violence. A central concept is social justice. In the West, where it is fashionable to be anti-social under the pretense that socialism is obsolete, it is easy to overlook calls for social justice and fixate instead on violent struggle. But seeing social movements only in terms of violence, real or imagined, is seeing them only in terms that are important to a narrow set of strategic interests.
I became deeply interested in this line of research around the time of the Persian Gulf Oil War in 1990-91. I was amazed at how readily the government and the corporate news media were able to rally public support for that senseless and destructive war. I was sickened by the grotesqueness of the war and the way academic experts and journalists self-righteously mimicked each other's stereotypes and biases in their inhuman depictions of "bad" Arabs and Muslims, while slavishly parroting the official public relations - fueled imagery of the "good" ones. I found it absolutely incredible that the persona of Saddam Hussein could be reworked from loyal proxy, during his murderous war against Iran, to Hitlerian demon after he became too big for his American britches. I thought to myself, Americans must be brain dead if they buy this. Many did. Not content with that as the sole
explanation, I set out to see how imagery could be reworked to expedite a shifting political econony. This article is largely about what I found.
One of the points I have tried to make is that Western civilization maintains a shifting array of images about Islam and Muslims. These images can be called upon as needed to explain, justify or simplify complex political, social and economic problems, whether they be international or domestic.
Notes
1. The best comprehensive discussion on the lineage of Western legal thought from the Crusades through modern legal treatment of Native Americans is Robert A. Williams, The American Indian in Western Legal Thought: The Discourses of Conquest (New York: Oxford University Press, 1990).
2. Robert F. Berkhofer, The White Man's Indian: Images of the American Indian from Columbus to the Present (New York: Vintage, 1979).
3. Ibid., 29.
4. Ibid., 30.
5. Ibid., 30-31.
6. For example: Norman Daniel, Islam and the West: The Making of an Image (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1961); Hichem Djait, Europe and Islam (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1985); Thierry Hentsch, Imagining the Middle East (Montreal: Black Rose, 1992); Edward Said, Orientalism, (New York: Vintage, 1979).
7. Edward Said, Orientalism (New York: Vintage, 1979).
8. Ibid., 301 and 322.
9. Ibid., 325-326.
10. Thierry Hentsch, Imagining the Middle East (Montreal: Black Rose, 1992).
11. Martin Bernal, Black Athena. The Afroasiatic Roots of Classical Civilization (New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers University Press, 1987).
12. Hentsch, op. cit., ix.
13. Ibid., x.
14. Ibid., xiv, emphasis in the original.
15. The passage appears in August C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eye Witnesses and Participants (Gloucester, Massachusetts: Peter Smith, 1958).
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid., and cf. Marshall Hodgson, Rethinking World History: Essays on Europe, Islam and World History (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1993).
18. In Krey, op. cit., 275.
19. In Norman Daniel, Heroes and Saracens: An Interpretation of the Chansons de Geste (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 1984).
20. In D.D.R. Owen, ed., The Song of Roland: The Oxford Text (London: Allen & Unwin, 1972), 75.
21. In Daniel, 1984, op. cit., 70.
22. These quotes are from David E. Stannard, American Holocaust: The Conquest of the New World (New York: Oxford University Press, 1992), 179. Stannard provides a particularly useful overview of the relationship between sex and violence in Western colonial discourse, especially in the section on "Sex, Race, and Holy War."
23. Karen Armstrong, Holy War: The Crusades and their Impact on Today's World (NewYork: Anchor, 1992), 230.
24. Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality: An Introduction (New York: Vintage, 1990).
25. Ibid., 58-59.
26. Ibid., 230.
27. In Stannard, op. cit., 253, cf. Douglas Kellner, The Persian Gulf TV War (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1992).
28. This story, including a case study of Puritan violence toward Indians, is well told by Francis Jennings, The Invasion of America: Indians, Colonialism, and the Cant of Conquest (New York: Norton, 1976).
29. Fuad Sha'ban, Islam and Arabs in Early American Thought: The Roots of Orientalism in America (Durham, North Carolina: The Acorn Press, 1991), 23-26.
30. In ibid., 20.
31. Ibid., 149.
32. Ibid., 183.
33. Henry Giroux provides a useful analysis of Aladdin and other Disney films as they relate to child development in America, in his essay "Are Disney Movies Good for Your Kids?" which can be found in the collection of essays edited by Shirley R. Steinberg and Joe L. Kinchloe, Kinderculture: The Corporate Construction of Cllildhood (Boulder, Colorado: Westview Press, 1997), 53-67.
34. Kellner, op. cit., 68-70.
35. For an explication of this thesis, see Joyce Nelson, The Perfect Machine: TV in the Nuclear Age (Toronto: Between the Lines, 1987).
36. Ward Churchill, Fantasies of the Master Race: Literature, Cinema and the Colonization of American Indians (Monroe, Maine: Common Courage Press, 1992), 245.
37. There is a growing genre of conspiracy literature espousing this thesis in the US, which has been recently heightened by an Israeli scholar working on a Congressional task force under President Bill Clinton, Yossef Bodansky. See in particular his book Target America: Terrorism in the U.S. Today (New York: Shapolsky, 1993). The same book with identical text is marketed outside the US under the title Target the West.
38. This was reported by Reuters on 20 April 1995. All quotes in this paragraph and the next were taken from this report.
39. This was reported in a series of news releases by the Associated Press on 20 April 1995.
40. See, for example, Crescent Intennational 1-15 May 1995.
41. This was reported by Reuters 20 April 1995; for a fuller account of the media circus, see the July/August 1995 issue of Extra!, the magazine of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting).
42. For a representative sample of this work, see the following: Edmund Ghareeb, ed. Split Vision: The Portrayal of Arabs in the American Media (Washington, DC: The American-Arab Affairs Council, 1983); Jack Shaheen, The TV Arab (Bowling Green, Ohio: Bowling Green State University Popular Press, 1984); Michael W. Suleiman, The Arabs in the Mind of America (Brattleboro, Vermont: Amana Books, 1988).
43. Herman's statements are taken from a piece he wrote in the November 1994 issue of Z Magazine.
44. Bernard Nietschmann, "The Third World War," Cultural Survival Quarterly 11, no. 3 (1987).
45. The relationship between language and politics, and especially the struggle over normative issues, is nicely detailed by Franke Wilmer, The Indigenous Voice in World Politics: From Time Immemorial (London: Sage Publications, 1993).
J. A. Progler, Winter 1997.
-----------------------------
[He is the Assistant Professor of Social Studies, School of Education, Brooklyn College at CUNY]
Acknowledgments:
This page is taken from http://ireland.iol.ie/~afifi/Articles/image.htm
Reflections on Black History Month
By Imam Zaid Shakir
Black History Month should be of interest to every Muslim -especially here in America. It is estimated that upwards to 20% of the Africans enslaved in the Americas were Muslim. [1] In some areas, such as the coast of the Carolinas, Georgia, and parts of Virginia, the percentages of Muslims in the slave population may have approached 40%. [2] The fact that the search of a random African American, Alex Haley, for his roots led him to a Muslim village in West Africa is indicative of the widespread Muslim presence among the enslaved population here in the Americas.
At this critical time in the history of our country, it is important for Muslims, whose legitimate existence in this country is being challenged in some quarters, to connect to our American Muslim roots. As Muslims, our story in this country did not begin with the coming of Syrians, Lebanese, Albanians, or Yemenis at the turn of the 20th Century and later. It began with those courageous African Muslim slaves whose blood, sweat, and tears were instrumental in building this country. Their struggle is our struggle, and our struggle should be a continuation of theirs.
In identifying with those African Muslims, we must not allow ourselves to forget that they were part of a greater community, a community which has evolved to almost fifty million African Americans. The struggle of that community, its pain, perseverance, triumphs, and defeats, cannot be separated from the struggle of its Muslim members. If we as Muslims are moved by the suffering of our coreligionists who were exposed to the dehumanizing cruelties of a vicious system, we should similarly be moved by the plight of their non-Muslim African brothers and sisters who suffered the same injustices.
We must also be moved to work with unwavering conviction to address, within the parameters of our organizational missions, the vestiges of institutional racism which continue to disproportionately affect African Americans and other racial minorities in this country. One statistic alone should be sufficient to alert us to the presence of such racism - 50% of this nation's 2.3 million incarcerated individuals come from her 12% African American population. Similarly discouraging statistics are found in areas ranging from access to higher education, teen pregnancies, high school dropout rates, youth homicides, and many other "quality of death" indicators.
African American Muslims have a particular responsibility in addressing such racism. In beginning to do so, we can take our lead from our formerly enslaved brothers. Despite their lack of freedom, many of them were never "owned." This fact is strikingly clear in their increasingly widespread biographies. Individuals such as Ayyub bin Sulayman (Job Ben Solomon), Ibrahim Abdul-Rahman, and Yarrow Mamout, to name a few, did not allow the ravages of chattel slavery to rob them of their dignity, honor, nor their human worth.
As we endeavor to address the imperfections of society, in race relations and other areas, we must do so with dignity, honor, grace, and with free and open minds. Those of us who hail from the historically oppressed minority communities of this land, must resist the temptation to allow the triumvirate of rage, a sense of victimization, and vengeance to distort our ability to calmly assess and then pragmatically address the many issues confronting us. When such a distortion occurs, delusional thinking and irrational politics usually result.
One of the greatest delusions challenging us lies in seeing our situation as paralleling that of our brothers and sisters in foreign lands governed by repressive, authoritarian regimes. By viewing our situation as parallel to theirs we are tempted to view the paradigm of resistance which governs their struggles as valid for our situation. Such an assessment is fallacious for a number of reasons.
First of all, most of the significant "Third World" liberation struggles pitted oppressed majorities against oppressive minorities. In this country, the white majority, and significant segments of the nonwhite minorities, are not so severely affected by structural violence or institutional racism that they view violent, or even aggressive challenges to the status quo as legitimate forms of political expression.
Secondly, alternative means of political expression, available in this country, are unavailable in most "third world" dictatorships or authoritarian oligarchies. Hence, the mechanisms whereby the Jews, by way of example, once a despised and demeaned minority in this country, were able to favorably situate themselves within the system, are not available in the previously referenced countries. Similarly, the progress achieved by African Americans in affirmative action, progress which has been steadily eroded, no doubt, could not have been hoped for by oppressed minorities in many other countries. Whether we view these realities as truly empowering or ultimately co-optive does not negate the fact that they do exist. And as long as they exist, they will be powerful mechanisms to damper the appeal and feasibility of radical challenges to the status quo.
Thirdly, while the feasibility of an aggressive, or even violent challenge to the status quo may be debatable in a small, minority-based, "third world" dictatorship, in a society as large, complex, diverse, and, ultimately, as politically conservative as the United States, such challenges would be used to legitimize severe repressive measures which would serve to render even milder forms of dissent less acceptable. While presented here in hypothetical terms, this is actually a recurrent lesson which American history has taught us.
The history of "third world" revolutionary change is no more encouraging. Frantz Fanon, in the Wretched of the Earth, his analysis of the Algerian decolonization struggle, saw decolonizing violence as a cathartic agent which would create a new liberated man. The sad reality created by that violence is documented by Fanon in the last chapter of his work. It led to a litany of mental disorders, which Fanon, a trained psychiatrist, documented all too well. Wreaked lives which the leaders of the nationalist struggle were ill-prepared to repair. Furthermore, thirty years later, the remnants of the nationalist regime which the revolution brought to power would be all too willing participants in a bloodbath that would rival anything the former French colonizers had visited upon the Algerian people.
Archbishop Dom Helder Camara, has pointed out that once a spiral of violence begins, it operates on its own internal logic. Injustice leads to revolt. Revolt induces repression. Repression leads to greater injustices, which in turn encourage more radical forms of revolt. These then induce more severe forms of repression. This spiral continues, unbroken. The challenge for theologians in this age, when the potential destructiveness of war is so great it threatens the very existence of our world, is to devise strategies which can meaningfully enhance our collective wellbeing by peacefully altering the mechanisms of structural violence and institutionalized racism. Muslim theologians, if we are truly "Heirs of the Prophets," Peace and Blessings of God be upon them, should not shy away from this challenge. However, in attempting to meet it, we must resist the temptation to resuscitate the failed strategies, stale ideas, and outdated methods of an ineffective "third world" revolution.
In a not too distant past, when standards of political correctness were more closely associated with truth, and not selfish and narrow political agendas, John Kennedy said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable." The great theologian Reinhold Niebubr declared, "In the social struggle we are either on the side of privilege or need." If these two white Americans, who were "privileged" in every sense of that somewhat trite expression, can advocate for the need to challenge oppressive social relations, it would be an unforgivable travesty for our voices to fall silent.
The question for us is, "How can we best address the oppressive mechanisms facing us, and those facing our coreligionists in so many redoubts scattered around the globe?" In answering this question, we can gain valuable insight from the lives and struggles of our African Muslim forebears. Superior erudition was the key to the liberation of Job Ben Solomon. Herein is a sign for us. As American Muslims we have been blessed to reside in the most intellectually dynamic society in history. Also, the primal command in our religion is to read. We should enthusiastically pursue the mandate created by these twin facts and push ourselves to become the most educated community on Earth -in religious and worldly knowledge. In so doing, the miracles which were so clearly manifested in the life of Job Ben Solomon will surely bless our lives.
The dignity, nobility, and erudition of Ibrahim 'Abd al-Rahman, qualities which earned him the epithet, "Prince," were instrumental in his liberation from the shackles of bondage. Our day is witnessing the steady degradation of our collective human dignity. We should be a community whose dignity and nobility readily impresses all who deal with us, and more importantly a community whose ethics are a reflection of the true value and depth of the prophetic teachings. Sadly, as Muslims, generally speaking, we have dishonored the prophetic legacy we have been entrusted with.
Our forefathers conquered lands with the loftiness of their character and ethics. We oftentimes repulse dignified outsiders who come into our midst. At the height of American chattel slavery, Yarrow Mamout, an elderly Muslim who had gained his freedom, so impressed the artist Charles Wilson Peale with his dignity, nobility, and grace that the latter, who painted six portraits of George Washington, was inspired to paint Mamout. Who among us would inspire a similarly placed artist today?
It is not the purpose of these ruminations to suggest a specific program of empowerment. Power, as the Qur'an emphatically affirms, is God's to give to whomsoever He chooses. [3] However, a deep knowledge of God, self, and society will certainly yield insights conducive to conformity to the divine ways God has established to invite His empowering grace upon a particular community. Furthermore, history affirms that dignity, nobility of character, and courage have been the indispensable characteristics of those who were able to take the oftentimes unpopular stands which helped to usher in fundamental change -by the Will of God.
In speaking of unpopular stands, we are not merely speaking of those which may place us in opposition to an unjust power structure, but similarly those which may place us in opposition to our race, tribe, class, or even our coreligionists. Popularity has never been a condition for greatness. However, the acts of a great woman may certainly render her popular to those whose lives are bettered by her acts.
In conclusion, Islam is calling us to be bigger than what the world has made us. If the world has made us members of a "disadvantaged" race, class, ethnicity, or gender, the world wants us to be dehumanized by the ensuing rage, sense of victimization, and a quest for vengeance. Perhaps the greatest manifestation of that dehumanization is the loss of hope. For our African Muslim ancestors enslaved in this land, Islam was always a source of hope, dignity, and for many, as we have mentioned, the key to their liberation. For those who never escaped the shackles of physical bondage, Islam provided the basis for their rising above the dehumanization of the chattel system. In the words of Dr. Sylviane A. Diouf, "The African Muslims may have been, in the Americas, the slaves of Christian masters, but their minds were free. They were the servants of Allah." [4] As they were, so too should we be.
Imam Zaid Shakir,
February 2004
Hayward, California
[1] See Sylviane A. Diouf, Servants of Allah: African Muslims Enslaved in the Americas, (New York, London: New York University Press, 1998) p. 48.
[2] Diouf, p. 47.
[3] See Al-Qur'an 3:26-27.
[4] Diouf, p. 210.
source: http://www.zaytuna.org/blackhistorymonth.html
The Muslim Population In The United States
Slave From the beginning of the cotton veil I held an oath as they made sail in the belly of the wooden whale That I would not fail to reach my home again All tied to the same chains with our new names, we remained- till our counted days. Listen to our call and hear the screams and pleas that one day we could be set free. God's promise to me. Out of it all we would come with great substance. Knowledge of, THE ONE.
OVERVIEW Muslim social scientists and researchers have spent a great deal of time trying to determine the number of Muslims in the United States. Most accept the estimate of from 5 million to 8 million. That is to say at least 5 million people in North America claim Islam as their religion and/or practice. What is represented in this report is based on estimates made in 1991, the World Almanac reports that Muslim in the United States number approximately 5,220,00. The total worldwide Muslim population is generally estimated at slightly more that 1 billion. David Barrett's publication, "International Bulletin of Missionary Research" cites a lower figure, 988,004,000.
An exact figure of Muslim population in the United States is very difficult to make. The figures presented here are based on available data.
In the United States, there are essentially three categories of Muslims: 1) immigrants; 2) American converts/reverts to Islam; and 3) those born to the first two groups as Muslims.
The immigrant population of the United States is relatively easy to document because the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Census Bureau, and other government agencies have been keeping records of immigrants. In order to arrive at our figures, we researched the history of Muslim ethnic groups around the world and then determined their percentage as Muslim. We then correlated this percentage with the number of Muslims in the United States, which enabled us to determine the percentage represented in the overall population.
Determining the number of indigenous Muslims was more difficult. In most cases, records have not been kept by any single source. To arrive at the number of American converts to Islam, we had to look at various groups' conversion rates and compare them against their mortality and fertility rates.
This is an on-going project, and AMC will keep the reader informed of new statistics through our quarterly publication, the AMC Report. The figures cited here represent a starting point for serious research on demographic data about the Muslim population of the United States.
U.S. Muslim Population Table Ethnic Grouping Population 1000 (1990) Percent of Total Muslim Population Definition of Terms
African-
American 2,100 42.0 African-Americans: Those persons of African descent native to the United States of America.
South Asians 1,220 24.4 South-Asians: Those of Indian/Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan, or Afghan descent now residing in the United States as citizens or permanent residents.
Arabs 620 12.4 Arabs: People from Arabic-speaking countries of the Middle East and North Africa who are permanent residents or citizens of the United States.
Africans 260 5.2 Africans: People from the African continent who are citizens or permanent residents of the United States
Iranians 180 3.6 Iranians: People of Persian descent, usually from Iran, who are citizens or permanent residents.
Turks 120 2.4 Turkish: People of Turkish descent who are citizens ro permanent residents.
South East Asians 100 2.0 South East Asians: People of Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Indochina, or the Phillippines.
American Whites 80 1.6 American Whites: Those of West European descent, who are native to the United States.
East Europeans 40 0.8 East Europeans: People from various regions of Eastern Europe.
Other 280 5.6 Other: All other groups.
Totals 5,000 100
Geographical Distribution: The table below represents a breakdown by states of the largest Muslim communities in the United States. It shows that there are an estimated 3.3. million Muslims in these states. The figure represents 62 percent of the estimated 5 million Muslims living in the United States.
Muslim State Population Table State Muslim Population
(1,000) Percentage Total Muslim Population Percent of Total State Population
California 1,000 20.0 3.4
New York 800 16.0 4.7
Illinois 420 8.4 3.6
New Jersey 200 4.0 2.5
Indiana 180 3.6 3.2
Michigan 170 3.4 1.8
Virginia 150 3.0 2.4
Texas 140 2.8 0.7
Ohio 130 2.6 1.2
Maryland 70 1.4 1.4
* Estimates under column 2 have been rounded to the nearest even number.
The list below shows the number of facilities used by Muslims for religious activities and community affairs: Mosques/Islamic Centers 843
Islamic Schools 165
Associations 426
Publications 89
There are 165 Islamic Schools in the United States, of which 92 are full time. Figures here for Masjids/Islamic Centers are based on our directory listings.
Note: The exact number of businesses owned and operated by Muslims is unavailable, but they are estimated in the thousands. These preliminary finding represent data collected during 1986-1992.
Information Resources African Presence in Early America by Ivan Van Sertima, 1987
Deeper Roots by Abdullah Hakim Quick, 1990
Arab America Today (A Demographic Profile of Arab Americans) By John Zogby, 1990
A Survey of North American Muslims by El Tigani A. Abugideiri, June 1977
A Century of Islam in America by Yvonne Y. Haddad, 1986
Ethnic Distribution of American Muslims and selected Socio Economic Characteristics by Arif Ghayrur, 1984
The Demography of Islamic Nations by John Weeks, 1988
Islam in the United States: Review of Sources by Dr. Sulayman S. Nyang, 1988
Demographic Consequences of Minority Consciousness: An analysis By Salaha M. Abedin, 1980
World Population Data Sheet Population Reference Bureau, Inc. Washington DC, 1990
Statistical Abstract of the United States U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census, 1990
Muslim Peoples , A World Ethnographic Survey Edited by Richard V. Weeks, 1984, vol. II
Muslim Peoples, a World Ethnographic Survey by Richard V. Weeks, 1978
The 1991 Almanac 44th Edition , by Houghnton Mifflin Company, 1991
The Islamic Society of North America Directory of Islamic Centers, Schools, Masjids, and MSA Chapters 1989 Revised Edition
The Islamic Struggle in America by Hijrah Magazine, Oct./Nov. 1985
Seven Muslim Slaves by Abdul Hakim Muhammad 1983
Prince Among Slaves by Terry Alford, 1977
Nature Knows no Color Line by J.A. Rogers, 1952
African Muslims in Antebellum American by Allen Austin, 1984
The Arab World Published by the Arab-American Press, 1945
The United States and the Sultanate of Oman Produce by the Sultan Qaboos Center, The Middle East Institute Washington DC, 1990
The University of Alabama, A Pictorial History by Suzanne Rau Wolfe History of the First Muslim Mosque of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania by Jameelah A. Hakim, 1989
Reference: American Muslim Council (AMC)
OVERVIEW Muslim social scientists and researchers have spent a great deal of time trying to determine the number of Muslims in the United States. Most accept the estimate of from 5 million to 8 million. That is to say at least 5 million people in North America claim Islam as their religion and/or practice. What is represented in this report is based on estimates made in 1991, the World Almanac reports that Muslim in the United States number approximately 5,220,00. The total worldwide Muslim population is generally estimated at slightly more that 1 billion. David Barrett's publication, "International Bulletin of Missionary Research" cites a lower figure, 988,004,000.
An exact figure of Muslim population in the United States is very difficult to make. The figures presented here are based on available data.
In the United States, there are essentially three categories of Muslims: 1) immigrants; 2) American converts/reverts to Islam; and 3) those born to the first two groups as Muslims.
The immigrant population of the United States is relatively easy to document because the Immigration and Naturalization Service, the Census Bureau, and other government agencies have been keeping records of immigrants. In order to arrive at our figures, we researched the history of Muslim ethnic groups around the world and then determined their percentage as Muslim. We then correlated this percentage with the number of Muslims in the United States, which enabled us to determine the percentage represented in the overall population.
Determining the number of indigenous Muslims was more difficult. In most cases, records have not been kept by any single source. To arrive at the number of American converts to Islam, we had to look at various groups' conversion rates and compare them against their mortality and fertility rates.
This is an on-going project, and AMC will keep the reader informed of new statistics through our quarterly publication, the AMC Report. The figures cited here represent a starting point for serious research on demographic data about the Muslim population of the United States.
U.S. Muslim Population Table Ethnic Grouping Population 1000 (1990) Percent of Total Muslim Population Definition of Terms
African-
American 2,100 42.0 African-Americans: Those persons of African descent native to the United States of America.
South Asians 1,220 24.4 South-Asians: Those of Indian/Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan, or Afghan descent now residing in the United States as citizens or permanent residents.
Arabs 620 12.4 Arabs: People from Arabic-speaking countries of the Middle East and North Africa who are permanent residents or citizens of the United States.
Africans 260 5.2 Africans: People from the African continent who are citizens or permanent residents of the United States
Iranians 180 3.6 Iranians: People of Persian descent, usually from Iran, who are citizens or permanent residents.
Turks 120 2.4 Turkish: People of Turkish descent who are citizens ro permanent residents.
South East Asians 100 2.0 South East Asians: People of Thailand, Malaysia, Indonesia, Indochina, or the Phillippines.
American Whites 80 1.6 American Whites: Those of West European descent, who are native to the United States.
East Europeans 40 0.8 East Europeans: People from various regions of Eastern Europe.
Other 280 5.6 Other: All other groups.
Totals 5,000 100
Geographical Distribution: The table below represents a breakdown by states of the largest Muslim communities in the United States. It shows that there are an estimated 3.3. million Muslims in these states. The figure represents 62 percent of the estimated 5 million Muslims living in the United States.
Muslim State Population Table State Muslim Population
(1,000) Percentage Total Muslim Population Percent of Total State Population
California 1,000 20.0 3.4
New York 800 16.0 4.7
Illinois 420 8.4 3.6
New Jersey 200 4.0 2.5
Indiana 180 3.6 3.2
Michigan 170 3.4 1.8
Virginia 150 3.0 2.4
Texas 140 2.8 0.7
Ohio 130 2.6 1.2
Maryland 70 1.4 1.4
* Estimates under column 2 have been rounded to the nearest even number.
The list below shows the number of facilities used by Muslims for religious activities and community affairs: Mosques/Islamic Centers 843
Islamic Schools 165
Associations 426
Publications 89
There are 165 Islamic Schools in the United States, of which 92 are full time. Figures here for Masjids/Islamic Centers are based on our directory listings.
Note: The exact number of businesses owned and operated by Muslims is unavailable, but they are estimated in the thousands. These preliminary finding represent data collected during 1986-1992.
Information Resources African Presence in Early America by Ivan Van Sertima, 1987
Deeper Roots by Abdullah Hakim Quick, 1990
Arab America Today (A Demographic Profile of Arab Americans) By John Zogby, 1990
A Survey of North American Muslims by El Tigani A. Abugideiri, June 1977
A Century of Islam in America by Yvonne Y. Haddad, 1986
Ethnic Distribution of American Muslims and selected Socio Economic Characteristics by Arif Ghayrur, 1984
The Demography of Islamic Nations by John Weeks, 1988
Islam in the United States: Review of Sources by Dr. Sulayman S. Nyang, 1988
Demographic Consequences of Minority Consciousness: An analysis By Salaha M. Abedin, 1980
World Population Data Sheet Population Reference Bureau, Inc. Washington DC, 1990
Statistical Abstract of the United States U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census, 1990
Muslim Peoples , A World Ethnographic Survey Edited by Richard V. Weeks, 1984, vol. II
Muslim Peoples, a World Ethnographic Survey by Richard V. Weeks, 1978
The 1991 Almanac 44th Edition , by Houghnton Mifflin Company, 1991
The Islamic Society of North America Directory of Islamic Centers, Schools, Masjids, and MSA Chapters 1989 Revised Edition
The Islamic Struggle in America by Hijrah Magazine, Oct./Nov. 1985
Seven Muslim Slaves by Abdul Hakim Muhammad 1983
Prince Among Slaves by Terry Alford, 1977
Nature Knows no Color Line by J.A. Rogers, 1952
African Muslims in Antebellum American by Allen Austin, 1984
The Arab World Published by the Arab-American Press, 1945
The United States and the Sultanate of Oman Produce by the Sultan Qaboos Center, The Middle East Institute Washington DC, 1990
The University of Alabama, A Pictorial History by Suzanne Rau Wolfe History of the First Muslim Mosque of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania by Jameelah A. Hakim, 1989
Reference: American Muslim Council (AMC)
Alcohol - A Disease?
by Ahmed Deedat
If alcoholism is a disease then it is the only disease that is sold in bottles
is advertised in newspapers, magazines, radios and television
is contracted by the will of man
has licensed outlets to spread it
produces revenue for the government
brings violent deaths on the highways
has no germs or viral cause
propels one's health to self-destruction
destroys family life and increases crime.
IT IS NOT A DISEASE - IT IS A SATAN'S HANDIWORK DON'T DRINK. Fire in your bellies! "Alcohol paralyses the senses, makes one lurch, and vomit, extinguishes the feeble glimmer of reason which flickers in our poor minds. It soon overcomes the strongest man, and turns him into a raging beast who with empurpled face and bloodshot eyes, bellows forth oaths and threats against his surroundings and insults imaginary enemies. Never in any animal species, not among pigs, nor jackals, nor donkeys, is such ignominy to be found. The ugliest thing in creation is the drunkard, a repulsive being, the sight of whom makes one ashamed to belong to the same living species." (Dr Charles Richet, Paris - Nobel Prize Winner of Physiology) "O ye who belive! Intoxicants and gambling...Are an abomination, - of Satan's handiwork: Shun such (abomination), That ye may prosper." - (Holy Quran 5:93) DON'T DRINK!
If alcoholism is a disease then it is the only disease that is sold in bottles
is advertised in newspapers, magazines, radios and television
is contracted by the will of man
has licensed outlets to spread it
produces revenue for the government
brings violent deaths on the highways
has no germs or viral cause
propels one's health to self-destruction
destroys family life and increases crime.
IT IS NOT A DISEASE - IT IS A SATAN'S HANDIWORK DON'T DRINK. Fire in your bellies! "Alcohol paralyses the senses, makes one lurch, and vomit, extinguishes the feeble glimmer of reason which flickers in our poor minds. It soon overcomes the strongest man, and turns him into a raging beast who with empurpled face and bloodshot eyes, bellows forth oaths and threats against his surroundings and insults imaginary enemies. Never in any animal species, not among pigs, nor jackals, nor donkeys, is such ignominy to be found. The ugliest thing in creation is the drunkard, a repulsive being, the sight of whom makes one ashamed to belong to the same living species." (Dr Charles Richet, Paris - Nobel Prize Winner of Physiology) "O ye who belive! Intoxicants and gambling...Are an abomination, - of Satan's handiwork: Shun such (abomination), That ye may prosper." - (Holy Quran 5:93) DON'T DRINK!
The lost city of Ubar
Feb. 5, 1992...The lost city of Ubar, called "the Atlantis of the Sands" by Lawrence of Arabia, has been found in remote southern Oman using pictures taken from space shuttle Challenger, explorers said Tuesday.
The researchers speculate that the city may have been the earliest known shipping center for frankincense, a fragrant gum resin harvested farther south. The researchers have to overcome sandstorms and deadly vipers to locate the city's octagon-shaped stone walls, 6- to 8-foot-tall remnants of seven of its eight 30-foot-tall mud-brick towers, various rooms, frankincense burners and thousands of pieces of pottery.
Researchers found the city by tracing ancient desert roads detected in pictures taken from several spacecraft, including radar and optical cameras carried by Challenger in October 1984, said Ronald Blom, a geologist at NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory in Pasadena. Evidence indicates that the city fell into a sinkhole created when an underground limestone cavern collapsed. According to legend, Ubar was destroyed during a disaster about C.E. 100 and was buried by sand. The city probably had fewer than 100 residents, but was surrounded by numerous campsites marked by pottery, firepits and charcoal.
Previous efforts to find Ubar in Oman's dunes failed in 1930, 1947 and 1953.
The lost city's relationship with the nation of 'Ad as mentioned in the Holy Quran is unclear.
Below is just one reference to the people of 'Ad in the Holy Quran.
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
By the Break of Day; By the Nights twice five; By the Even and Odd (contrasted); And by the Night when it passeth away; Is there (not) in these an adjuration (or evidence) for those who understand? Seest thou not how thy Lord dealt with the `Ad (people); Of the (city of) Iram, with lofty pillars; The like of which were not produced in (all) the land? And with the Thamud (people), who cut out (huge) rocks in the valley? And with Pharaoh, Lord of Stakes? (All) these transgressed Beyond bounds in the lands. And heaped therein Mischief (on mischief). Therefore did thy Lord pour on them a scourge of diverse chastisement: For thy Lord is (As a Guardian) on a watch-tower. (Holy Quran,Surah Al-Fajr, The Dawn,89:1-89:14)
The ancient 'Ad are called 'Ad Iram for the reason that they belonged to that branch of the Semitic race which descended from Iram, son of Shem, son of Noah (peace be on him).
If the above city was destroyed around 100 C.E., then it can not be the city of ancient 'Ad, to whom Prophet Hud (p.b.u.h.) was sent.
Acknowledgment: The picture is taken from NASA's page. Read the full story at http://observe.ivv.nasa.gov/nasa/exhibits/ubar/ubar_0.html
compiled by Ishaq Zahid
Powerball is Fireball
July 31, 1998: CNN Reports:
A group of 13 machine shop workers from a plant in Ohio has won the Powerball jackpot. They work at this automation tooling system facility in Westerville, Ohio, and the winning ticket was one of the 130 tickets they bought at a gas station in Richmond, Indiana. Each of the winners, who call themselves the "Lucky 13" will get more than $12 million, that's before taxes. (end of CNN quote)
While there are some benefits in lottery, the harm is far greater. All types of gambling, including lottery are forbidden in Islam. Don't let the powerball turn into fireball for you. Do not gamble. Do not buy lottery tickets. Do not buy raffles either. Give money for charity, but don't taint it with raffle tickets. Are you giving the money for the sake of God or for the sake of the prize? Do you believe in God and want to obey Him? If the answer is yes, read on.
Here are a few verses from the Quran to help us.
002.219 They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In them is great sin, and
some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit." They ask thee how much
they are to spend; Say: "What is beyond your needs." Thus doth God Make clear to
you His Signs: In order that ye may consider-
005.093 O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and
(divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such
(abomination), that ye may prosper.
005.094 Satan's plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred between you, with
intoxicants and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of God, and from
prayer: will ye not then abstain?
005.095 Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and beware (of evil): if ye do turn back,
know ye that it is Our Apostle's duty to proclaim (the message) in the clearest
manner.
005.101 Know ye that God is strict in punishment and that God is Oft-forgiving,
Most Merciful.
005.102 The Apostle's duty is but to proclaim (the message). But God knoweth all
that ye reveal and ye conceal.
005.103 Say: "Not equal are things that are bad and things that are good, even though
the abundance of the bad may dazzle thee; so fear God, O ye that understand; that (so)
ye may prosper."
A group of 13 machine shop workers from a plant in Ohio has won the Powerball jackpot. They work at this automation tooling system facility in Westerville, Ohio, and the winning ticket was one of the 130 tickets they bought at a gas station in Richmond, Indiana. Each of the winners, who call themselves the "Lucky 13" will get more than $12 million, that's before taxes. (end of CNN quote)
While there are some benefits in lottery, the harm is far greater. All types of gambling, including lottery are forbidden in Islam. Don't let the powerball turn into fireball for you. Do not gamble. Do not buy lottery tickets. Do not buy raffles either. Give money for charity, but don't taint it with raffle tickets. Are you giving the money for the sake of God or for the sake of the prize? Do you believe in God and want to obey Him? If the answer is yes, read on.
Here are a few verses from the Quran to help us.
002.219 They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In them is great sin, and
some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit." They ask thee how much
they are to spend; Say: "What is beyond your needs." Thus doth God Make clear to
you His Signs: In order that ye may consider-
005.093 O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and
(divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan's handwork: eschew such
(abomination), that ye may prosper.
005.094 Satan's plan is (but) to excite enmity and hatred between you, with
intoxicants and gambling, and hinder you from the remembrance of God, and from
prayer: will ye not then abstain?
005.095 Obey God, and obey the Apostle, and beware (of evil): if ye do turn back,
know ye that it is Our Apostle's duty to proclaim (the message) in the clearest
manner.
005.101 Know ye that God is strict in punishment and that God is Oft-forgiving,
Most Merciful.
005.102 The Apostle's duty is but to proclaim (the message). But God knoweth all
that ye reveal and ye conceal.
005.103 Say: "Not equal are things that are bad and things that are good, even though
the abundance of the bad may dazzle thee; so fear God, O ye that understand; that (so)
ye may prosper."
Homosexuality
Homosexuality and Lesbianism have no place in Islam. This issue is clear from the primary source of Islam, The Holy Quran. No Muslim scholar, Imam or a leader of a Muslim community can alter this injunction. A person committing such an act is in violation of God's Law and should seek repentence before God gives up on him or her. As the following verses tell us, it was the people of prophet Lot (peace be on him) who started this evil act and were severly punished by God.
We also (sent) Lut: he said to his people: "Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? "For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds." And his people gave no answer but this: they said, "drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!" But We saved him and his family, except his wife: she was of those who lagged behind. And We rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin and crime! (The Holy Quran, 7:80-84)
Let us all pray that God will spare us from His wrath. Let us pray that we will be among those to whom He has favored and not among those who have gone astray. Ameen.
We also (sent) Lut: he said to his people: "Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? "For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds." And his people gave no answer but this: they said, "drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!" But We saved him and his family, except his wife: she was of those who lagged behind. And We rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): then see what was the end of those who indulged in sin and crime! (The Holy Quran, 7:80-84)
Let us all pray that God will spare us from His wrath. Let us pray that we will be among those to whom He has favored and not among those who have gone astray. Ameen.
NO ALCOHOL, ABSOLUTELY AND POSITIVELY!
Alcohol is a leading cause of traffic accidents and family disintegration in the United States. Of the 17,126 people killed in alcohol-related crashes in 1996, 3,732 involved drivers with blood-alcohol levels of under .10 percent, according to government statistics. A study done recently states that a small amount of alcohol consumption (2-3 glasses?) has some benefits for the heart. However, its evil far exceeds its good. Another medical study suggests that men who drink can cause birth defects to their babies. Is that so? According to a 10-year German study babies born with fetal alcohol syndrome suffer long-lasting brain damage, though many physical deformities diminsh over time. According to a 1988 study by the American Medical Association (AMA), it has been found that 100,000 deaths and $85.8 billion are linked to the abuse of alcohol, with 25 to 40 percent of hospital beds being occupied by people being treated for complications from alcoholism. This cost is more than that for drugs and tobacco put together. The question is are we prepared to pay this enormous cost? Should all of us share this cost equally? Should there be a tax on alcohol so that the health care costs of alcoholism are paid by its drinkers? Many states have raised the drinking age to 21, hoping to reduce fatalities. Should older people be allowed to drink, while forbidding the young adults? What does Stormin' Normin have to say about Desert Storm and alcohol? Does Allah, the God of all mankind, allow us to drink? Let us first talk about the age barriers and alcohol.
O you who believe! Why say you that which you don't do yourself? It is most hateful in the sight of God that you say that which you don't do yourself. (61:2-3)
It seems hypocritical for older people to restrict young adults from drinking while they themselves drink. This would be like a thief presiding as a judge at a burglary trial, a criminal acting as a policeman, or a sinner assuming the role of a preacher. The drinking age in most states has been raised to 21, on the grounds that, according to statistical evidence, younger drunken drivers cause more accidents than older ones. A visit to area hospitals can serve as an eye opener. Many patients have been paralyzed due to traffic accidents involving drunken drivers. I personally know of three Muslims who were victims of such accidents and had to be hospitalized. Laws banning or regulating the use of alcohol have accomplished very little. Society must have the will to rid itself from alcohol and its harmful effects. Individuals must practice self-restraint. Adults, in particular, must teach by example and practice what they preach.
Prophet Muhammad ( S.A.W.) said: "On the day of judgement a man will be brought and thrown into Hell; as a result of this his intestines will come out of his belly, and he will go circling holding his intestines like a donkey running a mill. His companions in Hell will come to him: 'O! So and So! What is this? Did you not ask people to do good and avoid vice?' He will say: 'That is so. I enjoined others to do good, but did not do it myself; and I forbade them to do evil but did it myself.' (Riyadh-us-Saleheen, Ch.24, No. 198)
Islam prohibits all intoxicants including wine and beer. This prohibition applies to all places at all times. People who believe in God obey Him and do not drink. Can you imagine Jesus, Moses, Jacob or Abraham getting intoxicated? These pious men were far above such foolishness. They were high and exalted, not by drugs and alcohol, but by their good deeds and noble aims.
MEN, ALCOHOL, AND BABIES!
June 8, 1991, 6pm news broadcast, reported by Leslie Lyles of local ABC TV...... A research study conducted by a Chicago doctor says that men who drink alcohol can cause birth defects to their babies. The study was done over a 12-year span. Doctors recommend that men avoid drinking alcohol for 2 to 3 months prior to conception. Shouldn't we raise the drinking age to 70 something? Listen, people, to what Allah says in The Quran:
"O ye who believe! Strong drinks and games of chance and idols and divining of arrows are only an infamy of Satan's handiwork. Leave them aside in order that ye may succeed. Satan seeketh only to cast among you enmity and hatred by means of strong drinks and games of chance, and turn you from remembrance of Allah and from His worship. So will ye not then abstain?" (5:90-91)
Alcohol Syndrome May Result in Long term Brain Damage!
Thursday, April 8, 1993, London by Associated Press .......According to a 10-year German study babies born with fetal alcohol syndrome suffer long-lasting brain damage, though many physical deformities diminsh over time. Doctors have suspected that fetal alcohol syndrome -- a condition associated with exposure to alcohol in the womb - causes chronic emotional and intellectual damage. But few scientists have traced affected children from birth to adolescence. The new study shows many of the physical deformities disappeared with time, but an array of emotional disturbances persisted, said Dr. Hans-Ludwig Sophr, a pediatrician at Rittberg Hospital of the German Red Cross in Berlin. Fetal alcohol syndrome, which strikes one to two babies in every 1,000 live births worldwide, describes a collection of features including a small head, stunted growth and delayed mental development. Doctors do not know the precise level of alcohol that damages the fetus. The study is being published in the April 10 issue of The Lancet, a medical journal. "This is an important study to document what's been reported anecdotally," said Dr. George Brennaman, a pediatrician at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland. Brennaman is associate director of the Center for American Indian and Alaskan Native Health. Fetal alcohol syndrome is two to three times as common among American Indians compared to the general population. Brennaman said he recommends abstinence during pregnancy. German investigators traced 36 boys and 24 girls born with fetal alcohol syndrome between 1977 and 1979. Doctors examined and scored babies according to the extent of physical and neurological damage shortly after birth and again about 10 years later. "...So will ye not abstain?"
$85.8 billion, 100,000 deaths and Alcohol
A study by the American Medical Association (1988)
According to a 1988 study by the American Medical Association (AMA), it has been found that 100,000 deaths and $85.8 billion are linked to the abuse of alcohol, with 25 to 40 percent of hospital beds being occupied by people being treated for complications from alcoholism. This cost is more than that for drugs and tobacco put together. The question is are we prepared to pay this enormous cost? Should all of us share this cost equally? Should there be a tax on alcohol so that the health care costs of alcoholism are paid by its drinkers? Would Anheuser-Busch allow you to enact such a law? Would such a tax suddenly become an infringement on your basic right to free speech etc. Personally, I would favor such a law since I do not drink and do not want my tax dollars spent on the care of drunken drivers. The rising cost of health care is arguably this nation's Number ONE problem. Every time you buy an American car, $500 go towards the health care of the the workers. The comparable figure is about $50 for Japan. So for two cars of the same price, you get that much less quality in an American car on the basis of health care alone. (Capacity utilization and the credit crunch cause a greater difference.) So do you and I want to pay for a problem that occupies 25 to 40 of hospital beds?
Here is the complete article:
CHICAGO (UPI) -- The American Medical Association Monday estimated lifestyle factors and social problems add $171 billion to the nation's health care bill. Dr. Daniel Johnson Jr., speaker of the AMA's House of Delegates, said billions of dollars are spent each year on medical conditions caused by violence, drug abuse, tobacco and alcohol -- all of which could be avoided. An AMA study of statistics from 1988 -- the last year for which statistics are available -- found 500,000 premature deaths annually and $22 billion in health care costs are directly attributable to cigarettes and other uses of tobacco. The study found 100,000 deaths and $85.8 billion linked to abuse of alcohol, with 25 to 40 percent of hospital beds being occupied by people being treated for complications from alcoholism. The AMA estimated drug abuse costs the system $58.3 billion for care, treatment and rehabilitation, as well as for lost productivity and crime enforcement. Street and domestic violence add $5.3 billion to U.S. health costs and are the fastest growing public health problems, Johnson said. The study also examined communicable and sexually transmitted diseases and found medical care for HIV-infected patients alone will total $15.2 billion by 1995. Some 400,000 people die annually as a result of failure to use such things as seat belts and smoke detectors, the study found. Other factors include failure to screen for and treat life-threatening diseases and treatable malignancies, dangerous recreational activities, abuse of addictive substances and engaging in unprotected sex. Other factors in the study include defensive medicine, which cost the system $15.1 billion in 1989. The study found per capita health care costs for those under the age of 65 are 72 percent of the national average, while per capita costs for those 85 and over are 750 percent of the national average. It also found that insurance protects most Americans from the real costs and therefore discourages cost-conscious decisions. ``We've known for years that these factors have been driving health care costs up,'' Johnson said. ``We cannot sucessfully resolve our current health care crisis unless we are willing to alter damaging patterns of behavior.''
STORMIN' NORMIN ON BEER
June 13, 1991... Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, the commander of allied forces in the Persian Gulf War, told Congress that a lack of alcohol in the Gulf region made his troops better warriors. "Our sick call rate went down, our accident and injury rate went down, our incidents of indiscipline went down, and health of the force went up," the four-star general said. "So there were some very therapeutic outcomes from the fact that no alcohol was available whatsoever in the kingdom."
ALCOHOL HERE = tinat al-khabal in the HEREAFTER
A man from Yemen once asked the Prophet about a liquor made from millet called mizr which people drank in his country. The Prophet asked whether it was intoxicating and when the man replied in the affirmative, the Prophet(pbuh) said "Every intoxicant is prohibited. Allah has made a covenant regarding those who drink intoxicants to give them some tinat al-khabal to drink." He was asked what that was and he replied that it was the sweat of the inhabitants of hell, or the discharge of the inhabitants of hell. (Muslim) He who drinks alcohol ( wine,liquor or beer) in this world will be made to drink poison from Asawida (black and poisonous snakes) that will cause both the skin and the flesh of his face to fall into the vessel he drinks from. God Almighty shall accept neither the fasting, prayers nor even the pilgrimage of the one who drinks, brews, sells, or uses money obtained from selling alcohol unless he or she sincerely repents, vowing never to commit that evil again, and Allah accepts his or her repentance. Otherwise, that person will be made to drink the pus of Hell for every single drop of alcohol he or she had imbibed in this world.
Abdullah bin Umar related that the Prophet(pbuh) said: "Do not sit together with drinkers, nor visit them when they are sick. Do not even attend their funerals. The drinkers of alcohol shall come on the Last Day with black faces, their tongues leaning on one side and sliva coming out of their mouths. Anyone who sees their filthy appearance will know that they were the drinkers of alcohol." Wa'il al-Hadrami said that Tariq bin Suwaid asked the Prophet(pbuh) about wine and the Prophet(pbuh) forbade him. When Tariq told him that he made it only as a medicine, the Prophet(pbuh) replied, "It is not a medicine but a disease." (Muslim) Jabir reported the Messenger of Allah as saying "If a large amount of anything causes intoxication, a small amount of it is also prohibited." (Tirmidhi, Abu Daud and Ibn Majah)
In closing, let us hope that the followers of the prophets of God, be they Muslims, Christians or Jews, will abstain from all intoxicants and find true meaning in their own lives.
REFERENCES:
Prohibition of Alcohol in Islam, by Muhammad Samiullah (Pakistan), The Message International, Oct. - Dec. 1987, pp. 18 - 20; published by ICNA, 166-26, 89th Avenue, Jamaica, New York 11432.
by: Muhammad Ishaq Zahid Feb 25, 1998 updated: May 27, 98
"Alcohol paralyses the senses, makes one lurch, and vomit, extinguishes the feeble glimmer of reason which flickers in our poor minds. It soon overcomes the strongest man, and turns him into a raging beast who with empurpled face and bloodshot eyes, bellows forth oaths and threats against his surroundings and insults imaginary enemies. Never in any animal species, not among pigs, nor jackals, nor donkeys, is such ignominy to be found. The ugliest thing in creation is the drunkard, a repulsive being, the sight of whom makes one ashamed to belong to the same living species." (Dr Charles Richet, Paris - Nobel Prize Winner of Physiology)
"O ye who belive! Intoxicants and gambling...Are an abomination, - of Satan's handiwork: Shun such (abomination), That ye may prosper." - (Holy Quran 5:93)
O you who believe! Why say you that which you don't do yourself? It is most hateful in the sight of God that you say that which you don't do yourself. (61:2-3)
It seems hypocritical for older people to restrict young adults from drinking while they themselves drink. This would be like a thief presiding as a judge at a burglary trial, a criminal acting as a policeman, or a sinner assuming the role of a preacher. The drinking age in most states has been raised to 21, on the grounds that, according to statistical evidence, younger drunken drivers cause more accidents than older ones. A visit to area hospitals can serve as an eye opener. Many patients have been paralyzed due to traffic accidents involving drunken drivers. I personally know of three Muslims who were victims of such accidents and had to be hospitalized. Laws banning or regulating the use of alcohol have accomplished very little. Society must have the will to rid itself from alcohol and its harmful effects. Individuals must practice self-restraint. Adults, in particular, must teach by example and practice what they preach.
Prophet Muhammad ( S.A.W.) said: "On the day of judgement a man will be brought and thrown into Hell; as a result of this his intestines will come out of his belly, and he will go circling holding his intestines like a donkey running a mill. His companions in Hell will come to him: 'O! So and So! What is this? Did you not ask people to do good and avoid vice?' He will say: 'That is so. I enjoined others to do good, but did not do it myself; and I forbade them to do evil but did it myself.' (Riyadh-us-Saleheen, Ch.24, No. 198)
Islam prohibits all intoxicants including wine and beer. This prohibition applies to all places at all times. People who believe in God obey Him and do not drink. Can you imagine Jesus, Moses, Jacob or Abraham getting intoxicated? These pious men were far above such foolishness. They were high and exalted, not by drugs and alcohol, but by their good deeds and noble aims.
MEN, ALCOHOL, AND BABIES!
June 8, 1991, 6pm news broadcast, reported by Leslie Lyles of local ABC TV...... A research study conducted by a Chicago doctor says that men who drink alcohol can cause birth defects to their babies. The study was done over a 12-year span. Doctors recommend that men avoid drinking alcohol for 2 to 3 months prior to conception. Shouldn't we raise the drinking age to 70 something? Listen, people, to what Allah says in The Quran:
"O ye who believe! Strong drinks and games of chance and idols and divining of arrows are only an infamy of Satan's handiwork. Leave them aside in order that ye may succeed. Satan seeketh only to cast among you enmity and hatred by means of strong drinks and games of chance, and turn you from remembrance of Allah and from His worship. So will ye not then abstain?" (5:90-91)
Alcohol Syndrome May Result in Long term Brain Damage!
Thursday, April 8, 1993, London by Associated Press .......According to a 10-year German study babies born with fetal alcohol syndrome suffer long-lasting brain damage, though many physical deformities diminsh over time. Doctors have suspected that fetal alcohol syndrome -- a condition associated with exposure to alcohol in the womb - causes chronic emotional and intellectual damage. But few scientists have traced affected children from birth to adolescence. The new study shows many of the physical deformities disappeared with time, but an array of emotional disturbances persisted, said Dr. Hans-Ludwig Sophr, a pediatrician at Rittberg Hospital of the German Red Cross in Berlin. Fetal alcohol syndrome, which strikes one to two babies in every 1,000 live births worldwide, describes a collection of features including a small head, stunted growth and delayed mental development. Doctors do not know the precise level of alcohol that damages the fetus. The study is being published in the April 10 issue of The Lancet, a medical journal. "This is an important study to document what's been reported anecdotally," said Dr. George Brennaman, a pediatrician at Johns Hopkins University in Maryland. Brennaman is associate director of the Center for American Indian and Alaskan Native Health. Fetal alcohol syndrome is two to three times as common among American Indians compared to the general population. Brennaman said he recommends abstinence during pregnancy. German investigators traced 36 boys and 24 girls born with fetal alcohol syndrome between 1977 and 1979. Doctors examined and scored babies according to the extent of physical and neurological damage shortly after birth and again about 10 years later. "...So will ye not abstain?"
$85.8 billion, 100,000 deaths and Alcohol
A study by the American Medical Association (1988)
According to a 1988 study by the American Medical Association (AMA), it has been found that 100,000 deaths and $85.8 billion are linked to the abuse of alcohol, with 25 to 40 percent of hospital beds being occupied by people being treated for complications from alcoholism. This cost is more than that for drugs and tobacco put together. The question is are we prepared to pay this enormous cost? Should all of us share this cost equally? Should there be a tax on alcohol so that the health care costs of alcoholism are paid by its drinkers? Would Anheuser-Busch allow you to enact such a law? Would such a tax suddenly become an infringement on your basic right to free speech etc. Personally, I would favor such a law since I do not drink and do not want my tax dollars spent on the care of drunken drivers. The rising cost of health care is arguably this nation's Number ONE problem. Every time you buy an American car, $500 go towards the health care of the the workers. The comparable figure is about $50 for Japan. So for two cars of the same price, you get that much less quality in an American car on the basis of health care alone. (Capacity utilization and the credit crunch cause a greater difference.) So do you and I want to pay for a problem that occupies 25 to 40 of hospital beds?
Here is the complete article:
CHICAGO (UPI) -- The American Medical Association Monday estimated lifestyle factors and social problems add $171 billion to the nation's health care bill. Dr. Daniel Johnson Jr., speaker of the AMA's House of Delegates, said billions of dollars are spent each year on medical conditions caused by violence, drug abuse, tobacco and alcohol -- all of which could be avoided. An AMA study of statistics from 1988 -- the last year for which statistics are available -- found 500,000 premature deaths annually and $22 billion in health care costs are directly attributable to cigarettes and other uses of tobacco. The study found 100,000 deaths and $85.8 billion linked to abuse of alcohol, with 25 to 40 percent of hospital beds being occupied by people being treated for complications from alcoholism. The AMA estimated drug abuse costs the system $58.3 billion for care, treatment and rehabilitation, as well as for lost productivity and crime enforcement. Street and domestic violence add $5.3 billion to U.S. health costs and are the fastest growing public health problems, Johnson said. The study also examined communicable and sexually transmitted diseases and found medical care for HIV-infected patients alone will total $15.2 billion by 1995. Some 400,000 people die annually as a result of failure to use such things as seat belts and smoke detectors, the study found. Other factors include failure to screen for and treat life-threatening diseases and treatable malignancies, dangerous recreational activities, abuse of addictive substances and engaging in unprotected sex. Other factors in the study include defensive medicine, which cost the system $15.1 billion in 1989. The study found per capita health care costs for those under the age of 65 are 72 percent of the national average, while per capita costs for those 85 and over are 750 percent of the national average. It also found that insurance protects most Americans from the real costs and therefore discourages cost-conscious decisions. ``We've known for years that these factors have been driving health care costs up,'' Johnson said. ``We cannot sucessfully resolve our current health care crisis unless we are willing to alter damaging patterns of behavior.''
STORMIN' NORMIN ON BEER
June 13, 1991... Gen. H. Norman Schwarzkopf, the commander of allied forces in the Persian Gulf War, told Congress that a lack of alcohol in the Gulf region made his troops better warriors. "Our sick call rate went down, our accident and injury rate went down, our incidents of indiscipline went down, and health of the force went up," the four-star general said. "So there were some very therapeutic outcomes from the fact that no alcohol was available whatsoever in the kingdom."
ALCOHOL HERE = tinat al-khabal in the HEREAFTER
A man from Yemen once asked the Prophet about a liquor made from millet called mizr which people drank in his country. The Prophet asked whether it was intoxicating and when the man replied in the affirmative, the Prophet(pbuh) said "Every intoxicant is prohibited. Allah has made a covenant regarding those who drink intoxicants to give them some tinat al-khabal to drink." He was asked what that was and he replied that it was the sweat of the inhabitants of hell, or the discharge of the inhabitants of hell. (Muslim) He who drinks alcohol ( wine,liquor or beer) in this world will be made to drink poison from Asawida (black and poisonous snakes) that will cause both the skin and the flesh of his face to fall into the vessel he drinks from. God Almighty shall accept neither the fasting, prayers nor even the pilgrimage of the one who drinks, brews, sells, or uses money obtained from selling alcohol unless he or she sincerely repents, vowing never to commit that evil again, and Allah accepts his or her repentance. Otherwise, that person will be made to drink the pus of Hell for every single drop of alcohol he or she had imbibed in this world.
Abdullah bin Umar related that the Prophet(pbuh) said: "Do not sit together with drinkers, nor visit them when they are sick. Do not even attend their funerals. The drinkers of alcohol shall come on the Last Day with black faces, their tongues leaning on one side and sliva coming out of their mouths. Anyone who sees their filthy appearance will know that they were the drinkers of alcohol." Wa'il al-Hadrami said that Tariq bin Suwaid asked the Prophet(pbuh) about wine and the Prophet(pbuh) forbade him. When Tariq told him that he made it only as a medicine, the Prophet(pbuh) replied, "It is not a medicine but a disease." (Muslim) Jabir reported the Messenger of Allah as saying "If a large amount of anything causes intoxication, a small amount of it is also prohibited." (Tirmidhi, Abu Daud and Ibn Majah)
In closing, let us hope that the followers of the prophets of God, be they Muslims, Christians or Jews, will abstain from all intoxicants and find true meaning in their own lives.
REFERENCES:
Prohibition of Alcohol in Islam, by Muhammad Samiullah (Pakistan), The Message International, Oct. - Dec. 1987, pp. 18 - 20; published by ICNA, 166-26, 89th Avenue, Jamaica, New York 11432.
by: Muhammad Ishaq Zahid Feb 25, 1998 updated: May 27, 98
"Alcohol paralyses the senses, makes one lurch, and vomit, extinguishes the feeble glimmer of reason which flickers in our poor minds. It soon overcomes the strongest man, and turns him into a raging beast who with empurpled face and bloodshot eyes, bellows forth oaths and threats against his surroundings and insults imaginary enemies. Never in any animal species, not among pigs, nor jackals, nor donkeys, is such ignominy to be found. The ugliest thing in creation is the drunkard, a repulsive being, the sight of whom makes one ashamed to belong to the same living species." (Dr Charles Richet, Paris - Nobel Prize Winner of Physiology)
"O ye who belive! Intoxicants and gambling...Are an abomination, - of Satan's handiwork: Shun such (abomination), That ye may prosper." - (Holy Quran 5:93)
Women and Islam
Gender Equity in Islam presents an overview of the status and rights of Muslim women as defined by the Qur'an and Sunnah. In this brief but important work, Dr. Jamal Badawi examines the spiritual, social, economic, and political aspects of women's position in Islam and, in doing so, effectively summarizes the role of women in Muslim society. Further, in explaining the sources that provide the foundations for Islam's stance on gender equity, the author discusses the role of Islamic scholars in their approach to women's issues.
ISLAMIC TRADITIONS AND THE FEMINIST MOVEMENT: CONFRONTATION OR COOPERATION? by Dr. Lois Lamya' al Faruqi
Whether living in the Middle East or Africa, in Central Asia, in Pakistan, in Southeast Asia, or in Europe and the Americas, Muslim women tend to view the feminist movement with some apprehension. Although there are some features of the feminist cause with which we as Muslims would wish to join hands, other features generate our disappointment and even opposition. There is therefore no simple or "pat" answer to the question of the future cooperation or competition which feminism may meet in an Islamic environment.
There are however a number of social, psychological, and economic traditions which govern the thinking of most Muslims and which are particularly affective of woman's status and role in Islamic society. Understanding these can help us understand the issues which affect male and female status and roles, and how we should react to movements which seek to improve the situation of women in any of the countries where Muslims live.
A Canadian-born Muslim woman has taken to wearing the traditional hijab scarf. It tends to make people see her as either a terrorist or a symbol of oppressed womanhood, but she finds the experience LIBERATING.
THE VOICE OF A WOMAN IN ISLAM by Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi
Many Muslims have adopted the Judeo-Christian ethic which views women as the source of human tragedy because of her alleged biblical role as the temptress who seduced Adam into disobedience to his Lord. By tempting her husband to eat the forbidden fruit, she not only defied Allah, but caused humankind's expulsion from Paradise, thus instigating all temporal human suffering. Those misogynists who support this Biblical myth, dredge from the archives of psuedo-Islamic literature such as false and weak hadiths.
ISLAMIC TRADITIONS AND THE FEMINIST MOVEMENT: CONFRONTATION OR COOPERATION? by Dr. Lois Lamya' al Faruqi
Whether living in the Middle East or Africa, in Central Asia, in Pakistan, in Southeast Asia, or in Europe and the Americas, Muslim women tend to view the feminist movement with some apprehension. Although there are some features of the feminist cause with which we as Muslims would wish to join hands, other features generate our disappointment and even opposition. There is therefore no simple or "pat" answer to the question of the future cooperation or competition which feminism may meet in an Islamic environment.
There are however a number of social, psychological, and economic traditions which govern the thinking of most Muslims and which are particularly affective of woman's status and role in Islamic society. Understanding these can help us understand the issues which affect male and female status and roles, and how we should react to movements which seek to improve the situation of women in any of the countries where Muslims live.
A Canadian-born Muslim woman has taken to wearing the traditional hijab scarf. It tends to make people see her as either a terrorist or a symbol of oppressed womanhood, but she finds the experience LIBERATING.
THE VOICE OF A WOMAN IN ISLAM by Dr. Yusuf al-Qaradawi
Many Muslims have adopted the Judeo-Christian ethic which views women as the source of human tragedy because of her alleged biblical role as the temptress who seduced Adam into disobedience to his Lord. By tempting her husband to eat the forbidden fruit, she not only defied Allah, but caused humankind's expulsion from Paradise, thus instigating all temporal human suffering. Those misogynists who support this Biblical myth, dredge from the archives of psuedo-Islamic literature such as false and weak hadiths.
Islam and Science
Calling the Qur'an amazing is not something done only by Muslims, who have an appreciation for the book and who are pleased with it; it has been labeled amazing by non-Muslims as well. In fact, even people who hate Islam very much have still called it amazing. One thing which surprises non_muslims who are examining the book very closely is that the Qur'an does not appear to them to be what they expected.
The following extracts are from the well-known book, The Bible, The Quran and Science
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille.
The Qur'an presents in two verses a brief synthesis of the phenomena that constituted the basic process of the formation of the Universe.
"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (21:30) God orders the Prophet to speak after inviting him to reflect on the subject of the earth's creation: "Moreover (God) turned to the Heaven when it was smoke and said to it and to the earth..." (41:11)
The information the Qur'an provides on Celestial Organization mainly deals with the solar system. References are however made to phenomena that go beyond the solar system itself: they have been discovered in recent times.
The Qur'an gives an end to the Sun for its evolution and a destination place. It also provides the Moon with a settled place. To understand the possible meanings of these statements, we must remember what modern knowledge has to say about the evolution of the stars in general and the Sun in particular, and (by extension) the celestial bodies that automatically followed its movement through space, among them the Moon.
When talking of the conquest of space therefore, we have two passages in the text of the Qur'an: one of them refers to what will one day become a reality thanks to the powers of intelligence and ingenuity God will give to man, and the other describes an event that the unbelievers in Makkah will never witness, hence its character of a condition never to be realized. The event will however be seen by others, as intimated in the first verse quoted above. It describes the human reactions to the unexpected spectacle that travelers in space will see: their confused sight, as in drunkenness, the feeling of being bewitched..
The following extracts are from the well-known book, The Bible, The Quran and Science
by Dr. Maurice Bucaille.
The Qur'an presents in two verses a brief synthesis of the phenomena that constituted the basic process of the formation of the Universe.
"Do not the Unbelievers see that the heavens and the earth were joined together (as one unit of creation), before we clove them asunder? We made from water every living thing. Will they not then believe?" (21:30) God orders the Prophet to speak after inviting him to reflect on the subject of the earth's creation: "Moreover (God) turned to the Heaven when it was smoke and said to it and to the earth..." (41:11)
The information the Qur'an provides on Celestial Organization mainly deals with the solar system. References are however made to phenomena that go beyond the solar system itself: they have been discovered in recent times.
The Qur'an gives an end to the Sun for its evolution and a destination place. It also provides the Moon with a settled place. To understand the possible meanings of these statements, we must remember what modern knowledge has to say about the evolution of the stars in general and the Sun in particular, and (by extension) the celestial bodies that automatically followed its movement through space, among them the Moon.
When talking of the conquest of space therefore, we have two passages in the text of the Qur'an: one of them refers to what will one day become a reality thanks to the powers of intelligence and ingenuity God will give to man, and the other describes an event that the unbelievers in Makkah will never witness, hence its character of a condition never to be realized. The event will however be seen by others, as intimated in the first verse quoted above. It describes the human reactions to the unexpected spectacle that travelers in space will see: their confused sight, as in drunkenness, the feeling of being bewitched..
Tips on Healthy Aging
The following tips are Islamized quotes from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service, National Institutes of Health.
No known substance can extend life, but the chances of staying healthy and living a long time can be improved:
Eat a balanced diet, including five helpings of fruits and vegetables a day
Exercise regularly (check with a doctor before starting an exercise program).
Get regular health check-ups.
Don't smoke (it's never too late to quit).
Practice safety habits at home to prevent falls and fractures. Always wear your seatbelt in a car.
Stay in contact with family and friends. Stay active through work, play, and community.
Avoid overexposure to the sun and the cold.
Do not drink. While drinking may have a few benefits, its harm far exceeds its benefit.
Keep personal and financial records in order to simplify budgeting and investing. Plan long-term housing and money needs.
Keep a positive attitude toward life. Do things that make you happy.
No known substance can extend life, but the chances of staying healthy and living a long time can be improved:
Eat a balanced diet, including five helpings of fruits and vegetables a day
Exercise regularly (check with a doctor before starting an exercise program).
Get regular health check-ups.
Don't smoke (it's never too late to quit).
Practice safety habits at home to prevent falls and fractures. Always wear your seatbelt in a car.
Stay in contact with family and friends. Stay active through work, play, and community.
Avoid overexposure to the sun and the cold.
Do not drink. While drinking may have a few benefits, its harm far exceeds its benefit.
Keep personal and financial records in order to simplify budgeting and investing. Plan long-term housing and money needs.
Keep a positive attitude toward life. Do things that make you happy.
Muslims and Jews: a historical perspective that reveals surprises
Once upon a time, a widely circulated Jewish document described Islam as "an act of God's Mercy".
Also, Jews in the near East, north Africa and Spain threw their support behind advancing Muslim Arab armies.
No, these aren't fairy tales or propaganda. The relationship between Muslims and Jews really was that cooperative and marked by peaceful coexistence.
Just ask Khalid Siddiqi of the Islamic Education and Information Center in San Jose, California where he also teaches Islamic Studies and Arabic at Chabot College and Ohlone College.
Siddiqi notes that the first quote above is from S. D. Goitein's book Jews and Arabs. The second is from Merlin Swartz's 'The Position of Jews in Arab lands following the rise of Islam' (reprinted from The Muslim World. Hartford Seminary Foundation LXI1970).
Swartz also says the Muslim Arab conquest marked the dawn of a new era. Those forces that had led to the progressive isolation and disruption of Jewish life were not only checked they were dramatically reversed.
In an interview with Sound Vision, Siddiqi gave numerous examples of Jews flourishing under Muslim rule in places like Spain, Morocco, North African in general and various parts of the Middle East.
Siddiqi points out that Islam as a religion has given specific guidelines for the followers of Islam to base their relationship with any non-Muslim. These include People of Scripture, like the Jews, people who belong to other religions, and even atheists. Non-Muslims must be treated on the basis of Birr (kindness) and Qist (justice), as referred to Surah 60 verse 8 of the Quran.
It started at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him)
The peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Jews began at the time of the Prophet.
Siddiqi notes that the Jews welcomed the Prophet when he arrived in Madinah at the time of Hijrah (migration), along with the rest of the city's inhabitants.
But the Prophet had begun the step towards good relations with Jewish and other communities in Madinah even before getting there.
After receiving an invitation to Madinah from one of the city's tribes that had accepted Islam, the Prophet signed treaties with the city's Jewish, Christian and polytheist tribes before he arrived there.
These treaties clearly laid out responsibilities of each of the parties. It was based on these that the Prophet established the Mithaq al Madinah, the constitution of Madinah.
Siddiqi says this was the first constitution of the world and one of the greatest political documents ever prepared by any human being. It is the oldest surviving constitution of any state.
Under this constitution, any Jew who followed the Muslims was entitled to their assistance and the same rights as anyone of them without any injustice or partisanship.
It said the Jews are an Ummah (community of believers) alongside the Muslims. The Jews have their religion and the Muslims theirs. As well, it noted that each will assist one another against any violation of this covenant.
Jews during the Muslim era
Despite this early breach of contract, there are still numerous examples from Muslim history of Muslim-Jewish cooperation and coexistence.
Siddiqi gave examples of how Muslim Spain, which was a "golden era" of creativity and advancement for Muslims was also one for Jews.
While Europe was in its Dark Ages and Jews were reviled there, Muslims in Spain during the same period worked side by side with Jews in developing literature, science and art.
Together, they translated classical Greek texts into Arabic. This task later helped Europe move out of the Dark Ages and into the Renaissance.
Jews flourished under Muslim rule in Egypt as well, where they achieved very high positions in government.
Siddiqi quotes some lines from an Arab poet of that time, to illustrate: 'Today the Jews have reached the summit of their hopes and have become aristocrats. Power and riches have they and from them councilors and princes are chosen'.
Today: the forced expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland has destroyed good Muslim-Jewish relations
So what happened?
Although not the only cause, a large part of the deterioration in Muslim-Jewish relations comes from the emergence of Zionism, the forced expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland by Zionist Jews and British colonizers, as well as their continuing oppression.
Siddiqi says, "while this reaction results in anti-Jewish feeling it must be seen in its proper historical context. It must be remembered that anti-Jewish sentiments in so far as it is to be found in the contemporary Arab world is strictly a modern phenomenon and one that runs counter to the time honored Islamic tradition of fraternity and tolerance.
"The very widespread popular notion that present day Arab-Jewish hostility is but another chapter in a long history of mutual animosity is totally false. If there is one thing the past makes clear it is precisely that Arabs and Jews can live together peacefully and in a mutually beneficial relationship. History also makes it very clear that they are the heirs to the Islamic tradition of openness and tolerance."
The key to reestablishing good relations between Muslims and Jews again is justice, notes Siddiqui. This principle is foreign to neither Islam nor Judaism.
In Islam, standing up for justice, he points out, must be done even if it is against ourselves, our parents, our kin, the rich or the poor. This is clearly mentioned in the Quran (4:135).
Siddiqi points out that the emphasis on justice is also mentioned in Jewish scripture in the prophecies of Michael in chapter three: "Zion shall be redeemed with justice and by those who will come to her with righteousness."
Reference: http://soundvision.com/Info/politics/jewhistory.asp
Also, Jews in the near East, north Africa and Spain threw their support behind advancing Muslim Arab armies.
No, these aren't fairy tales or propaganda. The relationship between Muslims and Jews really was that cooperative and marked by peaceful coexistence.
Just ask Khalid Siddiqi of the Islamic Education and Information Center in San Jose, California where he also teaches Islamic Studies and Arabic at Chabot College and Ohlone College.
Siddiqi notes that the first quote above is from S. D. Goitein's book Jews and Arabs. The second is from Merlin Swartz's 'The Position of Jews in Arab lands following the rise of Islam' (reprinted from The Muslim World. Hartford Seminary Foundation LXI1970).
Swartz also says the Muslim Arab conquest marked the dawn of a new era. Those forces that had led to the progressive isolation and disruption of Jewish life were not only checked they were dramatically reversed.
In an interview with Sound Vision, Siddiqi gave numerous examples of Jews flourishing under Muslim rule in places like Spain, Morocco, North African in general and various parts of the Middle East.
Siddiqi points out that Islam as a religion has given specific guidelines for the followers of Islam to base their relationship with any non-Muslim. These include People of Scripture, like the Jews, people who belong to other religions, and even atheists. Non-Muslims must be treated on the basis of Birr (kindness) and Qist (justice), as referred to Surah 60 verse 8 of the Quran.
It started at the time of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him)
The peaceful coexistence of Muslims and Jews began at the time of the Prophet.
Siddiqi notes that the Jews welcomed the Prophet when he arrived in Madinah at the time of Hijrah (migration), along with the rest of the city's inhabitants.
But the Prophet had begun the step towards good relations with Jewish and other communities in Madinah even before getting there.
After receiving an invitation to Madinah from one of the city's tribes that had accepted Islam, the Prophet signed treaties with the city's Jewish, Christian and polytheist tribes before he arrived there.
These treaties clearly laid out responsibilities of each of the parties. It was based on these that the Prophet established the Mithaq al Madinah, the constitution of Madinah.
Siddiqi says this was the first constitution of the world and one of the greatest political documents ever prepared by any human being. It is the oldest surviving constitution of any state.
Under this constitution, any Jew who followed the Muslims was entitled to their assistance and the same rights as anyone of them without any injustice or partisanship.
It said the Jews are an Ummah (community of believers) alongside the Muslims. The Jews have their religion and the Muslims theirs. As well, it noted that each will assist one another against any violation of this covenant.
Jews during the Muslim era
Despite this early breach of contract, there are still numerous examples from Muslim history of Muslim-Jewish cooperation and coexistence.
Siddiqi gave examples of how Muslim Spain, which was a "golden era" of creativity and advancement for Muslims was also one for Jews.
While Europe was in its Dark Ages and Jews were reviled there, Muslims in Spain during the same period worked side by side with Jews in developing literature, science and art.
Together, they translated classical Greek texts into Arabic. This task later helped Europe move out of the Dark Ages and into the Renaissance.
Jews flourished under Muslim rule in Egypt as well, where they achieved very high positions in government.
Siddiqi quotes some lines from an Arab poet of that time, to illustrate: 'Today the Jews have reached the summit of their hopes and have become aristocrats. Power and riches have they and from them councilors and princes are chosen'.
Today: the forced expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland has destroyed good Muslim-Jewish relations
So what happened?
Although not the only cause, a large part of the deterioration in Muslim-Jewish relations comes from the emergence of Zionism, the forced expulsion of Palestinians from their homeland by Zionist Jews and British colonizers, as well as their continuing oppression.
Siddiqi says, "while this reaction results in anti-Jewish feeling it must be seen in its proper historical context. It must be remembered that anti-Jewish sentiments in so far as it is to be found in the contemporary Arab world is strictly a modern phenomenon and one that runs counter to the time honored Islamic tradition of fraternity and tolerance.
"The very widespread popular notion that present day Arab-Jewish hostility is but another chapter in a long history of mutual animosity is totally false. If there is one thing the past makes clear it is precisely that Arabs and Jews can live together peacefully and in a mutually beneficial relationship. History also makes it very clear that they are the heirs to the Islamic tradition of openness and tolerance."
The key to reestablishing good relations between Muslims and Jews again is justice, notes Siddiqui. This principle is foreign to neither Islam nor Judaism.
In Islam, standing up for justice, he points out, must be done even if it is against ourselves, our parents, our kin, the rich or the poor. This is clearly mentioned in the Quran (4:135).
Siddiqi points out that the emphasis on justice is also mentioned in Jewish scripture in the prophecies of Michael in chapter three: "Zion shall be redeemed with justice and by those who will come to her with righteousness."
Reference: http://soundvision.com/Info/politics/jewhistory.asp
Muslim-Christian Relations, The Good, the Bad
There were great times and there were the bad ones.
Tolerance, respect and cooperation some times. Murder, intolerance and hostility on other occasions.
These have been some of the defining features of Muslim-Christian relations throughout history. Here are some examples of the good and the bad.
First the good memories:
1. Habasha and the Negus
It was a Christian king in a predominantly Christian land who gave the small, persecuted community of early Muslims in the beginning of the Prophet Muhammad's mission protection. May Allah's peace and blessings be upon the Prophet.
The Muslims sought refuge in Habasha, modern day Ethiopia, after suffering starvation and torture at the hands of the polytheistic Makkans. The Prophet Muhammad said about the Negus and Habasha: "a king rules without injustice, a land of truthfulness."
Muslims were welcomed, protected and lived in peace with the Christians of Habasha. But this did not sit well with the Makkans, who did not want to see them leave Makkah or want the message of Islam to flourish in peace.They spent special envoys with gifts and lies about the Muslims to convince the Negus to send the Muslims back to Makkah. They told the Negus that this "new" faith took pride in insulting not just ancestral Makkan beliefs, but the beliefs of Christians as well.
Another king may have simply taken their word and automatically kicked the Muslims out. The Negus did not. He ordered that the leader of the Muslim community come to his court and explain Islam's position.
Enter Jafar ibn Abu Talib, early Muslim refugee to Habasha, and cousin of the Prophet.
Not only did he eloquently explain the message of Islam and the persecution of those who accepted this truthful message. He also recited the opening verses of Surah 19 of the Quran, Surah Maryam or Mary, after the Negus asked him to recite part of Quran.
King Negus listened to the recitation of the Quran in focused attention. He cried as he listened, so much so that his beard got wet. When Jafar completed the recitation, Negus said, ‘Surely this Revelation and the Revelation of Jesus were from the same Source.' Then to the two Makkan ambassadors, he said, 'By God, I will not hand over these persons to you.'
But the story does not end here. The Makkans would not give up so easily. They asked the king to find out what the Muslims' view of Jesus and his Divinity were, knowing of course, the difference in the Christian and Muslim positions regarding Jesus.
Again, Jafar responded, with no compromise of principles, just the simple, clear Truth:
'He (Jesus) is God's servant and Messenger; a spirit and a word from God that He bestowed on the Virgin Mary.'
Upon hearing this, Negus picked up a straw from the ground and said:
‘By God, Jesus was not even as much as one straw more than what you have said about him.'
He returned the gifts of the Quraysh. Negus told them he was not used to taking bribes and the Muslims would remain under his protection.
This was an early victory for positive Muslim-Christian relations.
2. Umar ibn al-Khattab and Jerusalem
Jerusalem and its surrounding territory were and remain holy to Muslims, Christians and Jews. It was during the Caliphate of Omar ibn al-Khattab that Muslims first gained leadership of this territory. May Allah be pleased with Omar.
The Muslim reaction to this victory is something to remember.
Omar entered Jerusalem in humility. He walked in with not he, the Caliph, but his servant comfortably riding on a camel. They had been taking turns walking and riding.
At one point in Jerusalem, the Christians asked him to pray in their church but he declined. He said he was afraid that in the future Muslims could use this as an excuse to take over the Church to build a Masjid.
The Christians gave the key of the Church of Resurrection to Muslims to be responsible for its safety. This key is still with the Muslims today as a sign and symbol of the mutual trust.
3. Saladin (Salah el Deen Ayyubi) and the Crusades
It was in response to the horrific oppression in Jerusalem at the hands of the Crusaders in the 11th century and the need to free the area of their control that Sultan Salah el Deen Ayyubi (Saladin) liberated Jerusalem from them in 1187.
His arrival brought relief for the local Christian population, who helped him, after the oppression they suffered at the hands of their co-religionists, the Crusaders.
Not only did Saladin treat the Crusaders with kindness, he ensured that Muslims and non-Muslims lived in peace and harmony with each other.
One particular story about him recounts that some Muslim soldiers were besieging a Christian fortress. Many Christians were seeking shelter inside, including a young couple who was planning to get married, but whose plans had been stopped by the fighting. They decided to get married anyway, even though they were trapped inside the castle.
Saladin was in charge of the Muslim troops at this time. When he heard about the wedding, he ordered his soldiers not to attack the castle where the couple was staying, so that they could enjoy peace and quiet. In return for this respect, the bride's mother sent out trays of food for Saladin and the Muslim army to share in the wedding celebrations.
Indeed the longest period of peace and justice for all in Jerusalem has been the period when Muslims were in control.
Now the bad news
1. The Crusades
During the Crusades (1095 until 1291) European Christians attacked and occupied this Holy land. They oppressed the Muslims, the local Christians and the Jews. These Crusaders killed over 200,000 innocent civilians.
The aim: to wrest control of Jerusalem from the Muslims. This was not only a period of bloodshed, hostility and violence. It was also the beginning of collective Western stereotypes of Islam and Muslims, according to some scholars.
The Crusades ended centuries ago. But today, the remnants of those stereotypes have taken on new meaning. Muslims are still bloodthirsty, violent savages by most of the mainstream media's standard. The propagation of these views on the collective level through the media has affected Muslims globally and locally. Muslims in America, while living peacefully with Christians and other religious groups, are still subject to discrimination in varying degrees, and physical violence and harassment in the worst cases.
While the Crusades were bad news for Muslims and even local Christians living alongside them, one significant outcome of this contact between Muslims and Western Christians was the passage of knowledge from one to the other.
Christians, through the Muslims, were able to access texts like those of Aristotle, for instance. The Muslims clearly passed on an intellectual heritage, which a number of scholars say laid the foundations for the modern Christian West. For more discussion of this, please see the book " Islam and the Discovery of Freedom by Rose Wilder Lane.
2. Muslim Spain versus Christian Spain
Many Muslims look back at Muslim Spain with pride. But Jews also call it their "golden era".
Spain became part of the Islamic world at the beginning of the eighth century. Under Muslims, Spain became the center of civilization. Although many local Spaniards embraced Islam, Christians and Jews were free in all aspects of their lives. The Muslims respected their religion and institutions. The result was the birth of the first true cosmopolitan culture in the West.
Christians studied alongside Muslim scholars to such a degree that in 854, a Christian named Alvaro of Cordoba complained that these students were forgetting their own religion and culture.
The Muslims and Christians of Spain did not live in their ghettos, isolated and not cooperating in various aspects of daily life together.
It was in Spain that Aristotle's works on physics and natural history were translated into Arabic from Greek. Historians generally acknowledge that the Muslim world proved to be a major conduit of ancient scholarship into the West, especially through Muslim Spain.
It wasn't just Muslims and Christians who thrived in Spain, though. Jews, who were reviled and hated elsewhere, were not only living safely and peacefully alongside non-Jews in Muslim Spain, they were learning and contributing to its culture and knowledge which Muslim scholars had established.
But this success in wealth, knowledge and co-existence came to end in a violent and very sad way.
As Christian Crusaders of Spain expelled Muslims, civilization that took centuries to build was destroyed. Muslims and Jews were either expelled or forced to convert to Christianity. Millions died as tolerance was replaced by the Spanish Inquisition. A suspected Muslim was to be killed for the smallest act resembling Islamic tradition - such as taking a bath on Friday.
3. European colonialism (1500s to the early 20th century)
European colonialism was such a powerful force that by 1900, 90.4 percent of Africa was under European or American colonial control. This was a political and economic phenomenon that began in the 1500s. Various European nations "discovered", conquered, and exploited large areas of the world.
In a quest for silk, spices and world domination, European explorers, like Christopher Columbus set out to sea. He ended up in North America. The result: the slaughter and destruction of millions of Natives and the usurpation of their land by Europeans.
In Muslim lands, colonialists wreaked havoc, supplanting Islamic educational systems with secular or Christianity-focused ones, and murdering and/or enslaving the natives of Africa, South Asia and the Middle East, for example.
They also acculturated the "savage" natives to the "refined" customs of Europe. In the Indian subcontinent today, the term "Brown Sahib" is used to refer to a native who is mentally colonized by the West. There are similar stock characters in other Muslim cultures.
4. Armenia-slaughter at the hands of Muslims, early 20th century
The predominantly Christian Armenians consider the greatest disaster in their history to be their murder and deportation from Turkey during World War I.
In 1915 as Turkish Armenians aligned with the pro-Christian Tsarist Russian enemy, the Turkish army reacted strongly against this betrayal. Although, according to Encyclopedia Britannica, statistics are disputed regarding the Armenian population in Ottoman Anatolia at the outbreak of World War I and the number of Armenians killed during this deportation, a large number of Armenians died during this civil war.
Those Turkish Armenians who survived migrated to places like predominantly Muslim Lebanon and Syria, as well as Russia, France, and the United States.
5. Current relations between the Muslims and Christians
Today 70% of all refugees in the world are Muslims. To Muslims, many of these refugees and other conflicts are a result of their powerlessness.
Muslims feel culturally enslaved, in many ways to the predominantly Christian West. The United States, with the new geopolitical reality of uni-polar world, continues to dictate policies to smaller nations of the world.
This new form of colonialism is done with the help of local lackeys in Muslim countries who take their orders about how their countries should be run from Washington, D.C. as opposed to locally.
On a larger level, British, French, American and Russian colonial powers (all Western, and all predominantly Christian) also control Muslim and other Third World countries through international institutions like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the Security Council of the United Nations.
This excessive power over the lives of millions is perceived by a number of Muslims as the continuing perpetuation of the colonial era. For most Muslims, colonialism is not about the spread of "refined European civilization". It is about massacre, slaver, and weakness. It is nothing to proudly look back upon.
The fight against tobacco
One example of modern American colonialism can be found in the fight against tobacco in the United States.
In the last eight years, the US tobacco industry has lost business because of public health awareness campaigns against smoking. But in the same period the industry has achieved the record profits. How?
They now have an open market to sell their deadly products to Third World consumers, thanks to the help of the American government. So cancer is bad for Americans, but it's okay for others. Where is the justice?
Despots and dictators: not in my backyard, but fine for yours
A second example of Western neo-colonialism is found in these countries' support for corrupt dictators, totalitarian despots and anti-democratic forces in the Muslim world. Muslims question how sincere the Western belief in justice and democracy really is when this happens.
For instance, the government of France supported the Algerian army when it canceled elections following the victory at the ballot of the Islamic Salvation Front party in 1992. France is the country famed for "liberty, equality and fraternity". It seems this is not what they had in mind for the Muslims in their former colonial baby, Algeria.
The United States, which touts "freedom and democracy" has similarly supported undemocratic regimes in Muslim and other countries. Justice, it seems, is not for all, especially not Muslims.
Muslim minorities in the West versus Christian minorities in Muslim countries
Both of these groups of minorities have been the brunt of stereotypical images in the local media, along with various forms of harassment. For example, several Masjids in America have been burned down and attacked as have chuches in Nigeria, Pakistan and Indonesia. Tribal clashes in Nigeria have taken on a religious color and a number of Christians have been murdered outside churches in Pakistan.
Muslims in Muslim countries must protect the rights of their Christian neighbors to freely practice their religion as well as their freedom of speech, as Prophet Mohamed (peace and blessings be upon him) and the rightly guided Khalifas after him did.The constitution the Prophet drafted in Madinah following his migration from Makkah enshrined the rights of Christians and Jews in the city, including those of worship. These were fully enforced under his leadership. Another example was when Umar ibn al-Khattab was Khalifah. He returned tax money collected from Christians in a town in modern day Iraq after he and the Muslims had to leave it. The taxes had been collected to ensure Muslim protection of the Christians living there. Since the Muslims could no longer do that, they returned the money.
Similarly, Christians in countries like America must stand up for Muslims' rights, especially those of free speech and freedom of religion. This way, both groups can build bridges of understanding and tolerance in a world currently fraught with violence, terror and destruction.
Still Some Examples of Cooperation:
But amid these examples of New World Order colonialism and tense Muslim-Christian relations, there are some bright spots.
In the 1990s, the West did eventually come to the aid of Muslims following massacres, rapes and the oppression of Muslims in Bosnia and Kosova.
On the level of faith, the 1994 United Nations Conference on Population in Cairo, Egypt, became a platform for Muslim and Catholic cooperation against perceived anti-religious bias.
In addition, it is somewhat ironic that while Muslims resent the Western support for dictatorships in their countries, they turn to the West when seeking to escape the oppression in their countries. For example, Iran's anti-Shah revolutionaries were essentially based in the West.
It is not uncommon to find Muslim refugees escaping to Germany, France, Britain, America and Canada. While many of them are economic migrants, seeking a better life for themselves and their families on a financial level, there are also those escaping political turmoil and corruption in their home countries.
The current situation
Although the current "war against terrorism", which has now expanded to include war against Iraq, started off as just that, there is now a general perception amongst Muslims that the war is turning against them, despite US President George W. Bush's assurances to the contrary. First came the reference to the war as a "crusade," then the bombing of innocent civilians in Afghanistan. America's one-sided support of Israel while its president refuses to even see Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, has only worsened the situation.
In the US at this moment, there are thousands of Arabs and Muslims who have been in prison for the past three months with no charges against them. Even their names are not being released. Racial and religious profiling is the norm today when it comes to Arabs and Muslims in America. Three major charities in the US have been banned without due process of law. Muslims who gave millions of dollars to these charities to fulfill the third pillar of Islam, Zakat, in the month of Ramadan, lost all that money. The abuse of individual freedom, the media's ridicule of Islam and mockery of Muslim beliefs have led to such lawlessness in dealing with Muslims that one Jewish attorney of a Muslim client commented that, "Muslims have become the new Niggers of America."
Terrorism is a real threat. It must be dealt with in a proper and fair manner. If we could wait to try Timothy McVeigh with the due course of law, why not let these individuals and their organizations know what the charges are against them and allow them to defend themselves. It seems that a Christian terrorist has civil rights but a Muslim terrorist has none, although terrorists do not represent their faith. Otherwise they would not do things like this.
But there have been positive actions taken as well since September 11. A number of churches and their leaders have come forward in interfaith gatherings to show support and sympathy for the Muslims of America. The Pope issued a call to Catholics worldwide to fast on the last Friday of Ramadan of 2002 in solidarity with Muslims. Some non-Muslim women have donned headscarves as a way of expressing sympathy for Muslim women too afraid to cover themselves in the backlash that followed the September 11 attacks.
More recently, a number of mainstream Christian groups have been at the forefront of the peace movement that opposed the war on Iraq, as well as the country's occupation by America. This is a very positive step forward, considering that churches did not oppose the Vietnam War until 10 years after it began, nor did Christian groups oppose the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, except for the Quakers.
However, with this positive development has come a threat to Muslims from one section of Christian America: certian evangelical groups. Statements made by high profile individuals like Franklin Graham (who described Islam as a "very evil and wicked religion") and Rev. Jerry Vines, a Southern Baptist (who said during a conference in St. Louis last year, that Islam's Allah is not the same as the God worshipped by Christians, and that "Allah is not Jehovah, either. Jehovah's not going to turn you into a terrorist.") have added fuel to the fire.
Although some mainstream churches opposed Graham's and Vines' statements, most adopted a silent or neutral stance towards such false, anti-Islamic propaganada.
In addition, amongst Christian groups, there has been a split in terms of war on Iraq. While most groups oppose the war, the more right-wing groups, like the evangelicals support it.
And so the cycle of positive and negative relations between Muslims and Christians continues. Muslims and Christians must continue to work together for peace and justice for all people. Muslims and Christians in America, especially, are in a unique position to do this and can serve as an example of peaceful co-existence of minorities the world over.
MORE ON ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY
The Islamic and Christian View of Jesus
The other Ansar: Companions of Prophet Jesus
John the Baptist: A Prophet of Islam
Muslim-Christian Relations, The Good, the Bad
For further study of a Muslim view of Jesus and Christianity read the following books:
Jesus, Prophet of Islam by Muhammad 'Ata'ur-Rahim
For Christ's Sake by Ahmad Thomson and Muhammad 'Ata'ur-Rahim
For a unique Christian view of the Islamic contribution to the West read the following book:
Islam and the Discovery of Freedom by Rose Wilder Lane
Reference: http://soundvision.com/Info/jesus/MuslimChristianRelations.asp
Tolerance, respect and cooperation some times. Murder, intolerance and hostility on other occasions.
These have been some of the defining features of Muslim-Christian relations throughout history. Here are some examples of the good and the bad.
First the good memories:
1. Habasha and the Negus
It was a Christian king in a predominantly Christian land who gave the small, persecuted community of early Muslims in the beginning of the Prophet Muhammad's mission protection. May Allah's peace and blessings be upon the Prophet.
The Muslims sought refuge in Habasha, modern day Ethiopia, after suffering starvation and torture at the hands of the polytheistic Makkans. The Prophet Muhammad said about the Negus and Habasha: "a king rules without injustice, a land of truthfulness."
Muslims were welcomed, protected and lived in peace with the Christians of Habasha. But this did not sit well with the Makkans, who did not want to see them leave Makkah or want the message of Islam to flourish in peace.They spent special envoys with gifts and lies about the Muslims to convince the Negus to send the Muslims back to Makkah. They told the Negus that this "new" faith took pride in insulting not just ancestral Makkan beliefs, but the beliefs of Christians as well.
Another king may have simply taken their word and automatically kicked the Muslims out. The Negus did not. He ordered that the leader of the Muslim community come to his court and explain Islam's position.
Enter Jafar ibn Abu Talib, early Muslim refugee to Habasha, and cousin of the Prophet.
Not only did he eloquently explain the message of Islam and the persecution of those who accepted this truthful message. He also recited the opening verses of Surah 19 of the Quran, Surah Maryam or Mary, after the Negus asked him to recite part of Quran.
King Negus listened to the recitation of the Quran in focused attention. He cried as he listened, so much so that his beard got wet. When Jafar completed the recitation, Negus said, ‘Surely this Revelation and the Revelation of Jesus were from the same Source.' Then to the two Makkan ambassadors, he said, 'By God, I will not hand over these persons to you.'
But the story does not end here. The Makkans would not give up so easily. They asked the king to find out what the Muslims' view of Jesus and his Divinity were, knowing of course, the difference in the Christian and Muslim positions regarding Jesus.
Again, Jafar responded, with no compromise of principles, just the simple, clear Truth:
'He (Jesus) is God's servant and Messenger; a spirit and a word from God that He bestowed on the Virgin Mary.'
Upon hearing this, Negus picked up a straw from the ground and said:
‘By God, Jesus was not even as much as one straw more than what you have said about him.'
He returned the gifts of the Quraysh. Negus told them he was not used to taking bribes and the Muslims would remain under his protection.
This was an early victory for positive Muslim-Christian relations.
2. Umar ibn al-Khattab and Jerusalem
Jerusalem and its surrounding territory were and remain holy to Muslims, Christians and Jews. It was during the Caliphate of Omar ibn al-Khattab that Muslims first gained leadership of this territory. May Allah be pleased with Omar.
The Muslim reaction to this victory is something to remember.
Omar entered Jerusalem in humility. He walked in with not he, the Caliph, but his servant comfortably riding on a camel. They had been taking turns walking and riding.
At one point in Jerusalem, the Christians asked him to pray in their church but he declined. He said he was afraid that in the future Muslims could use this as an excuse to take over the Church to build a Masjid.
The Christians gave the key of the Church of Resurrection to Muslims to be responsible for its safety. This key is still with the Muslims today as a sign and symbol of the mutual trust.
3. Saladin (Salah el Deen Ayyubi) and the Crusades
It was in response to the horrific oppression in Jerusalem at the hands of the Crusaders in the 11th century and the need to free the area of their control that Sultan Salah el Deen Ayyubi (Saladin) liberated Jerusalem from them in 1187.
His arrival brought relief for the local Christian population, who helped him, after the oppression they suffered at the hands of their co-religionists, the Crusaders.
Not only did Saladin treat the Crusaders with kindness, he ensured that Muslims and non-Muslims lived in peace and harmony with each other.
One particular story about him recounts that some Muslim soldiers were besieging a Christian fortress. Many Christians were seeking shelter inside, including a young couple who was planning to get married, but whose plans had been stopped by the fighting. They decided to get married anyway, even though they were trapped inside the castle.
Saladin was in charge of the Muslim troops at this time. When he heard about the wedding, he ordered his soldiers not to attack the castle where the couple was staying, so that they could enjoy peace and quiet. In return for this respect, the bride's mother sent out trays of food for Saladin and the Muslim army to share in the wedding celebrations.
Indeed the longest period of peace and justice for all in Jerusalem has been the period when Muslims were in control.
Now the bad news
1. The Crusades
During the Crusades (1095 until 1291) European Christians attacked and occupied this Holy land. They oppressed the Muslims, the local Christians and the Jews. These Crusaders killed over 200,000 innocent civilians.
The aim: to wrest control of Jerusalem from the Muslims. This was not only a period of bloodshed, hostility and violence. It was also the beginning of collective Western stereotypes of Islam and Muslims, according to some scholars.
The Crusades ended centuries ago. But today, the remnants of those stereotypes have taken on new meaning. Muslims are still bloodthirsty, violent savages by most of the mainstream media's standard. The propagation of these views on the collective level through the media has affected Muslims globally and locally. Muslims in America, while living peacefully with Christians and other religious groups, are still subject to discrimination in varying degrees, and physical violence and harassment in the worst cases.
While the Crusades were bad news for Muslims and even local Christians living alongside them, one significant outcome of this contact between Muslims and Western Christians was the passage of knowledge from one to the other.
Christians, through the Muslims, were able to access texts like those of Aristotle, for instance. The Muslims clearly passed on an intellectual heritage, which a number of scholars say laid the foundations for the modern Christian West. For more discussion of this, please see the book " Islam and the Discovery of Freedom by Rose Wilder Lane.
2. Muslim Spain versus Christian Spain
Many Muslims look back at Muslim Spain with pride. But Jews also call it their "golden era".
Spain became part of the Islamic world at the beginning of the eighth century. Under Muslims, Spain became the center of civilization. Although many local Spaniards embraced Islam, Christians and Jews were free in all aspects of their lives. The Muslims respected their religion and institutions. The result was the birth of the first true cosmopolitan culture in the West.
Christians studied alongside Muslim scholars to such a degree that in 854, a Christian named Alvaro of Cordoba complained that these students were forgetting their own religion and culture.
The Muslims and Christians of Spain did not live in their ghettos, isolated and not cooperating in various aspects of daily life together.
It was in Spain that Aristotle's works on physics and natural history were translated into Arabic from Greek. Historians generally acknowledge that the Muslim world proved to be a major conduit of ancient scholarship into the West, especially through Muslim Spain.
It wasn't just Muslims and Christians who thrived in Spain, though. Jews, who were reviled and hated elsewhere, were not only living safely and peacefully alongside non-Jews in Muslim Spain, they were learning and contributing to its culture and knowledge which Muslim scholars had established.
But this success in wealth, knowledge and co-existence came to end in a violent and very sad way.
As Christian Crusaders of Spain expelled Muslims, civilization that took centuries to build was destroyed. Muslims and Jews were either expelled or forced to convert to Christianity. Millions died as tolerance was replaced by the Spanish Inquisition. A suspected Muslim was to be killed for the smallest act resembling Islamic tradition - such as taking a bath on Friday.
3. European colonialism (1500s to the early 20th century)
European colonialism was such a powerful force that by 1900, 90.4 percent of Africa was under European or American colonial control. This was a political and economic phenomenon that began in the 1500s. Various European nations "discovered", conquered, and exploited large areas of the world.
In a quest for silk, spices and world domination, European explorers, like Christopher Columbus set out to sea. He ended up in North America. The result: the slaughter and destruction of millions of Natives and the usurpation of their land by Europeans.
In Muslim lands, colonialists wreaked havoc, supplanting Islamic educational systems with secular or Christianity-focused ones, and murdering and/or enslaving the natives of Africa, South Asia and the Middle East, for example.
They also acculturated the "savage" natives to the "refined" customs of Europe. In the Indian subcontinent today, the term "Brown Sahib" is used to refer to a native who is mentally colonized by the West. There are similar stock characters in other Muslim cultures.
4. Armenia-slaughter at the hands of Muslims, early 20th century
The predominantly Christian Armenians consider the greatest disaster in their history to be their murder and deportation from Turkey during World War I.
In 1915 as Turkish Armenians aligned with the pro-Christian Tsarist Russian enemy, the Turkish army reacted strongly against this betrayal. Although, according to Encyclopedia Britannica, statistics are disputed regarding the Armenian population in Ottoman Anatolia at the outbreak of World War I and the number of Armenians killed during this deportation, a large number of Armenians died during this civil war.
Those Turkish Armenians who survived migrated to places like predominantly Muslim Lebanon and Syria, as well as Russia, France, and the United States.
5. Current relations between the Muslims and Christians
Today 70% of all refugees in the world are Muslims. To Muslims, many of these refugees and other conflicts are a result of their powerlessness.
Muslims feel culturally enslaved, in many ways to the predominantly Christian West. The United States, with the new geopolitical reality of uni-polar world, continues to dictate policies to smaller nations of the world.
This new form of colonialism is done with the help of local lackeys in Muslim countries who take their orders about how their countries should be run from Washington, D.C. as opposed to locally.
On a larger level, British, French, American and Russian colonial powers (all Western, and all predominantly Christian) also control Muslim and other Third World countries through international institutions like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the Security Council of the United Nations.
This excessive power over the lives of millions is perceived by a number of Muslims as the continuing perpetuation of the colonial era. For most Muslims, colonialism is not about the spread of "refined European civilization". It is about massacre, slaver, and weakness. It is nothing to proudly look back upon.
The fight against tobacco
One example of modern American colonialism can be found in the fight against tobacco in the United States.
In the last eight years, the US tobacco industry has lost business because of public health awareness campaigns against smoking. But in the same period the industry has achieved the record profits. How?
They now have an open market to sell their deadly products to Third World consumers, thanks to the help of the American government. So cancer is bad for Americans, but it's okay for others. Where is the justice?
Despots and dictators: not in my backyard, but fine for yours
A second example of Western neo-colonialism is found in these countries' support for corrupt dictators, totalitarian despots and anti-democratic forces in the Muslim world. Muslims question how sincere the Western belief in justice and democracy really is when this happens.
For instance, the government of France supported the Algerian army when it canceled elections following the victory at the ballot of the Islamic Salvation Front party in 1992. France is the country famed for "liberty, equality and fraternity". It seems this is not what they had in mind for the Muslims in their former colonial baby, Algeria.
The United States, which touts "freedom and democracy" has similarly supported undemocratic regimes in Muslim and other countries. Justice, it seems, is not for all, especially not Muslims.
Muslim minorities in the West versus Christian minorities in Muslim countries
Both of these groups of minorities have been the brunt of stereotypical images in the local media, along with various forms of harassment. For example, several Masjids in America have been burned down and attacked as have chuches in Nigeria, Pakistan and Indonesia. Tribal clashes in Nigeria have taken on a religious color and a number of Christians have been murdered outside churches in Pakistan.
Muslims in Muslim countries must protect the rights of their Christian neighbors to freely practice their religion as well as their freedom of speech, as Prophet Mohamed (peace and blessings be upon him) and the rightly guided Khalifas after him did.The constitution the Prophet drafted in Madinah following his migration from Makkah enshrined the rights of Christians and Jews in the city, including those of worship. These were fully enforced under his leadership. Another example was when Umar ibn al-Khattab was Khalifah. He returned tax money collected from Christians in a town in modern day Iraq after he and the Muslims had to leave it. The taxes had been collected to ensure Muslim protection of the Christians living there. Since the Muslims could no longer do that, they returned the money.
Similarly, Christians in countries like America must stand up for Muslims' rights, especially those of free speech and freedom of religion. This way, both groups can build bridges of understanding and tolerance in a world currently fraught with violence, terror and destruction.
Still Some Examples of Cooperation:
But amid these examples of New World Order colonialism and tense Muslim-Christian relations, there are some bright spots.
In the 1990s, the West did eventually come to the aid of Muslims following massacres, rapes and the oppression of Muslims in Bosnia and Kosova.
On the level of faith, the 1994 United Nations Conference on Population in Cairo, Egypt, became a platform for Muslim and Catholic cooperation against perceived anti-religious bias.
In addition, it is somewhat ironic that while Muslims resent the Western support for dictatorships in their countries, they turn to the West when seeking to escape the oppression in their countries. For example, Iran's anti-Shah revolutionaries were essentially based in the West.
It is not uncommon to find Muslim refugees escaping to Germany, France, Britain, America and Canada. While many of them are economic migrants, seeking a better life for themselves and their families on a financial level, there are also those escaping political turmoil and corruption in their home countries.
The current situation
Although the current "war against terrorism", which has now expanded to include war against Iraq, started off as just that, there is now a general perception amongst Muslims that the war is turning against them, despite US President George W. Bush's assurances to the contrary. First came the reference to the war as a "crusade," then the bombing of innocent civilians in Afghanistan. America's one-sided support of Israel while its president refuses to even see Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat, has only worsened the situation.
In the US at this moment, there are thousands of Arabs and Muslims who have been in prison for the past three months with no charges against them. Even their names are not being released. Racial and religious profiling is the norm today when it comes to Arabs and Muslims in America. Three major charities in the US have been banned without due process of law. Muslims who gave millions of dollars to these charities to fulfill the third pillar of Islam, Zakat, in the month of Ramadan, lost all that money. The abuse of individual freedom, the media's ridicule of Islam and mockery of Muslim beliefs have led to such lawlessness in dealing with Muslims that one Jewish attorney of a Muslim client commented that, "Muslims have become the new Niggers of America."
Terrorism is a real threat. It must be dealt with in a proper and fair manner. If we could wait to try Timothy McVeigh with the due course of law, why not let these individuals and their organizations know what the charges are against them and allow them to defend themselves. It seems that a Christian terrorist has civil rights but a Muslim terrorist has none, although terrorists do not represent their faith. Otherwise they would not do things like this.
But there have been positive actions taken as well since September 11. A number of churches and their leaders have come forward in interfaith gatherings to show support and sympathy for the Muslims of America. The Pope issued a call to Catholics worldwide to fast on the last Friday of Ramadan of 2002 in solidarity with Muslims. Some non-Muslim women have donned headscarves as a way of expressing sympathy for Muslim women too afraid to cover themselves in the backlash that followed the September 11 attacks.
More recently, a number of mainstream Christian groups have been at the forefront of the peace movement that opposed the war on Iraq, as well as the country's occupation by America. This is a very positive step forward, considering that churches did not oppose the Vietnam War until 10 years after it began, nor did Christian groups oppose the internment of Japanese-Americans during World War II, except for the Quakers.
However, with this positive development has come a threat to Muslims from one section of Christian America: certian evangelical groups. Statements made by high profile individuals like Franklin Graham (who described Islam as a "very evil and wicked religion") and Rev. Jerry Vines, a Southern Baptist (who said during a conference in St. Louis last year, that Islam's Allah is not the same as the God worshipped by Christians, and that "Allah is not Jehovah, either. Jehovah's not going to turn you into a terrorist.") have added fuel to the fire.
Although some mainstream churches opposed Graham's and Vines' statements, most adopted a silent or neutral stance towards such false, anti-Islamic propaganada.
In addition, amongst Christian groups, there has been a split in terms of war on Iraq. While most groups oppose the war, the more right-wing groups, like the evangelicals support it.
And so the cycle of positive and negative relations between Muslims and Christians continues. Muslims and Christians must continue to work together for peace and justice for all people. Muslims and Christians in America, especially, are in a unique position to do this and can serve as an example of peaceful co-existence of minorities the world over.
MORE ON ISLAM AND CHRISTIANITY
The Islamic and Christian View of Jesus
The other Ansar: Companions of Prophet Jesus
John the Baptist: A Prophet of Islam
Muslim-Christian Relations, The Good, the Bad
For further study of a Muslim view of Jesus and Christianity read the following books:
Jesus, Prophet of Islam by Muhammad 'Ata'ur-Rahim
For Christ's Sake by Ahmad Thomson and Muhammad 'Ata'ur-Rahim
For a unique Christian view of the Islamic contribution to the West read the following book:
Islam and the Discovery of Freedom by Rose Wilder Lane
Reference: http://soundvision.com/Info/jesus/MuslimChristianRelations.asp
Human Relations
While Islam presents itself as the only way of life for people to achieve salvation in the after-life, it also teaches its followers to live up to high standards in conduct with other human beings, regardless of their religion, ethnicity, race, language or culture. The Holy Quran is highly critical of Christian beliefs in Trinity and regarding Jesus (peace be on him) as a deity. The Holy Book is also very critical of the Jews for not accepting Jesus and Muhammad (peace be on them) as messengers of God. At the same time, however, it asks Muslims to establish a social association special only to Christians and Jews. Examples of such association are permission of marrying chaste women among them and giving explicit permission to eat their food.
The verses in the Holy Quran forbid Muslims to insult anything that is viewed as a deity by any religion, regardless of whether it is a person, a stone, a stick or a tree. The verse 2:256 of the Quran says:
Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah hears and knows all things.
Islam wants its adherents to be just to every human being.
"Do not let your hatred of a people incite you to aggression." (The Quran 5:2).
"And do not let ill-will towards any folk incite you so that you swerve from dealing justly. Be just; that is nearest to heedfulness" (The Quran 5:8).
Muslims are asked to be truthful, trustworthy, humble, kind and generous. They are asked to repel evil with goodness, control their anger, and be forgiving. Some of the sayings of the Prophet are:
"To remove something harmful from the road, is charity."
"Charity erases sins just as water extinguishes fire."
"He is not a perfect believer, who goes to bed full and knows that his neighbor is hungry."
"Show mercy to people on earth so that Allâh will have mercy on you in heaven."
The verses in the Holy Quran forbid Muslims to insult anything that is viewed as a deity by any religion, regardless of whether it is a person, a stone, a stick or a tree. The verse 2:256 of the Quran says:
Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error: whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy hand-hold, that never breaks. And Allah hears and knows all things.
Islam wants its adherents to be just to every human being.
"Do not let your hatred of a people incite you to aggression." (The Quran 5:2).
"And do not let ill-will towards any folk incite you so that you swerve from dealing justly. Be just; that is nearest to heedfulness" (The Quran 5:8).
Muslims are asked to be truthful, trustworthy, humble, kind and generous. They are asked to repel evil with goodness, control their anger, and be forgiving. Some of the sayings of the Prophet are:
"To remove something harmful from the road, is charity."
"Charity erases sins just as water extinguishes fire."
"He is not a perfect believer, who goes to bed full and knows that his neighbor is hungry."
"Show mercy to people on earth so that Allâh will have mercy on you in heaven."
ISLAMIC CIVILIZATION AS DEPICTED IN THE QUR'AN
Taken from "The Life of Muhammad" by Muhammad Husayn Haykal,
translated by Dr. Ismail Ragi A. al Faruqi
Islamic and Western Civilizations
Muhammad left a great spiritual legacy which enveloped the world in its light and guided man's civilization throughout many centuries, a legacy which will envelop the world again and guide man's civilization once more until the light of God has filled the universe. The legacy of Muhammad had such great effect in the past and will have great or greater effect in the future precisely because Muhammad established the religion of truth and laid the foundation of the only civilization which guarantees the happiness and felicity of man. The religion which Muhammad conveyed and the civilization which he established at his Lord's command for the benefit of mankind are inseparable from each other. Islamic civilization has been raised on a foundation of science and rationalism, and that is the same foundation on which western civilization of today is based. Moreover, Islam as a religion has based itself on personalist thinking and intentional logic. The relation between religion and its propositions on the one hand, and civilization and its foundation on the other, is binding and firm. Islam links metaphysical thought and personal feelings with the rules of logic and the precepts of science, with a bond that all Muslims must discover and grasp if they are to remain Muslims. From this aspect, the civilization of Islam is radically different from that of western civilization which dominates the world today. The two are different in their description of life as well as the foundation on which they base such description. The difference between the two civilizations is so essential that they have developed in ways which are radically contradictory to each other.
The West and the Struggle between Church and State
The difference is due to a number of historical causes to which we have alluded in the prefaces to the first and second editions of this work. In western Christendom, the continuing struggle between the religious and secular powers, or-to use the contemporary idiom-between church and state, led to their separation and to the establishment of the state upon the denial of the power of the church. The struggle to which this will to power led has left deep effects upon the whole of western thought. The first of these effects was the separation of human feeling and reasoning from the logic of absolute reason and the findings of positive science based on sensory observation and evidence.
The Economic System as Foundation of Western Civilization
The victory of materialist thinking was largely due to the establishment of western civilization primarily upon an economic foundation. This situation led to the rise in the West of a number of worldviews which sought to place everything in the life of man and the world at the mercy of economic forces. Many an author in the West sought to explain the whole history of mankind-religious, esthetic, philosophic or scientific-in terms of the waves of progress or retrogression which constitute the economic history of the various peoples. Not only has this thinking pervaded historiography; it has even reached philosophy. A number of western philosophies have sought to found the laws and principles of morality on bases of pragmatism and utilitarianism. As a result of this fixation of thought in the West, all these theories, despite their perspicacity and originality, have been limited in scope to the realm of material benefits. In other words, all the laws of morality were based on a material foundation and in satisfaction of what was regarded as a necessary consequence of scientific research and evidence. As for the spiritual aspect, western civilization regarded it as purely individual, rationally incapable of being the object of any group consideration. From this followed the absolute freedom of belief which the West has sanctified. The West has honored the freedom of belief far more than it has the freedom of morals; and it has honored the freedom of morals far more than the freedom of economic activity. The latter it has tied hand and foot by public laws, and commanded that every western state and army prevent any violation of economic laws with all the power and coercive means at its disposal.
translated by Dr. Ismail Ragi A. al Faruqi
Islamic and Western Civilizations
Muhammad left a great spiritual legacy which enveloped the world in its light and guided man's civilization throughout many centuries, a legacy which will envelop the world again and guide man's civilization once more until the light of God has filled the universe. The legacy of Muhammad had such great effect in the past and will have great or greater effect in the future precisely because Muhammad established the religion of truth and laid the foundation of the only civilization which guarantees the happiness and felicity of man. The religion which Muhammad conveyed and the civilization which he established at his Lord's command for the benefit of mankind are inseparable from each other. Islamic civilization has been raised on a foundation of science and rationalism, and that is the same foundation on which western civilization of today is based. Moreover, Islam as a religion has based itself on personalist thinking and intentional logic. The relation between religion and its propositions on the one hand, and civilization and its foundation on the other, is binding and firm. Islam links metaphysical thought and personal feelings with the rules of logic and the precepts of science, with a bond that all Muslims must discover and grasp if they are to remain Muslims. From this aspect, the civilization of Islam is radically different from that of western civilization which dominates the world today. The two are different in their description of life as well as the foundation on which they base such description. The difference between the two civilizations is so essential that they have developed in ways which are radically contradictory to each other.
The West and the Struggle between Church and State
The difference is due to a number of historical causes to which we have alluded in the prefaces to the first and second editions of this work. In western Christendom, the continuing struggle between the religious and secular powers, or-to use the contemporary idiom-between church and state, led to their separation and to the establishment of the state upon the denial of the power of the church. The struggle to which this will to power led has left deep effects upon the whole of western thought. The first of these effects was the separation of human feeling and reasoning from the logic of absolute reason and the findings of positive science based on sensory observation and evidence.
The Economic System as Foundation of Western Civilization
The victory of materialist thinking was largely due to the establishment of western civilization primarily upon an economic foundation. This situation led to the rise in the West of a number of worldviews which sought to place everything in the life of man and the world at the mercy of economic forces. Many an author in the West sought to explain the whole history of mankind-religious, esthetic, philosophic or scientific-in terms of the waves of progress or retrogression which constitute the economic history of the various peoples. Not only has this thinking pervaded historiography; it has even reached philosophy. A number of western philosophies have sought to found the laws and principles of morality on bases of pragmatism and utilitarianism. As a result of this fixation of thought in the West, all these theories, despite their perspicacity and originality, have been limited in scope to the realm of material benefits. In other words, all the laws of morality were based on a material foundation and in satisfaction of what was regarded as a necessary consequence of scientific research and evidence. As for the spiritual aspect, western civilization regarded it as purely individual, rationally incapable of being the object of any group consideration. From this followed the absolute freedom of belief which the West has sanctified. The West has honored the freedom of belief far more than it has the freedom of morals; and it has honored the freedom of morals far more than the freedom of economic activity. The latter it has tied hand and foot by public laws, and commanded that every western state and army prevent any violation of economic laws with all the power and coercive means at its disposal.
ISLAMIC CIVILIZATION AND THE WESTERN ORIENTALISTS
Taken from "The Life of Muhammad" by Muhammad Husayn Haykal,
translated by Dr. Ismail Ragi A. al Faruqi
Irving and Islamic Determinism
Washington Irving, one of the greatest writers the United States of America produced in the nineteenth century, is a real credit to his people. He has written a biography of the Arab Prophet in which the material is presented in an eloquent and captivating manner. Although his treatment is well taken at times, it is prejudiced at others. His book ends with a conclusion in which he presents the principles of Islam and what he has taken to be the historical sources of those principles. After mentioning iman in God, in His angels, Books, prophets, and the Day of Judgment, Washington Irving wrote
"The sixth and last article of the Islam faith is PREDESTINATION, and on this Mahomet evidently reposed his chief dependence for the success of his military enterprises. He inculcated that every event had been predetermined by God, and written down in the eternal tablet previous to the creation of the world. That the destiny of every individual and the hour of his death were irrevocably fixed, and could neither be varied nor evaded by any effort of human sagacity or foresight. Under this persuasion the Moslems engaged in battle without risk; and, as death in battle was equivalent to martyrdom, and entitled them to an immediate admission into paradise, they had in either alternative, death or victory, a certainty of gain.
"This doctrine, according to which men by their own free will can neither avoid sin nor avert punishment, is considered by many Mussulmen as derogatory to the justice and clemency of God; and several sects have sprung up, who endeavor to soften and explain away this perplexing dogma; but the number of these doubters is small, and they are not considered orthodox.
"The doctrine of Predestination was one of those timely revelations to Mahomet that were almost miraculous from their seasonable occurrence. It took place immediately after the disastrous battle of Ohod, in which many of his followers, and among them his uncle Hamza, were slain. Then it was, in a moment of gloom and despondency, when his followers around him were disheartened, that he promulgated this law, telling them that every man must die at the appointed hour, whether in bed or in the field of battle. He declared, moreover, that the angel Gabriel had announced to him the reception of Hamza into the seventh heaven, with the title of Lion of God and of the Prophet. He added, as he contemplated the dead bodies, `I am witness for these, and for all who have been slain for the cause of God, that they shall appear in glory at the resurrection, with their wounds brilliant as vermilion and odoriferous as musk.'
"What doctrine could have been devised more calculated to hurry forward, in a wild career of conquest, a set of ignorant and predatory soldiers, than assurance of booty if they survived, and paradise if they fell? It rendered almost irresistible the Moslem arms; but it likewise contained the poison that was to destroy their dominion. From the moment the successors of the Prophet ceased to be aggressors and conquerors, and sheathed the sword definitely, the doctrine of predestination began its baneful work. Enervated by peace, and the sensuality permitted by the Koran-which so distinctly separates its doctrine from the pure and self-denying religion of the Messiah-the Moslem regarded every reverse as preordained by Allah, and inevitable; to be borne stoically, since human exertion and foresight were vain. `Help thyself and God will help thee,' was a precept never in force with the followers of Mahomet ; and its reverse has been their fate. The crescent has waned before the cross, and exists in Europe, where it was once so mighty, only by the suffrage, or rather the jealously of the great Christian powers, probably ere long to furnish another illustration, that `they that take the sword shall perish with the sword'.
[Washington Irving, Mahomet and His Successors, Philadelphia, J. B. Lippincott and Co., 1871, Vol, I, pp. 360-362.]
translated by Dr. Ismail Ragi A. al Faruqi
Irving and Islamic Determinism
Washington Irving, one of the greatest writers the United States of America produced in the nineteenth century, is a real credit to his people. He has written a biography of the Arab Prophet in which the material is presented in an eloquent and captivating manner. Although his treatment is well taken at times, it is prejudiced at others. His book ends with a conclusion in which he presents the principles of Islam and what he has taken to be the historical sources of those principles. After mentioning iman in God, in His angels, Books, prophets, and the Day of Judgment, Washington Irving wrote
"The sixth and last article of the Islam faith is PREDESTINATION, and on this Mahomet evidently reposed his chief dependence for the success of his military enterprises. He inculcated that every event had been predetermined by God, and written down in the eternal tablet previous to the creation of the world. That the destiny of every individual and the hour of his death were irrevocably fixed, and could neither be varied nor evaded by any effort of human sagacity or foresight. Under this persuasion the Moslems engaged in battle without risk; and, as death in battle was equivalent to martyrdom, and entitled them to an immediate admission into paradise, they had in either alternative, death or victory, a certainty of gain.
"This doctrine, according to which men by their own free will can neither avoid sin nor avert punishment, is considered by many Mussulmen as derogatory to the justice and clemency of God; and several sects have sprung up, who endeavor to soften and explain away this perplexing dogma; but the number of these doubters is small, and they are not considered orthodox.
"The doctrine of Predestination was one of those timely revelations to Mahomet that were almost miraculous from their seasonable occurrence. It took place immediately after the disastrous battle of Ohod, in which many of his followers, and among them his uncle Hamza, were slain. Then it was, in a moment of gloom and despondency, when his followers around him were disheartened, that he promulgated this law, telling them that every man must die at the appointed hour, whether in bed or in the field of battle. He declared, moreover, that the angel Gabriel had announced to him the reception of Hamza into the seventh heaven, with the title of Lion of God and of the Prophet. He added, as he contemplated the dead bodies, `I am witness for these, and for all who have been slain for the cause of God, that they shall appear in glory at the resurrection, with their wounds brilliant as vermilion and odoriferous as musk.'
"What doctrine could have been devised more calculated to hurry forward, in a wild career of conquest, a set of ignorant and predatory soldiers, than assurance of booty if they survived, and paradise if they fell? It rendered almost irresistible the Moslem arms; but it likewise contained the poison that was to destroy their dominion. From the moment the successors of the Prophet ceased to be aggressors and conquerors, and sheathed the sword definitely, the doctrine of predestination began its baneful work. Enervated by peace, and the sensuality permitted by the Koran-which so distinctly separates its doctrine from the pure and self-denying religion of the Messiah-the Moslem regarded every reverse as preordained by Allah, and inevitable; to be borne stoically, since human exertion and foresight were vain. `Help thyself and God will help thee,' was a precept never in force with the followers of Mahomet ; and its reverse has been their fate. The crescent has waned before the cross, and exists in Europe, where it was once so mighty, only by the suffrage, or rather the jealously of the great Christian powers, probably ere long to furnish another illustration, that `they that take the sword shall perish with the sword'.
[Washington Irving, Mahomet and His Successors, Philadelphia, J. B. Lippincott and Co., 1871, Vol, I, pp. 360-362.]
Moral State of the present-day Armies
Allah T'ala says in the Holy Quran:
وَلاَ تَكُونُواْ كَالَّذِينَ خَرَجُواْ مِن دِيَارِهِم بَطَرًا وَرِئَاء النَّاسِ وَيَصُدُّونَ عَن سَبِيلِ اللّهِ وَاللّهُ بِمَا يَعْمَلُونَ مُحِيطٌ
(8:47) And be not like those who came forth from their homes exulting, with a desire to be seen of people, and hindering others from the way of Allah. Allah encompasses all that they do.
This alludes to the army of the disbelieving Qurayash, which, when it proceeded on a military expedition against the Muslims, was accompanied by singing and dancing minstrels. (See Ibn Sa'd. vol. 2, p. 13 ) Whenever the army halted, dancing and drinking parties were held. Also the army arrogantly vaunted its military power and numerical strength before the tribes and localities which fell on the way, and boasted of its invincibility. (See al-Waqidi, vol. 1, p. 39 ) This much is about the moral state of the Quraysh army. What was even worse was the object of their fighting. They were not fighting for any lofty ideal. What they aimed at was merely to defeat the forces of truth and justice, to suppress and obliterate the only group which sought to uphold the truth. They simply did not want any one to champion the cause of truth and justice.
This occasion was considered appropriate to warn the Muslims not to let themselves degenerate into a group like the Quraysh. God had favoured them with faith and devotion to the truth. And gratitude to God for this favour required that they should purify both their conduct and their reason for fighting.
This directive was not meant just for the time in which it was revealed. It is equally applicable today, and will remain applicable in all times to come. The forces of Unbelief today are no different from those in the time of the Prophet (peace he on him) for the moral state of the present-day armies is no better than of armies in the past. Arrangements for prostitution and drinking are as much a part of the present-day armies of unbelievers as ever before. The soldiers in these armies feel no shame in openly demanding the maximum amount of alcoholic drinks and as many call-girls as possible. Without any sense of shame the soldiers virtually ask their compatriots to make available to them their daughters and sisters for the gratification of their lust. That being the case how can one expect that the soldiers of today would not go about committing debauchery and polluting the life of the people in the lands which they happen to conquer?
Apart from moral corruption, the soldiers of the present-day armies are known for their arrogance and affrontery to the conquered peoples. Their gestures and conversation - both of ordinary soldiers and officers - bespeak of their arrogance. Arrogance is also reflected in the statements made by the statesmen of the militarily-strong and triumphant nations who in effect boastfully say to their people, in the words of the Quran: 'No one shall overcome you today' (al-Anfal 8: 48) and challenging the whole world in their vainglory: 'Who is greater than us in strength?' (Fusilat 41: 15).
These powers are evidently wicked, but the purposes for which they wage war are even more so. These powers are keen, out of sheer trickery, to assure the rest of the world that in waging war they are prompted only by the welfare of mankind. In actual fact, they might have either one motive for waging war or another, but it is absolutely certain that the motive is not the welfare of mankind. Their purpose is to establish their exclusive control and to exploit the resources created by God for all mankind. Their goal is to reduce other nations to the position of hewers of wood and drawers of water and to subject them to thraldom and servitude. Here Muslims are being told, in effect, that they should eschew the ways of non-Muslims and desist from devoting their lives, energy, and resources to the evil purposes for which non-Muslims engage in warfare. (Tafheemul Quran)
وَلاَ تَكُونُواْ كَالَّذِينَ خَرَجُواْ مِن دِيَارِهِم بَطَرًا وَرِئَاء النَّاسِ وَيَصُدُّونَ عَن سَبِيلِ اللّهِ وَاللّهُ بِمَا يَعْمَلُونَ مُحِيطٌ
(8:47) And be not like those who came forth from their homes exulting, with a desire to be seen of people, and hindering others from the way of Allah. Allah encompasses all that they do.
This alludes to the army of the disbelieving Qurayash, which, when it proceeded on a military expedition against the Muslims, was accompanied by singing and dancing minstrels. (See Ibn Sa'd. vol. 2, p. 13 ) Whenever the army halted, dancing and drinking parties were held. Also the army arrogantly vaunted its military power and numerical strength before the tribes and localities which fell on the way, and boasted of its invincibility. (See al-Waqidi, vol. 1, p. 39 ) This much is about the moral state of the Quraysh army. What was even worse was the object of their fighting. They were not fighting for any lofty ideal. What they aimed at was merely to defeat the forces of truth and justice, to suppress and obliterate the only group which sought to uphold the truth. They simply did not want any one to champion the cause of truth and justice.
This occasion was considered appropriate to warn the Muslims not to let themselves degenerate into a group like the Quraysh. God had favoured them with faith and devotion to the truth. And gratitude to God for this favour required that they should purify both their conduct and their reason for fighting.
This directive was not meant just for the time in which it was revealed. It is equally applicable today, and will remain applicable in all times to come. The forces of Unbelief today are no different from those in the time of the Prophet (peace he on him) for the moral state of the present-day armies is no better than of armies in the past. Arrangements for prostitution and drinking are as much a part of the present-day armies of unbelievers as ever before. The soldiers in these armies feel no shame in openly demanding the maximum amount of alcoholic drinks and as many call-girls as possible. Without any sense of shame the soldiers virtually ask their compatriots to make available to them their daughters and sisters for the gratification of their lust. That being the case how can one expect that the soldiers of today would not go about committing debauchery and polluting the life of the people in the lands which they happen to conquer?
Apart from moral corruption, the soldiers of the present-day armies are known for their arrogance and affrontery to the conquered peoples. Their gestures and conversation - both of ordinary soldiers and officers - bespeak of their arrogance. Arrogance is also reflected in the statements made by the statesmen of the militarily-strong and triumphant nations who in effect boastfully say to their people, in the words of the Quran: 'No one shall overcome you today' (al-Anfal 8: 48) and challenging the whole world in their vainglory: 'Who is greater than us in strength?' (Fusilat 41: 15).
These powers are evidently wicked, but the purposes for which they wage war are even more so. These powers are keen, out of sheer trickery, to assure the rest of the world that in waging war they are prompted only by the welfare of mankind. In actual fact, they might have either one motive for waging war or another, but it is absolutely certain that the motive is not the welfare of mankind. Their purpose is to establish their exclusive control and to exploit the resources created by God for all mankind. Their goal is to reduce other nations to the position of hewers of wood and drawers of water and to subject them to thraldom and servitude. Here Muslims are being told, in effect, that they should eschew the ways of non-Muslims and desist from devoting their lives, energy, and resources to the evil purposes for which non-Muslims engage in warfare. (Tafheemul Quran)
The Ship and the Lifeboats
Although the pen and the sword are arrayed against it, Islam is spreading. But there are also problems within the Muslim reawakening.
By Khalid Baig
Posted: 14 Zul-Hijjah 1423, 16 February 2003
We are living at a time when the daily news about the world, especially about the Muslim world is quite depressing. In Palestine, Kashmir, Afghanistan, Iraq, and many other places Muslim life, property, and honor have been declared fair game by those who wield worldly power. It is not just armies waging this war. A whole gamut of institutions, from sophisticated research centers to slick media, is dedicated to the campaign to sow doubts, to spreads confusion, and to denigrate Islam. In hot spot after hot spot around the world, the sword is busy prosecuting a war on Islam. The pen is busy in both conducting a war on Islam and in trying to foment a war within Islam. While the unprecedented and unexpected momentum gained by the anti-war movement in the middle of February has given some hope that the mad rush to slaughter may be deflected, overall picture remains grim.
And yet these are also the times when people all over the world are coming to Islam in unprecedented numbers. At a time when Muslims have lost control of the sword and the pen, Islam is finding new followers everywhere everyday. (It is quite revealing that even as Islam continues to spread despite the sword, some people should continue to insist that it spread by the sword. As Qur'an repeatedly reminds us, the opponents of Islam are a very closed-minded lot).
Within the Muslim world also there are signs of awakening. Muslims are coming back to Islam after having toyed with one false ideology after another. Colonialism had hit them hard. It subjugated them physically, politically, economically, culturally, and mentally. An education system that they embraced as a ticket out of their miseries during that period of oppression compounded their problems by producing self-doubt and self-hate. It produced generations of perfect strangers within the house of Islam, who were then --- for this 'achievement' --- given leadership roles in all areas of Muslim societies. They hated their languages, their culture, and their religion. It is such people who rule the Muslim world today.
Yet, the scene is changing. More women are choosing hijab and are becoming more assertive about it as a symbol of their Islamic identity. There is a greater interest in Islamic knowledge. Qur'an lectures are attracting crowds that were not seen in the past. The nature of the questions people ask about Islam is also changing. There are more 'how to' and 'what to' questions than 'why' questions coming from the secular educated groups. The last Biswa Ijtima (annual gathering of Tablighi Jamaat in Bangladesh) attracted some two million attendees. What is more, they came from widely varying segments of society. A parallel growth can be seen in Islamic activism. Politics, media, relief and charity, education, and community service are all attracting new workers and new organizations. There is a new enthusiasm, new energy, and new awareness.
Our renewed interest in our religion is great but it is good to remember that Islamic revival will not take place through the blind leading the blind.
But there are also problems within this awakening. The period of colonialism was a big crash in which our ship was destroyed. In the immediate aftermath, survival was the main goal, and people came with whatever lifeboats they could. Now is the time to pick up the pieces and build the ship again. The problem is we have been living in the lifeboats for so long, we are confusing them with the ship. The schools for secular education were one such lifeboat. They imparted some skills necessary for survival in a changed world, although they impoverished Muslim education and society tremendously in so many ways. But today so many well-meaning people who get excited about spreading education in the Muslim world think of nothing more than establishing more of these same schools. Campaigns for 'democracy', whatever it means, were another such lifeboat, aimed at returning control of Muslim affairs to them thereby seeking liberation. Today, democracy or no democracy, nowhere do Muslims have any control over their affairs, but this lifeboat has become a ship and Khilafah, the Islamic system of governance, remains a strange entity. Islamic organizations were such a lifeboat, aimed at gathering like minded people so they could focus their resources and energies on some of the important things. Yet each of them is considered to be the ship by its occupants and captains, thereby creating new lines of cleavage within the Ummah.
There is another issue. Most of our new activism thrives on sincerity, concern and drive but not on knowledge or guidance. There are Islamic relief organizations providing much needed support for the destitute millions. But many do not show a sensitivity to check whether their fund raising methods are Islamic; whether they are distributing the zakat according to Shariah; whether their operation meets the Islamic guidelines. There are organizations focused on media and political activism --- certainly very important fields --- that sometime say things that the media or political establishment they are talking to would like to hear, even if they are totally wrong and un-Islamic. They seem to be doing as much damage as good through ignorance and carelessness.
The same observation can be made about our efforts at spreading Islamic knowledge. It is embarrassing how many of those giving lectures, issuing 'fatwas' (not necessarily calling them so but issuing legal opinions nonetheless), and conducting Qur'an lessons have no qualifications for the job. Yet they find a ready audience among those who confuse eloquence with scholarship.
Our renewed interest in our religion is great but it is good to remember that Islamic revival will not take place through the blind leading the blind. All Islamic work --- whether Dawah, or Jihad, or relief work or political or media activism --- requires guidance from the Shariah, which in turn requires knowledge and understanding. Recognizing the need for such guidance from true scholars is the first step in getting it. The questions we need to ask may not have ready-made answers but that does not justify not asking them or accepting answers from unqualified sources. There is a very good example in the work done in the field of Islamic finance during the last decades. It was the collaboration of religious scholars with experts in economics and finance that produced the body of knowledge today that did not exist before. A similar effort is needed in other fields. Muslim journalists working with scholars can help evolve an Islamic protocol for Journalism. Muslim activists working with scholars can help evolve Islamic protocol for media and political activism. Relief organizations can establish Shariah advisory boards to ensure their operations are within the bounds of Shariah.
Bringing our own house in order is the only response we can and must have to the threats, challenges, and fears we face today.
Reason and Revelation
by Khalid Baig
American economist Robert Samuelson recently made an interesting observation about the American society in his Newsweek column: "America's glories and evils are tightly fused together." Quoting sociologist Seymour Lipset, he asserts that America's economic vitality and progress come from the same source as do crime, family breakdown, inequality, and vulgarity. Freedom and individualism have fired economic advance, yet have also inhibited social control. But why the qualities that bring the best in a nation also should bring the worst in it? Is humanity doomed by having its vices and virtues so intricately mixed?
Samuelson does not probe the issue. Instead he seems to be happily resigned to it. "We are burdened as well as blessed by our beliefs," he says. Economics, we may be reminded, is the dismal science.
Actually the world is not doomed by design. Samuelson comes very close to the truth but he confuses approaches or tools with attributes. A tool that works great in one area is also being used in another for which it was never designed. The problem lies with the user who keeps on insisting on its use in the second area citing its success in the first. To put matters simply, it's the free use of reason and intellect that is behind most of America's (and West's in general) phenomenal scientific and material progress. It's the use of the same tool in moral, and religious life that has caused its equally phenomenal moral degeneration!
Every tool has a designated area of application. Outside, it will fail to work. A 4 bit computer is good for some elementary math involving whole numbers. It may multiply 2 by 20 and give the correct answer instantly. But burdened with complex calculations involving several decimal digits, it will give the WRONG answers. A weighing scale meant for gold will not work for iron and vice versa. Their resolution and capacity are inappropriate for those applications.
Same with the tools we use for learning about the world. Our senses and intellect are wonderful things. Science and technology are all about their use. Certainly it was free inquiry driven by reason that led to so many of the discoveries of science. It happened at an accelerated pace during the past four centuries and the results are everywhere around us to be seen.
But a tool that is so great in one area may be totally useless, even dangerous, in another. Pure Reason, uninformed by Divine Guidance, is a defective tool for deciding purpose of life or suggesting its values. What is Right and what is Wrong? These questions require knowledge beyond what we can acquire by using our senses and reasoned analysis. As a direct result, everyone's reasoning is different. That is why philosophers have never been able to agree upon what should be the goal of life. Happiness? Survival? Pleasure? Love? Self-fulfillment? You name it. In addition, it is impossible for us to separate our reasoning in these matters from our feelings. Pure or uninformed reason becomes just a tool to justify what we desire.
Today West's problem is that it has accepted the wrong tool for developing its moral compass. Probably the majority of its people abhor homosexuality. They may know that it is an abomination and evil. Yet today same-sex marriages are getting legal sanction in the West. And they are helpless in trying to stop its advances. Why? Because they cannot argue that it is wrong based on pure reason. It is easier to make a case against smoking in public places, then against the worst forms of immorality. Such is the result when pure reason becomes the accepted arbiter of right and wrong.
There is nothing modern about this either. Several centuries ago, Obaidullah Hasan Qirwani, a leader of the renegade batani cult declared it foolish for a brother to marry his beautiful sister to a total stranger, while trying to be content with a less qualified wife -- another stranger. She would be much more suited to be wife of her own brother, with whom she may be a lot more compatible, he argued. His argument is, no doubt, sickening. But is there a counter argument based on pure reason?
Certainly mankind needs a superior tool for determining the values and purpose of life. A source of guidance that is based on certain knowledge, not conjecture. One that can inform our desires rather than being subservient to them. This is what Prophets, Alayhim assalam, came with. They claimed to have access to the higher source of knowledge, the Divine Revelation. Those who accepted them used reason and observation to verify their authenticity and character. But they accepted Divine Revelation as a SUPERIOR source of knowledge! That is why a son can tell his father:
"O my father! To me has come knowledge that had not reached you. So follow me. I will guide you to a Way that is even and straight." (Maryam, 19:43).
All this is obvious, except in implications. We accept this is Right and that is Wrong because the Revelation TOLD us, not because it PROVED it to us. What is wrong with riba? Gambling? Pork? Alcohol? Revelation told us that they were wrong. Why is hijab necessary? Allah and His Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, ordered that. What are the rights of men and women? Those given to them by Allah and His Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. The attribute of the Muslims is that they "listened and followed" (Al-Baqarah, 2:285). It is not that they listened and questioned, and argued, and investigated and then if they felt like it, they followed. That is also THE message of Prophet Ibrahim, alayhi assalm's, sacrifice, a defining event for Islam. For the Qur'an describes the moment when the father and son were ready for the ultimate sacrifice by saying: "When they surrendered" (Al-Saffat, 37:103). Literally it can also be translated: "When they accepted Islam." For pure reason could have raised a million questions about the command for that sacrifice.
Normally it is difficult for us to say "I don't know." It is even more difficult for nations to admit a weakness in their celebrated tools of inquiry. That is the dilemma of the modern world, which sees so much wrong with itself but cannot bring itself to admitting the problem with its basic approach. But a Muslim is the person who has both the wisdom and the courage to surrender before the higher source of knowledge and guidance. For him Revelation informs his reason and his reason controls his emotions. Such is the person who is blessed, but not burdened, by his beliefs.
American economist Robert Samuelson recently made an interesting observation about the American society in his Newsweek column: "America's glories and evils are tightly fused together." Quoting sociologist Seymour Lipset, he asserts that America's economic vitality and progress come from the same source as do crime, family breakdown, inequality, and vulgarity. Freedom and individualism have fired economic advance, yet have also inhibited social control. But why the qualities that bring the best in a nation also should bring the worst in it? Is humanity doomed by having its vices and virtues so intricately mixed?
Samuelson does not probe the issue. Instead he seems to be happily resigned to it. "We are burdened as well as blessed by our beliefs," he says. Economics, we may be reminded, is the dismal science.
Actually the world is not doomed by design. Samuelson comes very close to the truth but he confuses approaches or tools with attributes. A tool that works great in one area is also being used in another for which it was never designed. The problem lies with the user who keeps on insisting on its use in the second area citing its success in the first. To put matters simply, it's the free use of reason and intellect that is behind most of America's (and West's in general) phenomenal scientific and material progress. It's the use of the same tool in moral, and religious life that has caused its equally phenomenal moral degeneration!
Every tool has a designated area of application. Outside, it will fail to work. A 4 bit computer is good for some elementary math involving whole numbers. It may multiply 2 by 20 and give the correct answer instantly. But burdened with complex calculations involving several decimal digits, it will give the WRONG answers. A weighing scale meant for gold will not work for iron and vice versa. Their resolution and capacity are inappropriate for those applications.
Same with the tools we use for learning about the world. Our senses and intellect are wonderful things. Science and technology are all about their use. Certainly it was free inquiry driven by reason that led to so many of the discoveries of science. It happened at an accelerated pace during the past four centuries and the results are everywhere around us to be seen.
But a tool that is so great in one area may be totally useless, even dangerous, in another. Pure Reason, uninformed by Divine Guidance, is a defective tool for deciding purpose of life or suggesting its values. What is Right and what is Wrong? These questions require knowledge beyond what we can acquire by using our senses and reasoned analysis. As a direct result, everyone's reasoning is different. That is why philosophers have never been able to agree upon what should be the goal of life. Happiness? Survival? Pleasure? Love? Self-fulfillment? You name it. In addition, it is impossible for us to separate our reasoning in these matters from our feelings. Pure or uninformed reason becomes just a tool to justify what we desire.
Today West's problem is that it has accepted the wrong tool for developing its moral compass. Probably the majority of its people abhor homosexuality. They may know that it is an abomination and evil. Yet today same-sex marriages are getting legal sanction in the West. And they are helpless in trying to stop its advances. Why? Because they cannot argue that it is wrong based on pure reason. It is easier to make a case against smoking in public places, then against the worst forms of immorality. Such is the result when pure reason becomes the accepted arbiter of right and wrong.
There is nothing modern about this either. Several centuries ago, Obaidullah Hasan Qirwani, a leader of the renegade batani cult declared it foolish for a brother to marry his beautiful sister to a total stranger, while trying to be content with a less qualified wife -- another stranger. She would be much more suited to be wife of her own brother, with whom she may be a lot more compatible, he argued. His argument is, no doubt, sickening. But is there a counter argument based on pure reason?
Certainly mankind needs a superior tool for determining the values and purpose of life. A source of guidance that is based on certain knowledge, not conjecture. One that can inform our desires rather than being subservient to them. This is what Prophets, Alayhim assalam, came with. They claimed to have access to the higher source of knowledge, the Divine Revelation. Those who accepted them used reason and observation to verify their authenticity and character. But they accepted Divine Revelation as a SUPERIOR source of knowledge! That is why a son can tell his father:
"O my father! To me has come knowledge that had not reached you. So follow me. I will guide you to a Way that is even and straight." (Maryam, 19:43).
All this is obvious, except in implications. We accept this is Right and that is Wrong because the Revelation TOLD us, not because it PROVED it to us. What is wrong with riba? Gambling? Pork? Alcohol? Revelation told us that they were wrong. Why is hijab necessary? Allah and His Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, ordered that. What are the rights of men and women? Those given to them by Allah and His Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. The attribute of the Muslims is that they "listened and followed" (Al-Baqarah, 2:285). It is not that they listened and questioned, and argued, and investigated and then if they felt like it, they followed. That is also THE message of Prophet Ibrahim, alayhi assalm's, sacrifice, a defining event for Islam. For the Qur'an describes the moment when the father and son were ready for the ultimate sacrifice by saying: "When they surrendered" (Al-Saffat, 37:103). Literally it can also be translated: "When they accepted Islam." For pure reason could have raised a million questions about the command for that sacrifice.
Normally it is difficult for us to say "I don't know." It is even more difficult for nations to admit a weakness in their celebrated tools of inquiry. That is the dilemma of the modern world, which sees so much wrong with itself but cannot bring itself to admitting the problem with its basic approach. But a Muslim is the person who has both the wisdom and the courage to surrender before the higher source of knowledge and guidance. For him Revelation informs his reason and his reason controls his emotions. Such is the person who is blessed, but not burdened, by his beliefs.
Analysis: More than Bad Rulers and Corrupt Societies
Analysis: More than Bad Rulers and Corrupt Societies
By Khalid Baig
Posted: 18 Safar 1424, 20 April 2003
In the past centuries the Muslim world was much more integrated than we realize. It was one social, cultural, religious and economic domain. Its language, system of education, currency, and laws were the same.
When British journalist Robert Fisk said that in the face of disaster Arabs act like mice, he was being polite. He could have said that the Muslims act like mice. The question is why?
It is easy and customary to blame the current Muslim rulers for this sorry situation. No doubt the Iraq invasion would not have been possible without their acquiescence and support. If they refused to open their lands, waterways, and airspace to the invasion, it could not have taken place. Neither would the slaughters in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosova, Kashmir, Chechnya, and Palestine have been possible if the Muslim rulers had their act together. But was it only because the Muslim rulers happened to be immoral, coward, and unscrupulous characters? Is the 1.2 billion strong Ummah suffering only because there are fifty-four corrupt persons who are ruling it?
These rulers do not carry out all their plans personally. They have armies of compliant soldiers, bureaucrats, and other staffers at every level of government that do the dirty work. Further the societies at large produce, nurture, and sustain the corrupt machinery of the corrupt governments. As we continue our investigation, we find that our problem is corruption; not only of the rulers but also of the ruled. Today we have strayed from the Shariah in our personal lives; we lie, cheat, steal at a higher rate than ever before; we exploit and oppress in our small spheres. In short, our problems are caused by our moral corruption.
But there is something more. And it is getting scant attention in the Muslim discourse.
Islam teaches us the correctness of belief is even more important than correctness of deeds. There is an implied message here: The corruption of ideas is far more devastating than the corruption of actions. This may be happening here. We complain about the particular tribal leaders that happen to be there today but forget about the tribalism that sits at the root of all this. This tribalism of the nation-states has been enshrined into the constitutions, legal structures, bureaucracies, and the entire apparatus of government in every Muslim country. Its language and thinking, though anathema to Islam, has gained widespread acceptance. While we condemn its outcome, we do not sufficiently examine or challenge the system itself.
We complain about the particular tribal leaders that happen to be there today but forget about the tribalism that sits at the root of all this
We constantly talk about the Muslim brotherhood and the need for Muslim unity. We assert that Muslims are one Ummah. Simultaneously --- and without much thought --- we embrace the symbols, ideas, and dictates of its exact opposite. We have lived under our nation-states, celebrated our national days, and sang our national anthems all our lives. As a result the realization that the gap between the idea of the nation-state and that of one Ummah is wider than can be patched with good leaders of individual nation-states does not occur easily. We do not realize that we may be trying to simultaneously ride two different boats going in opposite directions.
So let us consider some real life situations. In Pakistan, the provinces of Sind and Punjab share the Indus River. Available water is less than their combined needs and Punjab is situated upstream while Sind is downstream. Quite naturally, there is constant bickering over the distribution of water. The conflict is resolved by the presence of a central government and by the realization that both provinces belong to the same country. Now imagine that the two provinces had been transformed into two separate countries. We can be certain that the small issue that no body in the world knows about or cares about today would become a big international conflict. And it may matter little whether they were called Islamic Republic of Punjab and the Islamic Republic of Sind! The logic of a sovereign country is very different and once you embrace that there are consequences that good intentions and good people alone cannot overcome.
When completed Turkey's Southeast Anatolia Project, (GAP in Turkey) will reduce water supply to Syria by 50% and to Iraq by 90%, selling it instead to Israel through the so-called Peace Pipeline. A comparable situation would be Punjab denying water to Sind and then selling it to India.
To understand that let us move from the Indus basin to the Furat-Dijla (Euphrates-Tigris) basin. What is presented as a hypothetical situation in the former has been turned into an unfortunate reality in the latter. Both Dijla and Furat originate in Turkey, pass through Syria, and end up in Iraq where they join to form the Shat-al Arab that then discharges into the Persian Gulf. Mesopotamia means the land between the two rivers, the two rivers having been the source of civilization since the ancient times. Add the artificial international borders between Turkey, Syria, and Iraq, and the same life giving water turns into an explosive that could rock the area. In 1974 there was a near war between Syria and Iraq as Syria began to fill the reservoir that has become Lake Asad, decreasing the flow of the river to Iraq to as little as 25 percent of the normal rate. Armies were moved and threats were exchanged, though finally diplomatic activity by the Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia defused the situation. In 1990 tensions ran high as Turkey stopped all flow in Furat for one complete month as it started to fill the Ataturk Dam.
Today Turkey's Southeast Anatolia Project, (GAP in Turkey) is promising a much more serious conflict in the days to come. The multi-billion dollar GAP includes more than 20 dams and 17 electric power plants, which will reduce water supply to Syria by 50% and to Iraq by 90% when it is completed in another twenty years. Even more bizarre is the plan Turkey has for part of the water that it denies to Syria and Iraq seriously endangering their agriculture and economies; it will sell it to Israel through the so-called Peace Pipeline that will run through the Mediterranean. The agreement with Israel was signed in 2001. "We have declared that we can sell water to whichever country needs water, regardless of its language or flag," said Cumhur Ersumer, Turkey's energy minister at that time. "It looks like Israel will be the first country to buy Turkey's water." That is the logic of the nation-state as articulated by Suleyman Demirel: "Neither Syria or Iraq can lay claim to Turkey's rivers any more than Ankara could claim their oil. This is a matter of sovereignty."
We can be sure that accountants in Turkey can show that Turkey will benefit economically by doing what it plans to do. And even a so-called Islamist party in Turkey will be driven by those calculations pledging, as it does, allegiance to "Turkish national interests." A comparable situation would be Punjab denying water to Sind and then selling it to India. No matter how corrupt leaders in Pakistan become (if they have not already reached the limit) it is just impossible to imagine that outcome. And yet the same situation is not only possible, it is there in the other case. Such are the wonders of the corrupt ideology of nation-state!
Conflicts of interest between any two entities are normal and natural. What is crucial is the mechanism and structure for resolving them. Islamic laws of inheritance highlight this fact. Conflicts could develop even among close relatives over distribution of inheritance. Since Islam values very smooth relations and does not like even the slightest bickering there, the Shariah has provided the detailed rules for this distribution. Neither the people involved, nor the government can override this distribution. Thus a solid mechanism has been provided for resolution of these conflicts.
In case of two provinces of the same country, the mechanism for the resolution of their conflicts remains in the form of the central government as well as firm realization on the part of everyone that they are riding the same boat. However when they turn into independent countries, both of these are lost.
How the definition of the self-interest can change with a change in the frame of reference can be seen through another example. When the US gave the Pakistani ruler the choice of either joining the invader or joining the target he did not hesitate for a minute to choose the first option. It can be criticized as much as one wants, but the fact remains that under the frame of reference under which Pakistan and all Muslim countries operate today, that was an option. But can we imagine the US demanding, or Pakistan conceding the support for attacking Baluchistan? This would clearly be seen as preposterous by everyone. As far as the Shariah is concerned, the two situations are exactly alike. But in the system of nation-states they are not.
The gap between the idea of the nation-state and that of one Ummah is wider than can be patched with good leaders of individual nation-states
That the opposition to what the Pakistani president did was manageable is also a reflection of the fact that Muslims the world over have generally and unwittingly bought into the philosophy of this nationalism.
The imposition of embargo on Afghanistan and Iraq is another example of the clash between Islam and the nation-state. Islam teaches that it is not a believer who eats while his neighbor goes to bed hungry. The system of the UN on the other hand, ordered its member-states not to supply any food or medicine to those dying of hunger and disease in Iraq. Again, the fact that Muslim countries have complied with the latter without any consternation or serious opposition is a reminder of our subconscious acceptance of the nationalist ideology.
We can see why world Muslims acted like mice in the face of disaster. The Qur'an warned us not to engage in disputes and infighting or we would become weak and powerless. But we have not only done the exact opposite, we have given a permanent structure and legal cover to the arrangement for that infighting in the current political organization of the Muslim domain.
This exposition of the ideology of nation-state invariably faces a mental block; namely that all this is impossible. This argument runs like this. We had a Khilafah centuries ago. Since then we have had a checkered history of nominal Khalifah, Sultans, and Nawabs running their own kingdoms and fiefdoms. Today we have fifty-four states and there is no way we can change that in our life times. Yes and no. While we had more then one centers of political power for centuries, the Muslim world was much more integrated then than we realize. It was one social, cultural, religious and economic domain. Its language, system of education, currency, and laws were the same. There were no restrictions on travel, or movement of capital or goods. A Muslim could take up residence and start a business or get a job anywhere. Ibn Batuta traveled from Tunisia to Hijaz, East Africa, India, Malaya, and China, covering 75000 miles without traveling the same road twice. During the twenty-five year journey he took up residence where he wanted to; got even government assignments as Qadi and even as ambassador in China for the Sultan in India. If that was possible then, it should be easier now because of the huge advances in the communication and transportation technologies alone.
The corruption of ideas is far more devastating than the corruption of actions.
No one is suggesting that we can dismantle the fifty-four Muslim governments overnight and replace them with a Khilafah. But we can gradually breakdown the barriers between the Muslim states in travel, trade, and all exchanges at personal levels. With free flow of people, goods, capital, and ideas throughout the Muslim domain, a quite revolution can begin. We could realize that this domain is much more self-sufficient and strong then we have ever realized. That its various parts complement each other's needs and strengthen each other. That it is the artificial borders between Muslim lands drawn by colonial powers that have terribly weakened it!
While we recognize that the barriers to that vision are real and very serious, we must also realize that the most serious barriers are mental and psychological. We must break through the mental straitjacket and realize that another world is possible. Only then we will begin to see how to get there. It may take a generation or many generations. But we will never get there if we do not know that is where we want to go. Today sometimes Muslims say out of frustration that Muslim governments should form their own United Nations. The suggestion does capture our deep desire for unity as well as our deep running confusion about it. For it has one s too many. The Islamic discourse should be about a United Nation of theirs and not United Nations.
By Khalid Baig
Posted: 18 Safar 1424, 20 April 2003
In the past centuries the Muslim world was much more integrated than we realize. It was one social, cultural, religious and economic domain. Its language, system of education, currency, and laws were the same.
When British journalist Robert Fisk said that in the face of disaster Arabs act like mice, he was being polite. He could have said that the Muslims act like mice. The question is why?
It is easy and customary to blame the current Muslim rulers for this sorry situation. No doubt the Iraq invasion would not have been possible without their acquiescence and support. If they refused to open their lands, waterways, and airspace to the invasion, it could not have taken place. Neither would the slaughters in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Kosova, Kashmir, Chechnya, and Palestine have been possible if the Muslim rulers had their act together. But was it only because the Muslim rulers happened to be immoral, coward, and unscrupulous characters? Is the 1.2 billion strong Ummah suffering only because there are fifty-four corrupt persons who are ruling it?
These rulers do not carry out all their plans personally. They have armies of compliant soldiers, bureaucrats, and other staffers at every level of government that do the dirty work. Further the societies at large produce, nurture, and sustain the corrupt machinery of the corrupt governments. As we continue our investigation, we find that our problem is corruption; not only of the rulers but also of the ruled. Today we have strayed from the Shariah in our personal lives; we lie, cheat, steal at a higher rate than ever before; we exploit and oppress in our small spheres. In short, our problems are caused by our moral corruption.
But there is something more. And it is getting scant attention in the Muslim discourse.
Islam teaches us the correctness of belief is even more important than correctness of deeds. There is an implied message here: The corruption of ideas is far more devastating than the corruption of actions. This may be happening here. We complain about the particular tribal leaders that happen to be there today but forget about the tribalism that sits at the root of all this. This tribalism of the nation-states has been enshrined into the constitutions, legal structures, bureaucracies, and the entire apparatus of government in every Muslim country. Its language and thinking, though anathema to Islam, has gained widespread acceptance. While we condemn its outcome, we do not sufficiently examine or challenge the system itself.
We complain about the particular tribal leaders that happen to be there today but forget about the tribalism that sits at the root of all this
We constantly talk about the Muslim brotherhood and the need for Muslim unity. We assert that Muslims are one Ummah. Simultaneously --- and without much thought --- we embrace the symbols, ideas, and dictates of its exact opposite. We have lived under our nation-states, celebrated our national days, and sang our national anthems all our lives. As a result the realization that the gap between the idea of the nation-state and that of one Ummah is wider than can be patched with good leaders of individual nation-states does not occur easily. We do not realize that we may be trying to simultaneously ride two different boats going in opposite directions.
So let us consider some real life situations. In Pakistan, the provinces of Sind and Punjab share the Indus River. Available water is less than their combined needs and Punjab is situated upstream while Sind is downstream. Quite naturally, there is constant bickering over the distribution of water. The conflict is resolved by the presence of a central government and by the realization that both provinces belong to the same country. Now imagine that the two provinces had been transformed into two separate countries. We can be certain that the small issue that no body in the world knows about or cares about today would become a big international conflict. And it may matter little whether they were called Islamic Republic of Punjab and the Islamic Republic of Sind! The logic of a sovereign country is very different and once you embrace that there are consequences that good intentions and good people alone cannot overcome.
When completed Turkey's Southeast Anatolia Project, (GAP in Turkey) will reduce water supply to Syria by 50% and to Iraq by 90%, selling it instead to Israel through the so-called Peace Pipeline. A comparable situation would be Punjab denying water to Sind and then selling it to India.
To understand that let us move from the Indus basin to the Furat-Dijla (Euphrates-Tigris) basin. What is presented as a hypothetical situation in the former has been turned into an unfortunate reality in the latter. Both Dijla and Furat originate in Turkey, pass through Syria, and end up in Iraq where they join to form the Shat-al Arab that then discharges into the Persian Gulf. Mesopotamia means the land between the two rivers, the two rivers having been the source of civilization since the ancient times. Add the artificial international borders between Turkey, Syria, and Iraq, and the same life giving water turns into an explosive that could rock the area. In 1974 there was a near war between Syria and Iraq as Syria began to fill the reservoir that has become Lake Asad, decreasing the flow of the river to Iraq to as little as 25 percent of the normal rate. Armies were moved and threats were exchanged, though finally diplomatic activity by the Soviet Union and Saudi Arabia defused the situation. In 1990 tensions ran high as Turkey stopped all flow in Furat for one complete month as it started to fill the Ataturk Dam.
Today Turkey's Southeast Anatolia Project, (GAP in Turkey) is promising a much more serious conflict in the days to come. The multi-billion dollar GAP includes more than 20 dams and 17 electric power plants, which will reduce water supply to Syria by 50% and to Iraq by 90% when it is completed in another twenty years. Even more bizarre is the plan Turkey has for part of the water that it denies to Syria and Iraq seriously endangering their agriculture and economies; it will sell it to Israel through the so-called Peace Pipeline that will run through the Mediterranean. The agreement with Israel was signed in 2001. "We have declared that we can sell water to whichever country needs water, regardless of its language or flag," said Cumhur Ersumer, Turkey's energy minister at that time. "It looks like Israel will be the first country to buy Turkey's water." That is the logic of the nation-state as articulated by Suleyman Demirel: "Neither Syria or Iraq can lay claim to Turkey's rivers any more than Ankara could claim their oil. This is a matter of sovereignty."
We can be sure that accountants in Turkey can show that Turkey will benefit economically by doing what it plans to do. And even a so-called Islamist party in Turkey will be driven by those calculations pledging, as it does, allegiance to "Turkish national interests." A comparable situation would be Punjab denying water to Sind and then selling it to India. No matter how corrupt leaders in Pakistan become (if they have not already reached the limit) it is just impossible to imagine that outcome. And yet the same situation is not only possible, it is there in the other case. Such are the wonders of the corrupt ideology of nation-state!
Conflicts of interest between any two entities are normal and natural. What is crucial is the mechanism and structure for resolving them. Islamic laws of inheritance highlight this fact. Conflicts could develop even among close relatives over distribution of inheritance. Since Islam values very smooth relations and does not like even the slightest bickering there, the Shariah has provided the detailed rules for this distribution. Neither the people involved, nor the government can override this distribution. Thus a solid mechanism has been provided for resolution of these conflicts.
In case of two provinces of the same country, the mechanism for the resolution of their conflicts remains in the form of the central government as well as firm realization on the part of everyone that they are riding the same boat. However when they turn into independent countries, both of these are lost.
How the definition of the self-interest can change with a change in the frame of reference can be seen through another example. When the US gave the Pakistani ruler the choice of either joining the invader or joining the target he did not hesitate for a minute to choose the first option. It can be criticized as much as one wants, but the fact remains that under the frame of reference under which Pakistan and all Muslim countries operate today, that was an option. But can we imagine the US demanding, or Pakistan conceding the support for attacking Baluchistan? This would clearly be seen as preposterous by everyone. As far as the Shariah is concerned, the two situations are exactly alike. But in the system of nation-states they are not.
The gap between the idea of the nation-state and that of one Ummah is wider than can be patched with good leaders of individual nation-states
That the opposition to what the Pakistani president did was manageable is also a reflection of the fact that Muslims the world over have generally and unwittingly bought into the philosophy of this nationalism.
The imposition of embargo on Afghanistan and Iraq is another example of the clash between Islam and the nation-state. Islam teaches that it is not a believer who eats while his neighbor goes to bed hungry. The system of the UN on the other hand, ordered its member-states not to supply any food or medicine to those dying of hunger and disease in Iraq. Again, the fact that Muslim countries have complied with the latter without any consternation or serious opposition is a reminder of our subconscious acceptance of the nationalist ideology.
We can see why world Muslims acted like mice in the face of disaster. The Qur'an warned us not to engage in disputes and infighting or we would become weak and powerless. But we have not only done the exact opposite, we have given a permanent structure and legal cover to the arrangement for that infighting in the current political organization of the Muslim domain.
This exposition of the ideology of nation-state invariably faces a mental block; namely that all this is impossible. This argument runs like this. We had a Khilafah centuries ago. Since then we have had a checkered history of nominal Khalifah, Sultans, and Nawabs running their own kingdoms and fiefdoms. Today we have fifty-four states and there is no way we can change that in our life times. Yes and no. While we had more then one centers of political power for centuries, the Muslim world was much more integrated then than we realize. It was one social, cultural, religious and economic domain. Its language, system of education, currency, and laws were the same. There were no restrictions on travel, or movement of capital or goods. A Muslim could take up residence and start a business or get a job anywhere. Ibn Batuta traveled from Tunisia to Hijaz, East Africa, India, Malaya, and China, covering 75000 miles without traveling the same road twice. During the twenty-five year journey he took up residence where he wanted to; got even government assignments as Qadi and even as ambassador in China for the Sultan in India. If that was possible then, it should be easier now because of the huge advances in the communication and transportation technologies alone.
The corruption of ideas is far more devastating than the corruption of actions.
No one is suggesting that we can dismantle the fifty-four Muslim governments overnight and replace them with a Khilafah. But we can gradually breakdown the barriers between the Muslim states in travel, trade, and all exchanges at personal levels. With free flow of people, goods, capital, and ideas throughout the Muslim domain, a quite revolution can begin. We could realize that this domain is much more self-sufficient and strong then we have ever realized. That its various parts complement each other's needs and strengthen each other. That it is the artificial borders between Muslim lands drawn by colonial powers that have terribly weakened it!
While we recognize that the barriers to that vision are real and very serious, we must also realize that the most serious barriers are mental and psychological. We must break through the mental straitjacket and realize that another world is possible. Only then we will begin to see how to get there. It may take a generation or many generations. But we will never get there if we do not know that is where we want to go. Today sometimes Muslims say out of frustration that Muslim governments should form their own United Nations. The suggestion does capture our deep desire for unity as well as our deep running confusion about it. For it has one s too many. The Islamic discourse should be about a United Nation of theirs and not United Nations.
Invasion of Paganism into Monotheism by Materialism
About 3500 years ago, the Pharaoh of Egypt had declared himself Lord, ruling his nation as if life and death were in his hands. There were people in Egypt, mostly the Israelites, who believed in One God, but were made slaves and severely persecuted to the extent that their boys were killed as they were born. The land was also filled with magicians and witchcraft was the fashion of the day. Paganism was prevalent including the cow worship.
Centuries have passed since the Pharaohs ruled Egypt and much has changed. The scientific and technological advancements have made us live luxuriously in many ways. Many in America believe in One God, live in prosperity and are far removed from the like of the persecutions of the Pharaohs of the past. At the same time, magic and witchcraft still exist in the American life, but in ways which are very different from the time of the Pharaohs. An example of such presence can be seen in the Harry Potter books and paraphernalia. Paganism also has its presence, for example, in the customs of Halloween. The Holy scriptures acknowledge existence of magic, but forbid its practice.
"Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead." (Deuteronomy 18:10-11)
The story of Prophet Moses’ encounter with the magicians appears in several places in the Holy Scriptures. Below is one such narration:
Moses said: "O Pharaoh! I am an apostle from the Lord of the worlds,- One for whom it is right to say nothing but truth about God. Now have I come unto you (people), from your Lord, with a clear (Sign): So let the Children of Israel depart along with me." (Pharaoh) said: "If indeed thou hast come with a Sign, show it forth,- if thou
tells the truth." Then (Moses) threw his rod, and behold! it was a serpent, plain (for all to
see)! And he drew out his hand, and behold! it was white to all beholders! Said the Chiefs of the people of Pharaoh: "This is indeed a sorcerer well-versed. "His plan is to get you out of your land: then what is it ye counsel?" They said: "Keep him and his brother in suspense (for a while); and send to the cities men to collect- And bring up to thee all (our) sorcerers well-versed."
So there came the sorcerers to Pharaoh: They said, "of course we shall have
a (suitable) reward if we win!" He said: "Yea, (and more),- for ye shall in that case be (raised to posts) nearest (to my person)." They said: "O Moses! wilt thou throw (first), or shall we have the (first) throw?" Said Moses: "Throw ye (first)." So when they threw, they bewitched the eyes of the people, and struck terror into them: for they showed a great (feat of) magic. We put it into Moses' mind by inspiration: "Throw (now) thy rod":and behold! it swallows up straight away all the falsehoods which they fake!
Thus truth was confirmed, and all that they did was made of no effect. So the (great ones) were vanquished there and then, and were made to look small. But the sorcerers fell down prostrate in adoration. Saying: "We believe in the Lord of the Worlds,- "The Lord of Moses and Aaron."
Said Pharaoh: "Believe ye in Him before I give you permission? Surely this is a trick which ye have planned in the city to drive out its people: but soon shall ye know (the consequences). Be sure I will cut off your hands and your feet on apposite sides, and I will cause you all to die on the cross." They said: "For us, We are but sent back unto our Lord: "But thou dost wreak thy vengeance on us simply because we believed in the Signs of our Lord when they reached us! Our Lord! pour out on us patience and constancy, and take our souls unto thee as those who bow to thy will! (The Holy Quran, 7:104-126)
Moses exposed the falsehood of the sorcerers. The sorcerers repented, gave up magic and became true believers of the God Almighty. Can the same happen with the makers of Harry Potter? The books are in effect promoters of paganism. They glorify magic and paganism while non-magical people, called Muggles, are despised and portrayed as boring, narrow-minded, and paranoid of magic. Not surprisingly, the main characters in the story have few noble qualities; they lie with impunity, use profanity, don't respect their elders, break rules regularly, and are unrepentant. And for all these qualities and more, the books are popular and are having an effect. Children have also gone crazy over Harry Potter memorabilia, surrounding themselves with Harry Potter T-shirts, posters, toys, costumes, wands, hats, etc.
Welcome to the world of materialism and paganism, where superstitions and the occult reign supreme in the hearts and minds of people, and where the twin forces have forged an "alliance of the willing" that is doing its "magic" on a global scale. This alliance however is not limited to Harry Potter books.
Halloween has been tied to pagans, like the Druids. Samhain was the name of the Druid god of the dead. The Druids were a religious order amongst the Celts. On October 31st they would try to appease their lord of death. These Druids also believed that witches rode on broom sticks and that ghosts were the cause of supernatural occurrences. The belief was that on the eve of the Celtic New Year (which for them was October 31), the souls of the dead people roamed the land of the living. The Devil, spirits and witches were also believed to be moving about and at the height of their power.
Halloween activities have found their roots in almost every walk of life. Driving around neighborhoods shows a large number of homes with Halloween displays. School teachers hold special Halloween parties. There may not be a single store, office or institution left without a display of Halloween. The entire nation appears to be celebrating Halloween. It is, therefore, not difficult to conclude that those who believe in monotheism are also participating in these activities. I leave it to the rabbis, pastors and imams to give their verdicts based on the Holy Scriptures, but I do have to ask those who believe in One God to read the Ten Commandments just one more time, especially the phrase, “…for I the Lord your God am a jealous God …”
What did Moses do when he found his nation made a calf? What would Moses do if he were among us? Deeds have no value without Faith and yet Faith demands obedience in action. Satan did not say that he does not believe in God. He disobeyed God and became the lowest of the low!
by Ishaq Zahid
Centuries have passed since the Pharaohs ruled Egypt and much has changed. The scientific and technological advancements have made us live luxuriously in many ways. Many in America believe in One God, live in prosperity and are far removed from the like of the persecutions of the Pharaohs of the past. At the same time, magic and witchcraft still exist in the American life, but in ways which are very different from the time of the Pharaohs. An example of such presence can be seen in the Harry Potter books and paraphernalia. Paganism also has its presence, for example, in the customs of Halloween. The Holy scriptures acknowledge existence of magic, but forbid its practice.
"Let no one be found among you who sacrifices his son or daughter in the fire, who practices divination or sorcery, interprets omens, engages in witchcraft, or casts spells, or who is a medium or spiritist or who consults the dead." (Deuteronomy 18:10-11)
The story of Prophet Moses’ encounter with the magicians appears in several places in the Holy Scriptures. Below is one such narration:
Moses said: "O Pharaoh! I am an apostle from the Lord of the worlds,- One for whom it is right to say nothing but truth about God. Now have I come unto you (people), from your Lord, with a clear (Sign): So let the Children of Israel depart along with me." (Pharaoh) said: "If indeed thou hast come with a Sign, show it forth,- if thou
tells the truth." Then (Moses) threw his rod, and behold! it was a serpent, plain (for all to
see)! And he drew out his hand, and behold! it was white to all beholders! Said the Chiefs of the people of Pharaoh: "This is indeed a sorcerer well-versed. "His plan is to get you out of your land: then what is it ye counsel?" They said: "Keep him and his brother in suspense (for a while); and send to the cities men to collect- And bring up to thee all (our) sorcerers well-versed."
So there came the sorcerers to Pharaoh: They said, "of course we shall have
a (suitable) reward if we win!" He said: "Yea, (and more),- for ye shall in that case be (raised to posts) nearest (to my person)." They said: "O Moses! wilt thou throw (first), or shall we have the (first) throw?" Said Moses: "Throw ye (first)." So when they threw, they bewitched the eyes of the people, and struck terror into them: for they showed a great (feat of) magic. We put it into Moses' mind by inspiration: "Throw (now) thy rod":and behold! it swallows up straight away all the falsehoods which they fake!
Thus truth was confirmed, and all that they did was made of no effect. So the (great ones) were vanquished there and then, and were made to look small. But the sorcerers fell down prostrate in adoration. Saying: "We believe in the Lord of the Worlds,- "The Lord of Moses and Aaron."
Said Pharaoh: "Believe ye in Him before I give you permission? Surely this is a trick which ye have planned in the city to drive out its people: but soon shall ye know (the consequences). Be sure I will cut off your hands and your feet on apposite sides, and I will cause you all to die on the cross." They said: "For us, We are but sent back unto our Lord: "But thou dost wreak thy vengeance on us simply because we believed in the Signs of our Lord when they reached us! Our Lord! pour out on us patience and constancy, and take our souls unto thee as those who bow to thy will! (The Holy Quran, 7:104-126)
Moses exposed the falsehood of the sorcerers. The sorcerers repented, gave up magic and became true believers of the God Almighty. Can the same happen with the makers of Harry Potter? The books are in effect promoters of paganism. They glorify magic and paganism while non-magical people, called Muggles, are despised and portrayed as boring, narrow-minded, and paranoid of magic. Not surprisingly, the main characters in the story have few noble qualities; they lie with impunity, use profanity, don't respect their elders, break rules regularly, and are unrepentant. And for all these qualities and more, the books are popular and are having an effect. Children have also gone crazy over Harry Potter memorabilia, surrounding themselves with Harry Potter T-shirts, posters, toys, costumes, wands, hats, etc.
Welcome to the world of materialism and paganism, where superstitions and the occult reign supreme in the hearts and minds of people, and where the twin forces have forged an "alliance of the willing" that is doing its "magic" on a global scale. This alliance however is not limited to Harry Potter books.
Halloween has been tied to pagans, like the Druids. Samhain was the name of the Druid god of the dead. The Druids were a religious order amongst the Celts. On October 31st they would try to appease their lord of death. These Druids also believed that witches rode on broom sticks and that ghosts were the cause of supernatural occurrences. The belief was that on the eve of the Celtic New Year (which for them was October 31), the souls of the dead people roamed the land of the living. The Devil, spirits and witches were also believed to be moving about and at the height of their power.
Halloween activities have found their roots in almost every walk of life. Driving around neighborhoods shows a large number of homes with Halloween displays. School teachers hold special Halloween parties. There may not be a single store, office or institution left without a display of Halloween. The entire nation appears to be celebrating Halloween. It is, therefore, not difficult to conclude that those who believe in monotheism are also participating in these activities. I leave it to the rabbis, pastors and imams to give their verdicts based on the Holy Scriptures, but I do have to ask those who believe in One God to read the Ten Commandments just one more time, especially the phrase, “…for I the Lord your God am a jealous God …”
What did Moses do when he found his nation made a calf? What would Moses do if he were among us? Deeds have no value without Faith and yet Faith demands obedience in action. Satan did not say that he does not believe in God. He disobeyed God and became the lowest of the low!
by Ishaq Zahid
Harry Potter: Facts about Fiction
The following is a four years old article by Khalid Baig, but with a new movie out, it is worth reading before one decides to go to the cinema. (July 10, 2007)
Harry Potter: Facts about Fiction
By Khalid Baig
Posted: 21 Rabi-u-Thani 1424, 21 June 2003
As expected there was much frenzy around the latest Harry Potter book. Bookstores and clubs around the world arranged special midnight parties and other events in celebration of the launching of the long-awaited fifth book in the series. A grandiose countdown was held in Times Square for the coming of the fifth book.
The book was set to break many old records. Online bookseller Amazon had already received one million pre-orders of the new book, its largest pre-order ever. Scholastic, the American publisher had ordered 8.5 million copies as the largest first printing ever. Worldwide, 13 million copies of the book had rolled off the presses in a massive print run.
The other books in the Harry Potter series have been translated into more than 55 languages, including Urdu, Persian, and Turkish. Nearly 200 million copies of the first four books have been sold in 200 countries.
What is all this craze about?
The series chronicles the growing up of a young orphan wizard named Harry Potter who attends a secret magic boarding school called Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
Harry is a very unique wizard. His parents are killed while he is a baby by a wicked powerful wizard named Voldemort, but generally called "you-know-who" or "he-who-must-not-be-named". Voldemort fails in his attempt to kill Harry and instead is nearly destroyed when his magic rebounds on him. Harry is left with a lightning shaped scar on his forehead.
Harry is sent to live with his "muggle" (non-magical people) relatives for the next ten years. He lives a miserable life, tormented by his aunt and uncle and his spoiled cousin. They attempt to keep him from knowing that he is a wizard.
Then, suddenly a letter arrives from Hogwarts on his eleventh birthday, changing his life completely. Harry finds out he is a wizard and rather famous for his encounter with the evil lord Voldemort. Despite opposition from his aunt and uncle, Harry goes to the wizard boarding school where he meets new people, including his best friends Ron and Hermione. Harry discovers that he has both admirers and enemies.
Each book details the events of one school year.
The main characters in the story have few noble qualities; they lie with impunity, use profanity, don't respect their elders, break rules regularly, and are unrepentant.
While the books are characterized by most people as innocent fantasy and entertainment, they contain many evil messages - not all of which are subtle.
The books glorify magic and sorcery. Harry and his classmates regularly cast spells, brew potions, learn to tell the future, communicate with the spirits of the dead, train magical animals, and ride brooms. They study astrology, crystal gazing, numerology, transfiguration, and divination. Darker things occur as well such as murder, human sacrifice, drinking of unicorn blood, etc. The fight between good and evil in this book is actually a conflict between "good magic" and "evil magic", both of which are evil.
The books are in effect promoters of paganism. They glorify magic and paganism while non-magical people, called Muggles, are despised and portrayed as boring, narrow-minded, and paranoid of magic.
Not surprisingly, the main characters in the story have few noble qualities; they lie with impunity, use profanity, don't respect their elders, break rules regularly, and are unrepentant.
And for all these qualities and more, the books are popular and are having an effect. It is the "in" thing to purchase the book. And not just the book. Children have gone crazy over Harry Potter memorabilia, surrounding themselves with Harry Potter T-shirts, posters, toys, costumes, wands, hats, etc.
The media has been glorifying the book that glorifies sorcery.
Welcome to the world of capitalism and paganism, where superstitions and the occult reign supreme in the hearts and minds of people, and where the twin forces have forged an "alliance of the willing" that is doing its "magic" on a global scale.
Capitalism is all about maximization of profits and if that requires appealing to the lowest instincts and the darkest recesses of human nature, so be it. Millions of dollars have been spent on advertising the latest craze on billboards, buttons, bumper stickers, and posters etc. U.S. publisher Scholastic alone has planned a $4 million marketing budget for this single book - among the largest advertising budgets ever for a book.
The media machine --- equally adept at political, cultural, and commercial propaganda --- has been doing its part faithfully, paying a great deal of attention to the smallest events relating to the coming of the fifth book. It has been glorifying the book that glorifies sorcery.
Even if it were innocent entertainment (which it is not) the extreme devotion would be unjustified. But this culture is given to extremes and incidents of mass craziness are nothing new in it. The cabbage patch dolls craze in the 1980s was similar to current craze over the Harry Potter books. The Cabbage Patch Dolls were the fad of the 1980s. The most distinctive feature about them was that each doll looked a bit different from others and came with its own unique name and birthday, "adoption papers," and a "birth certificate." Marketing gimmick and television coverage combined to make sales explode starting in 1983. Chartered planes were used to bring the dolls from the overseas manufacturing plants to meet the ever increasing demand. Fist fights among eager customers often broke out in retail stores when a shipment of dolls arrived. In 1985, Coleco posted record sales of $600 million, thanks to their Cabbage Patch Kids.
When life has no higher purpose, entertainment and fun become the over-riding goal in life. When there is no belief in or clear concept of God as Creator and Master of the universe, superstition, sorcery, and the occult become fascinating.
When life has no higher purpose, entertainment and fun become the over-riding goal in life.
It is a reflection on the state of the society that there has been scarce opposition to this series that promises to become darker with each new release.
The Role of Muslims
In this current state of hysteria, Muslims should have played an important role in opposing this book and exposing the flaws of this culture. It is the duty of Muslims to guide the world, rather than blindly follow the ignorant masses. The Qur'an commands us in Surah Al-Kahf, "And don't obey any whose heart We have permitted to neglect the remembrance of Us, one who follows his own desires, whose case has gone beyond all bounds." [Al-Kahf 18:28]
Yet, unfortunately, we find very little opposition or reflection from Muslims, many of whom have chosen to blindly follow the pop culture. Many Muslims have assured themselves that the books are harmless fiction. Others even claim them to be beneficial because they encourage reading. Reading what? It does not occur to them to ask that question.
Islam prohibits both pointless entertainment (lahw) and sorcery. But countless Muslims seem to be unaware of that. And they are the ones fascinated by Harry Potter.
Harry Potter: Facts about Fiction
By Khalid Baig
Posted: 21 Rabi-u-Thani 1424, 21 June 2003
As expected there was much frenzy around the latest Harry Potter book. Bookstores and clubs around the world arranged special midnight parties and other events in celebration of the launching of the long-awaited fifth book in the series. A grandiose countdown was held in Times Square for the coming of the fifth book.
The book was set to break many old records. Online bookseller Amazon had already received one million pre-orders of the new book, its largest pre-order ever. Scholastic, the American publisher had ordered 8.5 million copies as the largest first printing ever. Worldwide, 13 million copies of the book had rolled off the presses in a massive print run.
The other books in the Harry Potter series have been translated into more than 55 languages, including Urdu, Persian, and Turkish. Nearly 200 million copies of the first four books have been sold in 200 countries.
What is all this craze about?
The series chronicles the growing up of a young orphan wizard named Harry Potter who attends a secret magic boarding school called Hogwarts School of Witchcraft and Wizardry.
Harry is a very unique wizard. His parents are killed while he is a baby by a wicked powerful wizard named Voldemort, but generally called "you-know-who" or "he-who-must-not-be-named". Voldemort fails in his attempt to kill Harry and instead is nearly destroyed when his magic rebounds on him. Harry is left with a lightning shaped scar on his forehead.
Harry is sent to live with his "muggle" (non-magical people) relatives for the next ten years. He lives a miserable life, tormented by his aunt and uncle and his spoiled cousin. They attempt to keep him from knowing that he is a wizard.
Then, suddenly a letter arrives from Hogwarts on his eleventh birthday, changing his life completely. Harry finds out he is a wizard and rather famous for his encounter with the evil lord Voldemort. Despite opposition from his aunt and uncle, Harry goes to the wizard boarding school where he meets new people, including his best friends Ron and Hermione. Harry discovers that he has both admirers and enemies.
Each book details the events of one school year.
The main characters in the story have few noble qualities; they lie with impunity, use profanity, don't respect their elders, break rules regularly, and are unrepentant.
While the books are characterized by most people as innocent fantasy and entertainment, they contain many evil messages - not all of which are subtle.
The books glorify magic and sorcery. Harry and his classmates regularly cast spells, brew potions, learn to tell the future, communicate with the spirits of the dead, train magical animals, and ride brooms. They study astrology, crystal gazing, numerology, transfiguration, and divination. Darker things occur as well such as murder, human sacrifice, drinking of unicorn blood, etc. The fight between good and evil in this book is actually a conflict between "good magic" and "evil magic", both of which are evil.
The books are in effect promoters of paganism. They glorify magic and paganism while non-magical people, called Muggles, are despised and portrayed as boring, narrow-minded, and paranoid of magic.
Not surprisingly, the main characters in the story have few noble qualities; they lie with impunity, use profanity, don't respect their elders, break rules regularly, and are unrepentant.
And for all these qualities and more, the books are popular and are having an effect. It is the "in" thing to purchase the book. And not just the book. Children have gone crazy over Harry Potter memorabilia, surrounding themselves with Harry Potter T-shirts, posters, toys, costumes, wands, hats, etc.
The media has been glorifying the book that glorifies sorcery.
Welcome to the world of capitalism and paganism, where superstitions and the occult reign supreme in the hearts and minds of people, and where the twin forces have forged an "alliance of the willing" that is doing its "magic" on a global scale.
Capitalism is all about maximization of profits and if that requires appealing to the lowest instincts and the darkest recesses of human nature, so be it. Millions of dollars have been spent on advertising the latest craze on billboards, buttons, bumper stickers, and posters etc. U.S. publisher Scholastic alone has planned a $4 million marketing budget for this single book - among the largest advertising budgets ever for a book.
The media machine --- equally adept at political, cultural, and commercial propaganda --- has been doing its part faithfully, paying a great deal of attention to the smallest events relating to the coming of the fifth book. It has been glorifying the book that glorifies sorcery.
Even if it were innocent entertainment (which it is not) the extreme devotion would be unjustified. But this culture is given to extremes and incidents of mass craziness are nothing new in it. The cabbage patch dolls craze in the 1980s was similar to current craze over the Harry Potter books. The Cabbage Patch Dolls were the fad of the 1980s. The most distinctive feature about them was that each doll looked a bit different from others and came with its own unique name and birthday, "adoption papers," and a "birth certificate." Marketing gimmick and television coverage combined to make sales explode starting in 1983. Chartered planes were used to bring the dolls from the overseas manufacturing plants to meet the ever increasing demand. Fist fights among eager customers often broke out in retail stores when a shipment of dolls arrived. In 1985, Coleco posted record sales of $600 million, thanks to their Cabbage Patch Kids.
When life has no higher purpose, entertainment and fun become the over-riding goal in life. When there is no belief in or clear concept of God as Creator and Master of the universe, superstition, sorcery, and the occult become fascinating.
When life has no higher purpose, entertainment and fun become the over-riding goal in life.
It is a reflection on the state of the society that there has been scarce opposition to this series that promises to become darker with each new release.
The Role of Muslims
In this current state of hysteria, Muslims should have played an important role in opposing this book and exposing the flaws of this culture. It is the duty of Muslims to guide the world, rather than blindly follow the ignorant masses. The Qur'an commands us in Surah Al-Kahf, "And don't obey any whose heart We have permitted to neglect the remembrance of Us, one who follows his own desires, whose case has gone beyond all bounds." [Al-Kahf 18:28]
Yet, unfortunately, we find very little opposition or reflection from Muslims, many of whom have chosen to blindly follow the pop culture. Many Muslims have assured themselves that the books are harmless fiction. Others even claim them to be beneficial because they encourage reading. Reading what? It does not occur to them to ask that question.
Islam prohibits both pointless entertainment (lahw) and sorcery. But countless Muslims seem to be unaware of that. And they are the ones fascinated by Harry Potter.
Prohibition of Deriding one's Lineage
Allah, the Exalted, says:
"And those who annoy believing men and women undeservedly, bear on themselves the crime of slander and plain sin.'' (33:58)
1578. Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "Two matters are signs of disbelief on the part of those who indulge in them: Defaming and speaking evil of a person's lineage, and wailing over the dead.''
[Muslim].
Commentary: Both the sins mentioned in this Hadith are such that if a Muslim thinks them lawful and still commits them he will become a Kafir. To defame someone's lineage means to disgrace or humiliate somebody by saying to him or to her: "Your father belongs to such and such profession'' or "Your mother is such and such / so-and-so'' or "You are a weaver, blacksmith, laundrer, cobbler, etc.''
Mourning and wailing means expressing qualities of a deceased person through weeping, crying and lamenting loudly. Imam An-Nawawi said that such qualities are attributes and acts of the disbelievers and practices of the pre-Islamic period, or Jahiliyyah.
"And those who annoy believing men and women undeservedly, bear on themselves the crime of slander and plain sin.'' (33:58)
1578. Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "Two matters are signs of disbelief on the part of those who indulge in them: Defaming and speaking evil of a person's lineage, and wailing over the dead.''
[Muslim].
Commentary: Both the sins mentioned in this Hadith are such that if a Muslim thinks them lawful and still commits them he will become a Kafir. To defame someone's lineage means to disgrace or humiliate somebody by saying to him or to her: "Your father belongs to such and such profession'' or "Your mother is such and such / so-and-so'' or "You are a weaver, blacksmith, laundrer, cobbler, etc.''
Mourning and wailing means expressing qualities of a deceased person through weeping, crying and lamenting loudly. Imam An-Nawawi said that such qualities are attributes and acts of the disbelievers and practices of the pre-Islamic period, or Jahiliyyah.
Prohibition of Rejoicing over another's Trouble
Allah SWT, the Exalted, says:
"The believers are nothing else than brothers (in Islamic religion).'' (49:10)
"Verily, those who like that (the crime of) illegal sexual intercourse should be propagated among those who believe, they will have a painful torment in this world and in the Hereafter.'' (24:19)
1577. Wathilah bin Al-Asqa` (May Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "Do not express pleasure at the misfortune of a (Muslim) brother lest Allah should bestow mercy upon him and make you suffer from a misfortune.''
[At-Tirmidhi].
Commentary: A true believer is one who feels unhappy to see Muslims suffering, and rejoices on the happiness of his other fellows in Faith. It is contrary to the conduct of a true believer to rejoice over the trouble of another Muslim as this attitude is very much disliked by Allah. There is every possibility that Allah may punish such a person in this world and relieve the one who is in trouble. See also Hadith No. 1571.
"The believers are nothing else than brothers (in Islamic religion).'' (49:10)
"Verily, those who like that (the crime of) illegal sexual intercourse should be propagated among those who believe, they will have a painful torment in this world and in the Hereafter.'' (24:19)
1577. Wathilah bin Al-Asqa` (May Allah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "Do not express pleasure at the misfortune of a (Muslim) brother lest Allah should bestow mercy upon him and make you suffer from a misfortune.''
[At-Tirmidhi].
Commentary: A true believer is one who feels unhappy to see Muslims suffering, and rejoices on the happiness of his other fellows in Faith. It is contrary to the conduct of a true believer to rejoice over the trouble of another Muslim as this attitude is very much disliked by Allah. There is every possibility that Allah may punish such a person in this world and relieve the one who is in trouble. See also Hadith No. 1571.
Prohibition of the Treachery and Breaking one's Covenant
Allah SWT, the Exalted, says:
"O you who believe! Fulfill (your) obligations.'' (5:1)
"And fulfill (every) covenant. Verily! The covenant will be questioned about.'' (17:34)
1584. `Abdullah bin `Amr bin Al-`As (May Allah be pleased with them) said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "Whosoever possesses these four characteristics is a sheer hypocrite; and anyone who possesses one of them possesses a characteristic of hypocrisy till he gives it up. These are: when he is entrusted with something, he proves dishonest; when he speaks, he tells a lie; when he makes a covenant, he proves treacherous; and when he quarrels, he behaves in very imprudent, evil, insulting manner.''
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
Commentary: This Hadith has already been mentioned (Hadith No. 1544). The traits mentioned in this Hadith are peculiar to hypocrites and every Muslim is required to abstain from them. Excellence of character is riveted with Faith. The nobility of character is invariably reflected in Faith, and where there is no Faith there will be little excellence of character.
1585. Ibn Mas`ud, Ibn `Umar and Anas (May Allah be pleased with them) said: The Prophet (PBUH) said, "For every one who breaks his covenant, there will be a (huge) flag on the Day of Resurrection and it will be said: `This flag proclaims a breach of covenant by so-and-so.'''
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
Commentary: "Ghadr'" means breach of oath and its disregard. On the Day of Judgement, a person with such a quality will be given a (huge) flag which will be a sign of his lack of sincerity to his words.
1586. Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri (May Allah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Every one who breaks a covenant will have a flag by his buttocks on the Day of Resurrection. It will be raised higher according to the nature of his breach. Behold, there will be no greater a sin with respect to breaking the covenant than that of a ruler who breaks his covenant with the Muslim masses.''
[Muslim].
Commentary: This Hadith clearly shows that breach of covenant is forbidden in Islam, especially on the part of a ruler because (a) he is in a position to honour his covenant, and (b) his evil can affect the whole Muslim community.
It was a custom in the Pre-Islamic Period of Ignorance in Arabia to fix flags on poles for those who were guilty of breach of oath to humiliate and defame them. Almighty Allah has mentioned the punishment of flags on the Day of Resurrection for such people who break their covenant so that people can easily understand its nature. What a humiliation that will be!
* Placing the flag by his bottom signifies humiliation and disgrace because flags are usually carried in front of the bearer not behind. (Editor's Note)
1587. Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Allah, the Exalted, says: `I will contend on the Day of Resurrection against three (types of) people: One who makes a covenant in My Name and then breaks it; one who sells a free man as a slave and devours his price; and one who hires a workman and having taken full work from him, does not pay him his wages.'''
[Al-Bukhari].
Commentary: This Hadith highlights the importance of fulfillment of promise, the prohibition of the sale of a free person, and the payment of due wages to the labourers.
"O you who believe! Fulfill (your) obligations.'' (5:1)
"And fulfill (every) covenant. Verily! The covenant will be questioned about.'' (17:34)
1584. `Abdullah bin `Amr bin Al-`As (May Allah be pleased with them) said: The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, "Whosoever possesses these four characteristics is a sheer hypocrite; and anyone who possesses one of them possesses a characteristic of hypocrisy till he gives it up. These are: when he is entrusted with something, he proves dishonest; when he speaks, he tells a lie; when he makes a covenant, he proves treacherous; and when he quarrels, he behaves in very imprudent, evil, insulting manner.''
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
Commentary: This Hadith has already been mentioned (Hadith No. 1544). The traits mentioned in this Hadith are peculiar to hypocrites and every Muslim is required to abstain from them. Excellence of character is riveted with Faith. The nobility of character is invariably reflected in Faith, and where there is no Faith there will be little excellence of character.
1585. Ibn Mas`ud, Ibn `Umar and Anas (May Allah be pleased with them) said: The Prophet (PBUH) said, "For every one who breaks his covenant, there will be a (huge) flag on the Day of Resurrection and it will be said: `This flag proclaims a breach of covenant by so-and-so.'''
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
Commentary: "Ghadr'" means breach of oath and its disregard. On the Day of Judgement, a person with such a quality will be given a (huge) flag which will be a sign of his lack of sincerity to his words.
1586. Abu Sa`id Al-Khudri (May Allah be pleased with him) said: The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Every one who breaks a covenant will have a flag by his buttocks on the Day of Resurrection. It will be raised higher according to the nature of his breach. Behold, there will be no greater a sin with respect to breaking the covenant than that of a ruler who breaks his covenant with the Muslim masses.''
[Muslim].
Commentary: This Hadith clearly shows that breach of covenant is forbidden in Islam, especially on the part of a ruler because (a) he is in a position to honour his covenant, and (b) his evil can affect the whole Muslim community.
It was a custom in the Pre-Islamic Period of Ignorance in Arabia to fix flags on poles for those who were guilty of breach of oath to humiliate and defame them. Almighty Allah has mentioned the punishment of flags on the Day of Resurrection for such people who break their covenant so that people can easily understand its nature. What a humiliation that will be!
* Placing the flag by his bottom signifies humiliation and disgrace because flags are usually carried in front of the bearer not behind. (Editor's Note)
1587. Abu Hurairah (May Allah be pleased with him) reported: The Prophet (PBUH) said, "Allah, the Exalted, says: `I will contend on the Day of Resurrection against three (types of) people: One who makes a covenant in My Name and then breaks it; one who sells a free man as a slave and devours his price; and one who hires a workman and having taken full work from him, does not pay him his wages.'''
[Al-Bukhari].
Commentary: This Hadith highlights the importance of fulfillment of promise, the prohibition of the sale of a free person, and the payment of due wages to the labourers.
Competing in Sin
If there is a phrase that can describe the world today, it has to be "Competing in Sin!"
Many Muslim governments, groups and individuals have taken an un-Islamic path and are trying to do what non-Muslim governments, groups and individuals are doing. It is a competition in sin and Muslims are losing. About fourteen hundred years ago, one of the most beloved person of the Muslim ummah, Umar bin Abdul Aziz wrote a letter to a military commander and said:
Sin is even more dangerous than the ruses/tricks of the enemy. Amirul-Momineen bids upon Mansur that instead of taking fright of his enemy, he should fear transgressing the limits of Allah T’ala. We overcome our enemies in the battlefield only because of their vices and sins, for, had it not been so, we would not have had the courage to face them. We can not deploy troops in the same numbers as our enemies can do, nor do we possess the equipments they have got. Thus, if we equate ourselves with our enemies in misdeeds and transgressions, they would undoubtedly gain a victory over us by virtue of their numerical superiority and strength.
Competing in Sin!
Outline
Surah Al-Teen
Comments on asfala safeleen
A careful analysis of Current world crises and the state of the Muslim Ummah is needed.
One of the letters of Umar bin Abdul Aziz to his military commander may give us an understanding.
Statistics
The sentences from the letter again
Ayah on unjust killing
سورة التين - سورة 95
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
1. وَالتِّينِ وَالزَّيْتُونِ
2. وَطُورِ سِينِينَ
3. وَهَذَا الْبَلَدِ الْأَمِينِ
4. لَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنسَانَ فِي أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِيمٍ
5. ثُمَّ رَدَدْنَاهُ أَسْفَلَ سَافِلِينَ
6. إِلَّا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ فَلَهُمْ أَجْرٌ غَيْرُ مَمْنُونٍ
7. فَمَا يُكَذِّبُكَ بَعْدُ بِالدِّينِ
8. أَلَيْسَ اللَّهُ بِأَحْكَمِ الْحَاكِمِينَ
THE FIG, THE FIGTREE, CHAPTER NO. 095
With the Name of Allah, the Merciful Benefactor, The Merciful Redeemer
095.001 By the Fig and the Olive,
095.002 And the Mount of Sinai,
095.003 And this City (Makkah) of security,-
095.004 We have indeed created man in the best of moulds,
095.005 Then do We abase him (to be) the lowest of the low,-
095.006 Except such as believe and do righteous deeds: For they shall have a reward unfailing.
095.007 Then what can, after this, contradict thee, as to the judgment (to come)?
095.008 Is not Allah the wisest of judges?
Yes Indeed!
This Surah tells us, among other things, that if a person does not have the true faith (Eiman) and is not striving for righteous deeds (amal-us-saleh), using The Holy Quran and Sunnah as The Guidance, then even though every person is created by the best of moulds, that person becomes the lowest of the low! Asfala Safileen.
Islam is taken as a complete way of life. Righteous deeds therefore are not limited to prayers, Zakat and fasting.
Many Muslim governments, groups and individuals have taken an un-Islamic path and are trying to do what non-Muslim governments, groups and individuals are doing. It is a competition in sin and Muslims are losing. About fourteen hundred years ago, one of the most beloved person of the Muslim ummah, Umar bin Abdul Aziz wrote a letter to a military commander and said:
Sin is even more dangerous than the ruses/tricks of the enemy. Amirul-Momineen bids upon Mansur that instead of taking fright of his enemy, he should fear transgressing the limits of Allah T’ala. We overcome our enemies in the battlefield only because of their vices and sins, for, had it not been so, we would not have had the courage to face them. We can not deploy troops in the same numbers as our enemies can do, nor do we possess the equipments they have got. Thus, if we equate ourselves with our enemies in misdeeds and transgressions, they would undoubtedly gain a victory over us by virtue of their numerical superiority and strength.
Competing in Sin!
Outline
Surah Al-Teen
Comments on asfala safeleen
A careful analysis of Current world crises and the state of the Muslim Ummah is needed.
One of the letters of Umar bin Abdul Aziz to his military commander may give us an understanding.
Statistics
The sentences from the letter again
Ayah on unjust killing
سورة التين - سورة 95
بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
1. وَالتِّينِ وَالزَّيْتُونِ
2. وَطُورِ سِينِينَ
3. وَهَذَا الْبَلَدِ الْأَمِينِ
4. لَقَدْ خَلَقْنَا الْإِنسَانَ فِي أَحْسَنِ تَقْوِيمٍ
5. ثُمَّ رَدَدْنَاهُ أَسْفَلَ سَافِلِينَ
6. إِلَّا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا وَعَمِلُوا الصَّالِحَاتِ فَلَهُمْ أَجْرٌ غَيْرُ مَمْنُونٍ
7. فَمَا يُكَذِّبُكَ بَعْدُ بِالدِّينِ
8. أَلَيْسَ اللَّهُ بِأَحْكَمِ الْحَاكِمِينَ
THE FIG, THE FIGTREE, CHAPTER NO. 095
With the Name of Allah, the Merciful Benefactor, The Merciful Redeemer
095.001 By the Fig and the Olive,
095.002 And the Mount of Sinai,
095.003 And this City (Makkah) of security,-
095.004 We have indeed created man in the best of moulds,
095.005 Then do We abase him (to be) the lowest of the low,-
095.006 Except such as believe and do righteous deeds: For they shall have a reward unfailing.
095.007 Then what can, after this, contradict thee, as to the judgment (to come)?
095.008 Is not Allah the wisest of judges?
Yes Indeed!
This Surah tells us, among other things, that if a person does not have the true faith (Eiman) and is not striving for righteous deeds (amal-us-saleh), using The Holy Quran and Sunnah as The Guidance, then even though every person is created by the best of moulds, that person becomes the lowest of the low! Asfala Safileen.
Islam is taken as a complete way of life. Righteous deeds therefore are not limited to prayers, Zakat and fasting.
The First, The Last, The Evident and The Immanent
هُوَ الْأَوَّلُ وَالْآخِرُ وَالظَّاهِرُ وَالْبَاطِنُ وَهُوَ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيمٌ
057.003 He is the First and the Last, the Evident and the Immanent: and He has full knowledge of all things.
When there was nothing, Allah T'ala was, and when there will be nothing, He will be. He is the most Manifest of all the manifest, for whatever manifests itself in the world, does only by His attributes and His works and His light. And He is the Most Hidden of all the hidden, for not only do the senses fail to percieve Him but the intellect and thought and imagination also cannot attain to His essence and reality.
The best commentary in this regard are the words of a supplication of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings). which Imam Ahmad, Muslim, Tirmidhi, and Baihaqi have related on the authority of Hadrat Abu Hurairah, and Hafiz Abu Ya'la Mosuli in his Musnad on the authority of Hadrat 'A'ishah:
"Antal Awwal, fa-laisa qablaka shai'in; wa Antal Akhir fa-laisa ba 'daka shai 'in; wa Antal Zahir, fa-laisa fauqaka shai in; wa Antal Batin, fa laisa dunaka shai'in. " "You alone are the First; none is before You; You alone are the Last: none is after You; You alone are the Exalted none is above You; You alone are the Hidden: none is more hidden than You. "
Here, the question arises: How does this accord with the immortality and eternal life of the dwellers of Paradise and Hell mentioned in the Qur'an when Allah alone is the Last and Eternal? Its answer has been provided by the Qur'an itself: "Everything is perishable except Allah Himself." (AI-Qasas: 88). In other words no creature is immortal in its personal capacity; if a thing exists or continues to exist, it does so because Allah keeps it so, and can exist only by His letting it exist; otherwise in its own capacity everything is perishable except Allah. Immortality in Heaven and Hell will not be bestowed upon somebody because he is immortal by himself, but because AIIah will grant him eternal life. The same is true of the angels: they are not immortal by themselves. When Allah willed they came into existence, and will continue to exist only as long as He wills.
057.003 He is the First and the Last, the Evident and the Immanent: and He has full knowledge of all things.
When there was nothing, Allah T'ala was, and when there will be nothing, He will be. He is the most Manifest of all the manifest, for whatever manifests itself in the world, does only by His attributes and His works and His light. And He is the Most Hidden of all the hidden, for not only do the senses fail to percieve Him but the intellect and thought and imagination also cannot attain to His essence and reality.
The best commentary in this regard are the words of a supplication of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be Allah's peace and blessings). which Imam Ahmad, Muslim, Tirmidhi, and Baihaqi have related on the authority of Hadrat Abu Hurairah, and Hafiz Abu Ya'la Mosuli in his Musnad on the authority of Hadrat 'A'ishah:
"Antal Awwal, fa-laisa qablaka shai'in; wa Antal Akhir fa-laisa ba 'daka shai 'in; wa Antal Zahir, fa-laisa fauqaka shai in; wa Antal Batin, fa laisa dunaka shai'in. " "You alone are the First; none is before You; You alone are the Last: none is after You; You alone are the Exalted none is above You; You alone are the Hidden: none is more hidden than You. "
Here, the question arises: How does this accord with the immortality and eternal life of the dwellers of Paradise and Hell mentioned in the Qur'an when Allah alone is the Last and Eternal? Its answer has been provided by the Qur'an itself: "Everything is perishable except Allah Himself." (AI-Qasas: 88). In other words no creature is immortal in its personal capacity; if a thing exists or continues to exist, it does so because Allah keeps it so, and can exist only by His letting it exist; otherwise in its own capacity everything is perishable except Allah. Immortality in Heaven and Hell will not be bestowed upon somebody because he is immortal by himself, but because AIIah will grant him eternal life. The same is true of the angels: they are not immortal by themselves. When Allah willed they came into existence, and will continue to exist only as long as He wills.
Shirk: The One Unforgiveable Sin!
Associating other deities with Allah is the one unforgiveable sin in Islam.
Allah T'ala says in the Holy Quran:
إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَغْفِرُ أَن يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَلِكَ لِمَن يَشَاء وَمَن يُشْرِكْ بِاللّهِ فَقَدِ افْتَرَى إِثْمًا عَظِيمًا
004.048 God forgives not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgives
anything else, to whom He pleases; to set up partners with God is to devise a sin
Most heinous indeed.
The purpose of this verse is not to tell man that he may commit any sin as long as he does not associate others with God in His divinity. The object is rather to impress upon those who had begun to regard polytheism as a trivial matter that it constitutes the most serious offence in God's sight, an offence so serious that while other sins may be pardoned this will not.
The Arabic word Shirk can be translated as polytheism. Polytheism should be understood in the light of the Islamic Holy texts.
Shirk is that people should associate none with God in His divinity: neither in His essence, nor in His attributes, nor in His powers and authority, nor in the rights He has against His creatures.
To associate someone with God in His divinity is to declare that the former shares the essence of God's divinity. Instances of associating others in God's essence are the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, the belief of the pagan Arabs that angels are daughters of God, and the belief of other polytheists in the divine character of their self-styled gods and goddesses and, in some cases, of their royalty.
Likewise, a person associates others in the attributes of God when he considers someone other than God to be invested with those attributes which belong exclusively to God. One becomes guilty of this kind of polytheism if one believes somebody either to know all the mysteries of the Unseen or to be all-seeing and all-hearing or to be free of all defects and weaknesses and thus infallible.
A person associates others in the authority of God when he recognizes someone to be possessed of authority which belongs to God alone by virtue of His godhead; for example, the power to either benefit or harm people in a supernatural manner, to fulfil the needs of people and rescue them from distress, to protect and shield them, to hear their prayers, to make or mar their fate. A person is guilty of the same when he recognizes someone as possessing the rightful authority to determine what is lawful and what is unlawful, and to make laws for the regulation of human life. Such authority belongs to God alone, and recognizing anyone other than God as possessing it is tantamount to associating others with God in His authority.
Moreover, to associate others with God in His divine rights means that one recognizes someone beside God as legitimately deserving that which may he asked of man by God alone, viz. bowing and prostrating, standing in awe and reverence with folded hands, devotional greeting and kissing the earth, slaughtering animals and making any other offerings in thanksgiving for his grace and benevolence and in acknowledgement of his overlordship, vowing offerings in his name, calling him to rescue one from one's affliction and misfortune, and all the other forms of worship, adoration and reverence which are exclusively for God. In the same way, no one has the right to be loved to the exclusion of all other attachments, or to be held in such awe that one always fears his wrath and dreads the violation of his command, both openly and in secret. Likewise, it is God - and God alone - Who has the right to be obeyed unconditionally, and Whose guidance should be considered the only criterion of right and wrong. In the same way, man should not commit himself to obey any authority which is either independent of obedience to God or whose command lacks the sanction of God.
If someone accords any of these rights to anyone other than God, he is guilty of associating others with God in His divinity. His guilt is the same whether or not he calls such beings divine. (Tafheemul Quran)
Allah T'ala says in the Holy Quran:
إِنَّ اللّهَ لاَ يَغْفِرُ أَن يُشْرَكَ بِهِ وَيَغْفِرُ مَا دُونَ ذَلِكَ لِمَن يَشَاء وَمَن يُشْرِكْ بِاللّهِ فَقَدِ افْتَرَى إِثْمًا عَظِيمًا
004.048 God forgives not that partners should be set up with Him; but He forgives
anything else, to whom He pleases; to set up partners with God is to devise a sin
Most heinous indeed.
The purpose of this verse is not to tell man that he may commit any sin as long as he does not associate others with God in His divinity. The object is rather to impress upon those who had begun to regard polytheism as a trivial matter that it constitutes the most serious offence in God's sight, an offence so serious that while other sins may be pardoned this will not.
The Arabic word Shirk can be translated as polytheism. Polytheism should be understood in the light of the Islamic Holy texts.
Shirk is that people should associate none with God in His divinity: neither in His essence, nor in His attributes, nor in His powers and authority, nor in the rights He has against His creatures.
To associate someone with God in His divinity is to declare that the former shares the essence of God's divinity. Instances of associating others in God's essence are the Christian doctrine of the Trinity, the belief of the pagan Arabs that angels are daughters of God, and the belief of other polytheists in the divine character of their self-styled gods and goddesses and, in some cases, of their royalty.
Likewise, a person associates others in the attributes of God when he considers someone other than God to be invested with those attributes which belong exclusively to God. One becomes guilty of this kind of polytheism if one believes somebody either to know all the mysteries of the Unseen or to be all-seeing and all-hearing or to be free of all defects and weaknesses and thus infallible.
A person associates others in the authority of God when he recognizes someone to be possessed of authority which belongs to God alone by virtue of His godhead; for example, the power to either benefit or harm people in a supernatural manner, to fulfil the needs of people and rescue them from distress, to protect and shield them, to hear their prayers, to make or mar their fate. A person is guilty of the same when he recognizes someone as possessing the rightful authority to determine what is lawful and what is unlawful, and to make laws for the regulation of human life. Such authority belongs to God alone, and recognizing anyone other than God as possessing it is tantamount to associating others with God in His authority.
Moreover, to associate others with God in His divine rights means that one recognizes someone beside God as legitimately deserving that which may he asked of man by God alone, viz. bowing and prostrating, standing in awe and reverence with folded hands, devotional greeting and kissing the earth, slaughtering animals and making any other offerings in thanksgiving for his grace and benevolence and in acknowledgement of his overlordship, vowing offerings in his name, calling him to rescue one from one's affliction and misfortune, and all the other forms of worship, adoration and reverence which are exclusively for God. In the same way, no one has the right to be loved to the exclusion of all other attachments, or to be held in such awe that one always fears his wrath and dreads the violation of his command, both openly and in secret. Likewise, it is God - and God alone - Who has the right to be obeyed unconditionally, and Whose guidance should be considered the only criterion of right and wrong. In the same way, man should not commit himself to obey any authority which is either independent of obedience to God or whose command lacks the sanction of God.
If someone accords any of these rights to anyone other than God, he is guilty of associating others with God in His divinity. His guilt is the same whether or not he calls such beings divine. (Tafheemul Quran)
Lam Ya Lid Wa Lum Yu Lad
لَمْ يَلِدْ وَلَمْ يُولَدْ
He begets not, nor is He begotten. (112:3)
The polytheists in every age have adopted the concept that like men, gods also belong to a species,
which has many members and they also get married, beget and are begotten. They did not even regard
Allah, Lord of the universe, as supreme and above this concept of ignorance, and even proposed
children for Him.
Thus, the Arabian belief as stated in the Qur'an was that they regarded the angels as daughters of Allah. The Prophetic communities too could not remain immune from this creed of paganism. They too adopted the creed of holding one saintly person or another as son of God. Two kinds of concepts have always been mixed up in these debasing superstitions. Some people thought that those whom they regarded as Allah's children, were descended from him in the natural way and some others claimed that the one whom they called son of God, had been adopted by Allah Himself as a son. Although they could not dare call anyone as, God forbid, father of God, obviously human mind cannot remain immune against such a concept that God too should be regarded as a son of somebody when it is conceived that He is not free from sex and procreation and that He too, like man, is the kind of being which begets children and needs to adopt a son in case it is childless, That is why one of the questions asked of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) was: what is the ancestry of Allah? and another was: from whom has He inherited the world and who will inherit it after Him?
If these assumptions of ignorance are analysed, it becomes obvious that they logically necessitate the assumption of some other things as well. _
First, that God should not be One, but there should be a species of Gods, and its members should be associates in the attributes, acts and powers of Divinity. This not only follows from assuming God begetting children but also from assuming that He has adopted someone as a son. For the adopted son of somebody can inevitably be of his own kind. And when, God forbid, he is of the same kind as God, it cannot be denied that he too possesses attributes of Godhead.
Second, that children cannot be conceived unless the male and the female combine and some substance from the father and the mother unites to take the shape of child. Therefore, the assumption that God begets children necessitates that He should, God forbid, be a material and physical entity, should have a wife of His own species, and some substance also should issue from His body.
Third, that wherever there is sex and procreation, it is there because individuals are mortal and for the survival of their species it is inevitable that they should beget children to perpetuate the race. Thus, the assumption that God begets children also necessitates that He should, God forbid, Himself be mortal, and immortality should belong to the species of Gods, not to God Himself. Furthermore, it also necessitates that like all mortal individuals, God also, God forbid, should have a beginning and an end. For the individuals of the species whose survival depends upon sex and procreation neither exist since eternity nor will exist till eternity.
Fourth, that the object of adopting some one as a son is that a childless person needs a helper in his lifetime and a heir after his death. Therefore, the supposition that Allah has adopted a son inevitably amounts to ascribing all those weaknesses to His sublime Being which characterise mortal man.
Although aII these assumptions are destroyed as soon as Allah is called and described as Ahad and As-Samad, yet when it is said: "Neither has He an offspring nor is He the offspring of another", there remains no room for any ambiguity in this regard. Then, since these concepts are the most potent factors of polytheism with regard to Divine Being, AIlah has refuted them clearly and absolutely not only in Surah AI-Ikhlas (Ch. 112) but has also reiterated this theme at different places in different ways so that the people may understand the truth fully. For example Iet us consider the following verses:
"Allah is only One Deity: He is far too exalted that He should have a son: whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth belongs to Him." (AnNisa': 171)
"Note it well: they, in fact, invent a falsehood when they say, `Allah has children'. They are utter liars," (As-Saaffat: 151-152)
"They have invented a blood-relationship between Allah and the angels, whereas the angels know full well that these people will be brought up (as culprits)" (As-Saaffat: 158)
"These people have made some of His servants to be part of Him. The fact is that man is manifestly ungrateful. " (Az-Zukhruf: l 5 )
"Yet the people have set up the Jinn as partners with Allah, whereas He is their Creator; they have also invented for Him sons and daughters without having any knowledge, whereas He is absolutely free from and exalted far above the things they say. He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth: how should He have a son, when He has no consort? He has created each and every thing." (AlAn'am: 100-102)
"They say: the Merciful has offspring. Glory be to Allah! They (whom they describe as His offspring) are His mere servants who have been honoured." (AI-Anbiya: 26)
"They remarked: Allah has taken a son to himself. Allah is AII-pure: He is Self Sufficient He is the Owner of everything that is in the heavens and the earth. Have you any authority for what you say? What, do you ascribe to Allah that of which you have no knowledge?" (Yunus: 68)
"And (O Prophet,) say: praise is for Allah Who has begotten no son nor has any partner in His Kingdom nor is helpless to need any supporter." (Bani Isra'il:111)
"Allah has no offspring, and there is no other deity as a partner with Him." (Al-Mu'minun: 91)
In these verses the belief of the people who ascribe real or adopted children to Allah, has been refuted from every aspect, and its being a false belief has also been proved by argument. These and many other Qur'anic verses of the same theme explain Surah Al-Ikhlas fully well. (Tafheemul Quran)
He begets not, nor is He begotten. (112:3)
The polytheists in every age have adopted the concept that like men, gods also belong to a species,
which has many members and they also get married, beget and are begotten. They did not even regard
Allah, Lord of the universe, as supreme and above this concept of ignorance, and even proposed
children for Him.
Thus, the Arabian belief as stated in the Qur'an was that they regarded the angels as daughters of Allah. The Prophetic communities too could not remain immune from this creed of paganism. They too adopted the creed of holding one saintly person or another as son of God. Two kinds of concepts have always been mixed up in these debasing superstitions. Some people thought that those whom they regarded as Allah's children, were descended from him in the natural way and some others claimed that the one whom they called son of God, had been adopted by Allah Himself as a son. Although they could not dare call anyone as, God forbid, father of God, obviously human mind cannot remain immune against such a concept that God too should be regarded as a son of somebody when it is conceived that He is not free from sex and procreation and that He too, like man, is the kind of being which begets children and needs to adopt a son in case it is childless, That is why one of the questions asked of the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) was: what is the ancestry of Allah? and another was: from whom has He inherited the world and who will inherit it after Him?
If these assumptions of ignorance are analysed, it becomes obvious that they logically necessitate the assumption of some other things as well. _
First, that God should not be One, but there should be a species of Gods, and its members should be associates in the attributes, acts and powers of Divinity. This not only follows from assuming God begetting children but also from assuming that He has adopted someone as a son. For the adopted son of somebody can inevitably be of his own kind. And when, God forbid, he is of the same kind as God, it cannot be denied that he too possesses attributes of Godhead.
Second, that children cannot be conceived unless the male and the female combine and some substance from the father and the mother unites to take the shape of child. Therefore, the assumption that God begets children necessitates that He should, God forbid, be a material and physical entity, should have a wife of His own species, and some substance also should issue from His body.
Third, that wherever there is sex and procreation, it is there because individuals are mortal and for the survival of their species it is inevitable that they should beget children to perpetuate the race. Thus, the assumption that God begets children also necessitates that He should, God forbid, Himself be mortal, and immortality should belong to the species of Gods, not to God Himself. Furthermore, it also necessitates that like all mortal individuals, God also, God forbid, should have a beginning and an end. For the individuals of the species whose survival depends upon sex and procreation neither exist since eternity nor will exist till eternity.
Fourth, that the object of adopting some one as a son is that a childless person needs a helper in his lifetime and a heir after his death. Therefore, the supposition that Allah has adopted a son inevitably amounts to ascribing all those weaknesses to His sublime Being which characterise mortal man.
Although aII these assumptions are destroyed as soon as Allah is called and described as Ahad and As-Samad, yet when it is said: "Neither has He an offspring nor is He the offspring of another", there remains no room for any ambiguity in this regard. Then, since these concepts are the most potent factors of polytheism with regard to Divine Being, AIlah has refuted them clearly and absolutely not only in Surah AI-Ikhlas (Ch. 112) but has also reiterated this theme at different places in different ways so that the people may understand the truth fully. For example Iet us consider the following verses:
"Allah is only One Deity: He is far too exalted that He should have a son: whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth belongs to Him." (AnNisa': 171)
"Note it well: they, in fact, invent a falsehood when they say, `Allah has children'. They are utter liars," (As-Saaffat: 151-152)
"They have invented a blood-relationship between Allah and the angels, whereas the angels know full well that these people will be brought up (as culprits)" (As-Saaffat: 158)
"These people have made some of His servants to be part of Him. The fact is that man is manifestly ungrateful. " (Az-Zukhruf: l 5 )
"Yet the people have set up the Jinn as partners with Allah, whereas He is their Creator; they have also invented for Him sons and daughters without having any knowledge, whereas He is absolutely free from and exalted far above the things they say. He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth: how should He have a son, when He has no consort? He has created each and every thing." (AlAn'am: 100-102)
"They say: the Merciful has offspring. Glory be to Allah! They (whom they describe as His offspring) are His mere servants who have been honoured." (AI-Anbiya: 26)
"They remarked: Allah has taken a son to himself. Allah is AII-pure: He is Self Sufficient He is the Owner of everything that is in the heavens and the earth. Have you any authority for what you say? What, do you ascribe to Allah that of which you have no knowledge?" (Yunus: 68)
"And (O Prophet,) say: praise is for Allah Who has begotten no son nor has any partner in His Kingdom nor is helpless to need any supporter." (Bani Isra'il:111)
"Allah has no offspring, and there is no other deity as a partner with Him." (Al-Mu'minun: 91)
In these verses the belief of the people who ascribe real or adopted children to Allah, has been refuted from every aspect, and its being a false belief has also been proved by argument. These and many other Qur'anic verses of the same theme explain Surah Al-Ikhlas fully well. (Tafheemul Quran)
The Opening (Al-Fatehah)
The first chapter of the Holy Quran, "The Opening" (Al-Fatehah) is recited by Muslims in their daily prayers.
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْمِ
(1:1) In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate *1
*1 One of the many practices taught by Islam is that its followers should begin their activities in the name of God. This principle, if consciously and earnestly followed, will necessarily yield three beneficial results. First, one will be able to restrain oneself from many misdeed, since the habit of pronouncing the name of God is bound to make one wonder when about to commit some offence how such an act can be reconciled with the saying of God's holy name. Second, if a man pronounces the name of God before starting good and legitimate tasks, this act will ensue that both his starting point and his mental orientation are sound. Third - and this is the most important benefit - when a man begins something by pronouncing God's name, he will enjoy God's support and succour; God will bless his efforts and protect him from the machinations and temptation of Satan. For whenever man turns to God, God turns to him as well.
اَلْحَمْدُ ِللهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِيْنَ
(1:2) Praise *2 be to Allah, the Lord *3 of the entire universe.
*2. As we have already explained, the character of this surah is that of a prayer. The prayer begins with praise of the One to whom our prayer is addressed. This indicates that whenever one prays one ought to pray in a dignified manner. It does not become a cultivated person to blurt out his petition. Refinement demands that our requests should be preceded by a wholehearted acknowledgement of the unique position, infinite benevolence and unmatched excellence of the One to Whom we pray. Whenever we praise someone, we do so for two reasons. First, because excellence calls for praise, irrespective of whether that excellence has any direct relevance to us or not. Second, we praise one who, we consider to be our benefactor; when this is the case our praise arises from a deep feeling of gratitude. God is worthy of praise on both counts. It is incumbent on us to praise Him not only in recognition of His infinite excellence but also because of our feeling of gratitude to Him, arising from our awareness of the blessings He has lavished upon us. It is important to note that what is said here is not merely that praise be to God, but that all praise be to God alone. Whenever there is any beauty, any excellence, any perfection-in whatever thing or in whatever shape it may manifest itself- its ultimate source is none other than God Himself. No human beings, angels, Demigods, heavenly bodies-in short, no created beings-are possessed of an innate excellence; where excellence exists, it is a gift from God. Thus, if there is anyone at all whom we ought to adore and worship, to whom we ought to feel indebted and grateful, towards whom we should remain humble and obedient, it is the creator of excellence, rather than its possessor.
*3. In Arabic the word Rabb has three meanings: (i) Lord and Master; (ii) Sustainer, Provider, Supporter, Nourisher and Guardian, and (iii) Sovereign, Ruler, He Who controls and directs. God is the Rabb of the universe in all three meanings of the term.
َالرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْمِ
(1:3) The Merciful, the Compassionate *4
*4. Whenever we are deeply impressed by the greatness of something we try to express our feelings by using superlatives. If the use of one superlative does not do full justice to our feelings, we tend to re-emphasize the extraordinary excellence of the object of our admiration by adding a second superlative of nearly equivalent meaning.* This would seem to explain the use of the word Rahim following Rahman. The form of the word Rahman connotes intensity. Yet God's mercy and beneficence towards His creatures is so great, so extensive and of such an infinite nature that no one word, however strong its connotation, can do it full justice. The epithet Rahim was therefore added to that of Rahman.
مَالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّيْنِ
(1:4) The Master of the Day of Recompense *5.
*5. God will be the Lord of the Day when all generations of mankind gather together on order to render an account of their conduct, and when each person will be finally rewarded or punished for his deeds. The description of God as Lord of the Day of Judgement following the mention of his benevolence and compassion indicates that we ought to remember another aspect of God as well-namely, that He will judge us all, that He is so absolutely powerful, that on the Day of Judgement no one will have the power either to resist the enforcement of punishments that He decrees or to prevent anyone from receiving the rewards that He decides to confer. Hence, we ought not only to love Him for nourishing and sustaining us and for His compassion and mercy towards us, but should also hold Him in awe because of His justice, and should not forget that our ultimate happiness or misery rests completely with Him.
إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِيْنُ
(1:5) You alone do we worship *6, and You alone do we turn for help *7
*6. The term ibadah is used in three sense: (i) worship and adoration; (ii) obedience and submission; and (iii) service and subjection. In this particular context the term carries all these meanings simultaneously. In other words, we say to God that we worship and adore Him, that we are obedient to Him and follow His will, and also that we are His servants. Moreover man is so bound to none save God, that none but He, may be the subject of man's worship and total devotion, of man's unreserved obedience, of man's absolute subjection and servitude.
*7. Not only do we worship God, but our relationship with Him is such that we turn to Him alone for help and succour. We know that He is the Lord of the whole universe and that He alone is the Master of all blessings and benefactions. Hence, in seeking the fulfilment of our needs we turn to Him alone. It is towards Him alone that we stretch forth our hands when we pray and supplicate. It is in Him that we repose our trust. It is therefore to Him alone that we address our request for true guidance.
اِهْدِنَا الصِّرَاطَ الْمُسْتَقِيْمَ
(1:6) Direct us on to the Straight Way *8,
*8. We beseech God to guide us in all walks of life to a way which is absolutely true, which provides us with a properly-based outlook and sound principles of behaviour, a way which will prevent our succumbing to false doctrines and adopting unsound principles of conduct, a way that will lead us to our true salvation and happiness. This is man's prayer to God as he begins the study of the Qur'an. It is, in short, to illuminate the truth which he often tends to lose in a labyrinth of philosophical speculation; to enlighten him as to which of the numerous ethical doctrines ensures a sound course of conduct; to show which of the myriad ways and by-ways is the clear, straight, open road of sound belief and right behaviour.
صِرَاطَ الَّذِيْنَ أَنعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوْبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّالِّيْنَ
(1:7) The way of those whom You have favoured *9, who did not incur Your wrath, who are not astray *10.
*9. This defines the 'straight way' which we ask God to open to us. It is the way which has always been followed by those who have enjoyed God's favours and blessings. This is the way which has been trodden from the beginning of time by all those individuals and communities that have unfailingly enjoyed God's favours and blessings.
*10. This makes it clear that the recipients of God's favour are not those who appear, briefly, to enjoy worldly prosperity and success; all too often, these people are among those whom God has condemned because they have lost sight of the true path of salvation and happiness. This negative explanation makes it quite clear that in'am (favour) denotes all those real and abiding favours and blessings which one receives in reward for righteous conduct through God's approval and pleasure, rather than those apparent and fleeting favours which the Pharaohs, Nimrods and Korahs (Qaruns) used to receive in the past, and which are enjoyed even today by people notorious for oppression, evil and corruption.
(Tafheemul Quran)
بِسْمِ اللهِ الرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْمِ
(1:1) In the name of Allah, the Merciful, the Compassionate *1
*1 One of the many practices taught by Islam is that its followers should begin their activities in the name of God. This principle, if consciously and earnestly followed, will necessarily yield three beneficial results. First, one will be able to restrain oneself from many misdeed, since the habit of pronouncing the name of God is bound to make one wonder when about to commit some offence how such an act can be reconciled with the saying of God's holy name. Second, if a man pronounces the name of God before starting good and legitimate tasks, this act will ensue that both his starting point and his mental orientation are sound. Third - and this is the most important benefit - when a man begins something by pronouncing God's name, he will enjoy God's support and succour; God will bless his efforts and protect him from the machinations and temptation of Satan. For whenever man turns to God, God turns to him as well.
اَلْحَمْدُ ِللهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِيْنَ
(1:2) Praise *2 be to Allah, the Lord *3 of the entire universe.
*2. As we have already explained, the character of this surah is that of a prayer. The prayer begins with praise of the One to whom our prayer is addressed. This indicates that whenever one prays one ought to pray in a dignified manner. It does not become a cultivated person to blurt out his petition. Refinement demands that our requests should be preceded by a wholehearted acknowledgement of the unique position, infinite benevolence and unmatched excellence of the One to Whom we pray. Whenever we praise someone, we do so for two reasons. First, because excellence calls for praise, irrespective of whether that excellence has any direct relevance to us or not. Second, we praise one who, we consider to be our benefactor; when this is the case our praise arises from a deep feeling of gratitude. God is worthy of praise on both counts. It is incumbent on us to praise Him not only in recognition of His infinite excellence but also because of our feeling of gratitude to Him, arising from our awareness of the blessings He has lavished upon us. It is important to note that what is said here is not merely that praise be to God, but that all praise be to God alone. Whenever there is any beauty, any excellence, any perfection-in whatever thing or in whatever shape it may manifest itself- its ultimate source is none other than God Himself. No human beings, angels, Demigods, heavenly bodies-in short, no created beings-are possessed of an innate excellence; where excellence exists, it is a gift from God. Thus, if there is anyone at all whom we ought to adore and worship, to whom we ought to feel indebted and grateful, towards whom we should remain humble and obedient, it is the creator of excellence, rather than its possessor.
*3. In Arabic the word Rabb has three meanings: (i) Lord and Master; (ii) Sustainer, Provider, Supporter, Nourisher and Guardian, and (iii) Sovereign, Ruler, He Who controls and directs. God is the Rabb of the universe in all three meanings of the term.
َالرَّحْمٰنِ الرَّحِيْمِ
(1:3) The Merciful, the Compassionate *4
*4. Whenever we are deeply impressed by the greatness of something we try to express our feelings by using superlatives. If the use of one superlative does not do full justice to our feelings, we tend to re-emphasize the extraordinary excellence of the object of our admiration by adding a second superlative of nearly equivalent meaning.* This would seem to explain the use of the word Rahim following Rahman. The form of the word Rahman connotes intensity. Yet God's mercy and beneficence towards His creatures is so great, so extensive and of such an infinite nature that no one word, however strong its connotation, can do it full justice. The epithet Rahim was therefore added to that of Rahman.
مَالِكِ يَوْمِ الدِّيْنِ
(1:4) The Master of the Day of Recompense *5.
*5. God will be the Lord of the Day when all generations of mankind gather together on order to render an account of their conduct, and when each person will be finally rewarded or punished for his deeds. The description of God as Lord of the Day of Judgement following the mention of his benevolence and compassion indicates that we ought to remember another aspect of God as well-namely, that He will judge us all, that He is so absolutely powerful, that on the Day of Judgement no one will have the power either to resist the enforcement of punishments that He decrees or to prevent anyone from receiving the rewards that He decides to confer. Hence, we ought not only to love Him for nourishing and sustaining us and for His compassion and mercy towards us, but should also hold Him in awe because of His justice, and should not forget that our ultimate happiness or misery rests completely with Him.
إِيَّاكَ نَعْبُدُ وإِيَّاكَ نَسْتَعِيْنُ
(1:5) You alone do we worship *6, and You alone do we turn for help *7
*6. The term ibadah is used in three sense: (i) worship and adoration; (ii) obedience and submission; and (iii) service and subjection. In this particular context the term carries all these meanings simultaneously. In other words, we say to God that we worship and adore Him, that we are obedient to Him and follow His will, and also that we are His servants. Moreover man is so bound to none save God, that none but He, may be the subject of man's worship and total devotion, of man's unreserved obedience, of man's absolute subjection and servitude.
*7. Not only do we worship God, but our relationship with Him is such that we turn to Him alone for help and succour. We know that He is the Lord of the whole universe and that He alone is the Master of all blessings and benefactions. Hence, in seeking the fulfilment of our needs we turn to Him alone. It is towards Him alone that we stretch forth our hands when we pray and supplicate. It is in Him that we repose our trust. It is therefore to Him alone that we address our request for true guidance.
اِهْدِنَا الصِّرَاطَ الْمُسْتَقِيْمَ
(1:6) Direct us on to the Straight Way *8,
*8. We beseech God to guide us in all walks of life to a way which is absolutely true, which provides us with a properly-based outlook and sound principles of behaviour, a way which will prevent our succumbing to false doctrines and adopting unsound principles of conduct, a way that will lead us to our true salvation and happiness. This is man's prayer to God as he begins the study of the Qur'an. It is, in short, to illuminate the truth which he often tends to lose in a labyrinth of philosophical speculation; to enlighten him as to which of the numerous ethical doctrines ensures a sound course of conduct; to show which of the myriad ways and by-ways is the clear, straight, open road of sound belief and right behaviour.
صِرَاطَ الَّذِيْنَ أَنعَمْتَ عَلَيْهِمْ غَيْرِ الْمَغْضُوْبِ عَلَيْهِمْ وَلاَ الضَّالِّيْنَ
(1:7) The way of those whom You have favoured *9, who did not incur Your wrath, who are not astray *10.
*9. This defines the 'straight way' which we ask God to open to us. It is the way which has always been followed by those who have enjoyed God's favours and blessings. This is the way which has been trodden from the beginning of time by all those individuals and communities that have unfailingly enjoyed God's favours and blessings.
*10. This makes it clear that the recipients of God's favour are not those who appear, briefly, to enjoy worldly prosperity and success; all too often, these people are among those whom God has condemned because they have lost sight of the true path of salvation and happiness. This negative explanation makes it quite clear that in'am (favour) denotes all those real and abiding favours and blessings which one receives in reward for righteous conduct through God's approval and pleasure, rather than those apparent and fleeting favours which the Pharaohs, Nimrods and Korahs (Qaruns) used to receive in the past, and which are enjoyed even today by people notorious for oppression, evil and corruption.
(Tafheemul Quran)
Last Sermon of the Prophet
Audhu billahe minishaitan Ar-rajim(I seek refuge in Allah from the rejected Satan.)
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim(In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.)
The Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) Last Sermon
This sermon was delivered on the Ninth Day of Dhul Hijjah, 10 A.H. in the 'Uranah valley of Mount Arafat' (in Mecca). After praising, and thanking Allah the Prophet (pbuh) said:
"O People, lend me an attentive ear, for I know not whether after this year, I shall ever be amongst you again. Therefore listen to what I am saying to you very carefully and TAKE THESE WORDS TO THOSE WHO COULD NOT BE PRESENT HERE TODAY.
O People, just as you regard this month, this day, this city as Sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust. Return the goods entrusted to you to their rightful owners. Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you. Remember that you will indeed meet your LORD, and that HE will indeed reckon your deeds. ALLAH has forbidden you to take usury (interest), therefore all interest obligation shall henceforth be waived. Your capital, however, is yours to keep. You will neither inflict nor suffer any inequity. Allah has Judged that there shall be no interest and that all the interest due to Abbas ibn 'Abd'al Muttalib (Prophet's uncle) shall henceforth be waived...
Beware of Satan, for the safety of your religion. He has lost all hope that he will ever be able to lead you astray in big things, so beware of following him in small things.
O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under Allah's trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with any one of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste.
O People, listen to me in earnest, worship ALLAH, say your five daily prayers (Salah), fast during the month of Ramadan, and give your wealth in Zakat. Perform Hajj if you can afford to.
All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves.
Remember, one day you will appear before ALLAH and answer your deeds. So beware, do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.
O People, NO PROPHET OR APOSTLE WILL COME AFTER ME AND NO NEW FAITH WILL BE BORN. Reason well, therefore, O People, and understand words which I convey to you. I leave behind me two things, the QURAN and my example, the SUNNAH and if you follow these you will never go astray.
All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and may the last ones understand my words better than those who listen to me directly. Be my witness, O ALLAH, that I have conveyed your message to your people".
Bismillah Ar-Rahman Ar-Rahim(In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.)
The Prophet Muhammad's (PBUH) Last Sermon
This sermon was delivered on the Ninth Day of Dhul Hijjah, 10 A.H. in the 'Uranah valley of Mount Arafat' (in Mecca). After praising, and thanking Allah the Prophet (pbuh) said:
"O People, lend me an attentive ear, for I know not whether after this year, I shall ever be amongst you again. Therefore listen to what I am saying to you very carefully and TAKE THESE WORDS TO THOSE WHO COULD NOT BE PRESENT HERE TODAY.
O People, just as you regard this month, this day, this city as Sacred, so regard the life and property of every Muslim as a sacred trust. Return the goods entrusted to you to their rightful owners. Hurt no one so that no one may hurt you. Remember that you will indeed meet your LORD, and that HE will indeed reckon your deeds. ALLAH has forbidden you to take usury (interest), therefore all interest obligation shall henceforth be waived. Your capital, however, is yours to keep. You will neither inflict nor suffer any inequity. Allah has Judged that there shall be no interest and that all the interest due to Abbas ibn 'Abd'al Muttalib (Prophet's uncle) shall henceforth be waived...
Beware of Satan, for the safety of your religion. He has lost all hope that he will ever be able to lead you astray in big things, so beware of following him in small things.
O People, it is true that you have certain rights with regard to your women, but they also have rights over you. Remember that you have taken them as your wives only under Allah's trust and with His permission. If they abide by your right then to them belongs the right to be fed and clothed in kindness. Do treat your women well and be kind to them for they are your partners and committed helpers. And it is your right that they do not make friends with any one of whom you do not approve, as well as never to be unchaste.
O People, listen to me in earnest, worship ALLAH, say your five daily prayers (Salah), fast during the month of Ramadan, and give your wealth in Zakat. Perform Hajj if you can afford to.
All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over black nor a black has any superiority over white except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not, therefore, do injustice to yourselves.
Remember, one day you will appear before ALLAH and answer your deeds. So beware, do not stray from the path of righteousness after I am gone.
O People, NO PROPHET OR APOSTLE WILL COME AFTER ME AND NO NEW FAITH WILL BE BORN. Reason well, therefore, O People, and understand words which I convey to you. I leave behind me two things, the QURAN and my example, the SUNNAH and if you follow these you will never go astray.
All those who listen to me shall pass on my words to others and those to others again; and may the last ones understand my words better than those who listen to me directly. Be my witness, O ALLAH, that I have conveyed your message to your people".
Genuine Prophets Preach Only Islam
"The prophet which foretells the Islam (Shalom), at the coming of the word of the Prophet, that prophet will be recognized to have been sent by God in truth" (Jer. xxviii. 9).
There is no nation known to history like the people of Israel, which during a period of less than four hundred years, was infested with myriads of false prophets, not to mention the swarms of sorcerers, soothsayers and all sorts of witchcrafts and magicians. The false prophets were of two kinds: those who professed the religion and the Torah (Law) of Yahweh and pretended to prophesy in His Name, and those who under the patronage of an idolater Israelite monarch prophesied in the name of Baal or other deities of the neighboring heathen peoples. Belonging to the former category there were several impostors as contemporaries with the true prophets like Mikha (Micah) and Jeremiah, and to the latter there were those who gave much trouble to Elijah, and caused the massacres of the true prophets and believers during the reign of Ahab and his wife Jezebel. Most dangerous of all to the cause of true faith and religion were the pseudo-prophets, who conducted the divine services in the temple as well as in the Misphas and pretended to deliver the oracles of God to the people. No prophet, perhaps, received at the hands of these impostors more of persecution and hardships than the Prophet Jeremiah.
While still a young man, Jeremiah began his prophetic mission about the latter quarter of the seventh century before the Christian era, when the Kingdom of Judah was in great danger of invasion by the armies of the Chaldeans. The Jews had entered into alliance with the Pharaoh of Egypt, but as the latter had been badly defeated by the troops of Nebuchadnezzar, Jerusalem's doom was merely a question of time. In these critical days, during which the fate of the remnant of the people of God was to be decided, the Prophet Jeremiah was stoutly advising the king and the leaders of the Jews to submit and serve the King of Babylon, so that Jerusalem might be saved from being burnt down to ashes and the people from being deported into captivity. He poured out all his eloquent and fiery discourses into the ears of the kings, the priests, and the elders of the people, but all of no avail. He delivered message after message from God, saying that the only remedy for saving the country and the people from the imminent destruction was to submit to the Chaldeans; but there was no one to lend ear to his warnings.
Nebuchadnezzar comes and takes the city, carries away with him the king, the princes, and many captives, as well as all the treasures of the temple, including the gold and silver vessels. Another prince, and a third one, is appointed by the Emperor of Babylon to reign as his vassal in Jerusalem. This king, instead of being wise and loyal to his master of Babylon, revolts against him. Jeremiah incessantly admonishes the king to remain loyal and to abandon the Egyptian policy. But the false prophets continue to harangue in the temple, saying: "Thus says the Lord of hosts, Behold, I have broken the yoke of the King of Babylon, and in two years' time all the Jewish captives and the vessels of the House of God will be returned to Jerusalem." Jeremiah makes a wooden yoke round his own neck and goes to the temple and tells the people that God has been pleased to place in this way the yoke of the monarch of Babylon upon the neck of all the Jews. He is struck on the face by one opponent prophet, who breaks to pieces the wooden yoke from Jeremiah's neck and repeats the harangue of the false prophets. Jeremiah is thrown into a deep dungeon full of mire, and is fed only on a dry loaf of barley a day until a famine prevails in the city, which is besieged by the Chaldeans. The pseudo-prophet Hananiah dies as Jeremiah had foretold. The wall of the city is thrown down somewhere, and the victorious army rushes into the city, the fleeing King Zedekiah and his retinue are seized and taken to the King of Babylon. The city and the temple, after being pillaged, are set on fire and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem are carried into Babylonia; only the poorer classes are left to cultivate the land. By order of Nebuchadnezzar, Jeremiah is granted a favor of staying in Jerusalem, and the newly appointed governor, Gedaliah, is charged to guard and well look after the prophet. But Gedaliah is killed by the rebellious Jews, and then they all flee to Egypt, carrying Jeremiah with them. Even in Egypt he prophesies against the fugitives and the Egyptians. He must have ended his life in Egypt.
His books, as it now stands, is quite different from the text of the Septuagint; evidently the copy from which the Greek text was written by the Alexandrian translators had a different order of chapters.
The Biblical critics consider that Jeremiah was the author, or, at any rate, a compiler, of the fifth book of the Pentateuch called Deuteronomy. I myself am of the same opinion. Jeremiah was a Levite and a priest as well as a prophet. There is much of Jeremiah's teachings in Deuteronomy which are unknown in the rest of the Old Testament writings. And I take one of these teachings for my present subject, which I consider as one of the gems or golden texts of the Old Testament and must be esteemed very precious and holy.
After this detailed explanation I hasten to the main point which I have selected for the topic of this article: How to distinguish a genuine prophet from a false prophet. Jeremiah has supplied us with a fairly satisfactory answer, namely:
"THE PROPHET WHO TEACHES ISLAM"
In the Book of Deuteronomy (xiii. 1- 5, xviii. 20 - 22) God the Almighty gives some instructions concerning the false prophets who may prophesy in the Name of the Lord and in such an insidious way that they could mislead His people. Further, he tells us that the best way to find out the impostor's perfidy was to anticipate the fulfillment of his predictions, and then to put him to death when his fraud was divulged. But, as is well known, the ignorant cannot well distinguish between the genuine prophet and the imposter, just as much as they to-day are unable to definitely discover which of the two, a Roman Catholic priest or a Calvinist minister, is a genuine follower of Jesus Christ! A false prophet would also foretell events, work wonders, and do other religious things similar - at least in appearance - to those performed by a true one. The competition between the Prophet Moses and the magicians of Egypt is an apt illustration of this statement. Thus it is Jeremiah who gives us the best way of testing the veracity, the genuineness, of a prophet, and that way is the sign of Islam. Please read the whole chapter xxviii. of Jeremiah, and then ponder and reflect on the ninth verse: -
"The prophet which foretells the Islam (Shalom), at the coming of the word of the Prophet, that prophet will be recognized to have been sent by God in truth" (Jer. xxviii. 9).
This translation is strictly literal. The original verb naba, usually translated as "to foretell" or "to prophesy," and the noun nabi, "a prophet" has given the impression that a prophet is a person who foretells the future or past events by the aid of divine revelation. This definition is only partially true. The complete definition of the word "Prophet" must be: "one who receives oracles or messages from God, and delivers them faithfully to the person or people intended." It is evident that a divine message need not necessarily be a foretelling of past and future events. In the same way verb "prophesy" does not necessarily mean to reveal the past or future occurrences, but rather to preach or promulgate the message from God. Consequently to prophesy is to deliver and utter a new oracle, its nature or character being quite immaterial. To read the words of a prophet would be to prophesy no more than would a prophet deliver an oracle when making a discourse or public speech of his own accord. In the Qur'an God orders His beloved worshiper Prophet Muhammad to declare: "Say: 'I am only human like you, revealed to me is that your God is One God....'" Ch. 18:110 so that we may be careful not to attribute to any of the prophets the quality of knowing and saying everything through the Revelation. The Divine Revelations used to come at intervals, while the prophets in their personal intercourse and knowledge might be liable to mistakes and errors. A prophet is not appointed by God to teach humanity physics, mathematics, or any other positive science. It would be very unjust on our part to blame a prophet for a slip of language or a mistake committed as a man.
A prophet, therefore, is the subject of test and examination only when he officially and formally delivers the Message he has received from his Lord. His private affairs, his family concerns, and his personal attainments do not concern us so much as his mission and office. In order to find out whether a prophet is genuine or an impostor, it is not fair to give a verdict against his prophetical character because he is reported to have been a little harsh or rude to his mother or because he believed in the literal inspiration and the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. While making this observation, I have in mind the case of Jesus Christ, and many others in the history of Israel on other points.
It is mala fides and ill will to accuse prophets of sensuality, rudeness, ignorance in sciences, and of other personal frailties. They were men like ourselves and subject to the same natural inclinations and passions. They were protected from mortal sins and from the perversion of the message they had to hand further. We must be extremely careful not to exalt the prophets of God too high in our imagination, lest God be displeased with us. They are all His creatures and worshipers; they accomplished their work and returned to Him. The moment we forget God and concentrate our love and admiration upon the person of any of the messengers of God we are in danger of falling into the sin of polytheism.
Having so far explained the nature and the signification of the prophet and the prophecy, I shall now endeavor to prove that no prophet could be genuine unless, as Jeremiah expressly says, he preaches and propagates the religion of Islam.
In order to understand better the sense and the importance of the passage under our contemplation we should just cast a glance over the preceding verse where Jeremiah tells his antagonist Prophet Hananiah: "The prophets that have been before me and before thee from old (times) prophesied against many lands, and against great kingdoms, concerning war and evil and pestilence." Then he proceeds: -
"The prophet that prophesies concerning Islam as soon as the word of the prophet comes, that prophet is known to have been sent by the Lord in truth."
There can be raised no serious objection to the English wording of this passage excepting the clause "l shalom" which I have translated as "concerning Islam." The preposition "l" before "shalom" signifies "concerning" or "about," and places its subject in the objective case and not in the dative, as it would be if the predicate were a verb like "come," "go," or "give."
That "shalom" and the Syriac "Shlama," as well as the Arabic "salam" and "Islam," are of one and the same Semitic root, "shalam," and mean the same thing, is an admitted truth by all the scholars of the Semitic languages. The verb "shalam" signifies "to submit, resign oneself to," and then "to make peace;" and consequently "to be safe, sound, and tranquil." No religious system in the world has ever been qualified with a better and more comprehensive, dignified, and sublime name than that of "Islam.' The true Religion of the True God cannot be named after the name of any of His worshipers, and much less after the name of a people or country. It is, indeed, this sanctity and the inviolability of the word "Islam" that strikes its opponents with awe, fear, and reverence even when the Muslims are weak and unhappy. It is the name and title of a religion that teaches and commands an absolute submission and resignation of will and self to the Supreme Being, and then to obtain peace and tranquillity in mind and at home, no matter what tribulations or passing misfortunes may threaten us that fills its opponents with awe (1).
------------- Footnote (1) It is interesting and significant to note how the observations of the learned professor coincide with those of the ex-Kaiser of Germany who on the occasion of his seventieth birthday celebrations at Doorn, Holland, was reported to have said in his speech: "And understand this - if ever the Muhammadans should conceive the idea that it is the command of Allah to bring order into a declining West and subjugate to His will, then - with faith in God - they will come upon the godless Europeans like a tidal wave, against which even the reddest Bolshevist, full of eagerness for combat, will be helpless." (Evening Standard, London, January 26, 1929.) ------------- End of footnote
It is the firm and unshaking belief in the Oneness of Allah and the unswerving confidence in His Mercy and justice that makes a Muslim distinguishable and prominent among non-Muslims. And it is this sound faith in Allah and the sincere attachment to His Holy Qur'an and the Prophet that the Christian missionaries have been desperately attacking and have hopelessly failed. Hence, Jeremiah's words that "the Prophet who prophesies, namely, who preaches and speaks concerning the affairs of Islam as his religion, he will at once be known to have been sent by the Lord in truth." Let us, therefore, take into serious consideration the following points:-
1. The Prophet Jeremiah is the only prophet before Christ who uses the word Shalom in the sense of a religion. He is the only prophet who uses this word with the object of setting or proving the veracity of a messenger of God. According to the Qur'anic revelation, Prophets Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and all the prophets were Muslims, and professed Islam as their religion. The term "Islam" and its equivalents, "Shalom" and Shlama," were known to the Jews and Christians of Mecca and Medina when Prophet Muhammad appeared to perfect and universalize the religion of Islam. A prophet who predicts "peace" as an abstract, vague and temporary condition cannot succeed in proving his identity thereby. In fact, the point of dispute, or rather the critical national question, controverted by the two eminent prophets known to the court and the nation like Jeremiah and Hananiah (Jer. xxviii.), could not be solved and definitely settled by the affirmation of the one and the denial of the other, of the imminent catastrophe. To predict "peace" by Jeremiah when he had all the time been predicting the great national disaster - either by the submission of the King Sidaqia to the Chaldean sovereign or by his resistance - would not only involve his failure, not to talk of his being a success in proving his veracity, but also it would make him even ridiculous. For, in either case, his presumed "peace" would mean no peace at all. On the contrary, if the Jews resisted the Chaldean army, it meant a complete national ruin, and if they submitted, an unconditional servitude. It is evident, therefore, that Jeremiah uses the term "Shalom" in the sense of a tangible, concrete, and real religious system which Islam comprises. To make it more clear, we should attentively listen to the arguments of the two opponent prophets discussing and disputing the national question in the presence of a wicked king and his court of vile flatterers and depraved hypocrites. Jeremiah has at heart the cause of God and His religion of peace, and in the vital interests of the religion of peace, or Islam, he advises the wicked king and his courtiers to submit to the yoke of Babylon and serve the Chaldeans and live. For there was no other alternative open to them. They had abandoned the God of their forefathers, polluted His temple, mocked and reviled His prophets, and committed evil and treachery (2 Chron. xxxvi. etc.). So God had delivered them into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, and would not save them. For a true and sincere worshiper of God, the religion comes first and the nation after. It is the government and the nation - especially when they have forsaken God - that are to be sacrificed for the cause of religion, and not vice versa! The other Prophet of Gibeon, called Hananiah, sought to please his master the king; he was a courtier and favorite, rich and in splendor, whereas his antagonist was always languishing and starving in the prisons and dungeons. He cares not a fillip for the religion and the real welfare of the people. He is also a prophet, for so says the Book of Jeremiah, yet he is a villain, and has exchanged God for a depraved king! He prophesies in the name of the same God as does Jeremiah, and announces the return of the booty and the captives from Babylon in two years' time.
Now, from the above imperfect description of the prophets, which of the two would you qualify as the true worshiper of God and as the loyal defender of God's religion? Surely Jeremiah would at once attract your sympathy and choice.
2. It is only the religion of Shalom, of Islam, that can testify to the character and the office of a true prophet, Imam, or any minister of God on earth. God is One, and His religion is one. There is no other religion in the world like Islam, which professes and defends this absolute Oneness of the Deity. He who, therefore, sacrifices every other interest, honor and love for the cause of this Holy Religion, he is undoubtedly the genuine prophet and the minister of God. But there is still one thing more worthy of our notice, and that thing is this. If the religion of Islam is not the standard and the measure by which to test the veracity of a prophet or minister of God, then there is no other criterion to answer that purpose. A miracle is not always a sufficient proof, for the sorcerers also work wonders. The fulfillment of a prophecy or prediction, too, is not in itself a sufficient proof; for just as one holy Spirit reveals a future event to a true prophet, so does sometimes an evil spirit the same to an imposter. Hence it is clear that the prophet who "prophesies concerning Shalom - Islam - as being the name of Faith and path of life, as soon as he receives a message from God he will be known to have been sent by Him." Such was the argument which Jeremiah had recourse to and with which he wished to convince his audience of the falsity of Hananiah. But the wicked king and his entourage would not listen to and obey the Word of God.
3. As argued in the preceding paragraph, it should be noted that neither the fulfillment of a prediction nor the work- ing of a miracle was enough to prove the genuine character of a prophet; that the loyalty and strict attachment to the religion is the best and the decisive proof for the purpose; that "Shalom" was used to express the religion of peace. Once again we repeat the same assertion that Shalom is no other than Islam. And we demand from those who would object to this interpretation to produce an Arabic word be- sides Islam and Salam as the equivalent of the Shalom, and also to find for us another word in Hebrew besides Shalom that would convey and express the same meaning as Islam. It is impossible to produce another such an equivalent. Therefore we are forced to admit that Shalom is the same as "salam" or "peace" in the abstract, and "Islam" as a religion and faith in the concrete.
4. As the Qur'an in chap. ii expressly reminds us that Abraham and his sons and grandsons were the followers of Islam; that they were neither Jews nor Christians; that they preached and propagated the worship and the faith in the one God to all the peoples among whom they sojourned or dwelt, we must admit that not only the Jews, but several other nations that descended from the other sons of Abraham and many tribes converted and absorbed by them, were also Muslims; that is to say, believers in Allah and resigned to His Will. There were the people of Esau, the Edomites, the Midianites, and numerous other peoples living in Arabia, who knew God and worshipped Him like the Israelites. These peoples had also their own prophets and religious guides like Job, Jethro (the father-in-law of the Prophet Moses), Balaam, Hud, and many others. But they, like the Jews, had taken to idolatry until it was totally eradicated by the Prince of the prophets. The Jews, in about the fifth century B.C., produced the greater portion of their canonical books of the Old Testament, when the memories of the conquest of the land of Canaan by Joshua, the temple and Jerusalem of Solomon, were events buried in the past epochs of their wondrous history. A nationalistic and Judaistic spirit of solicitude and seclusion reigned among the small remnant of Israel; the belief in the coming of a great Savior to restore the lost throne and crown of David was regnant, and the old meaning of "Shalom" as the name of the religion of Abraham and common to all the different peoples descended from him was no longer remembered. It is from this point of view that I regard this passage of Jeremiah as one of the golden texts in the Hebrew sacred writ.
There is no nation known to history like the people of Israel, which during a period of less than four hundred years, was infested with myriads of false prophets, not to mention the swarms of sorcerers, soothsayers and all sorts of witchcrafts and magicians. The false prophets were of two kinds: those who professed the religion and the Torah (Law) of Yahweh and pretended to prophesy in His Name, and those who under the patronage of an idolater Israelite monarch prophesied in the name of Baal or other deities of the neighboring heathen peoples. Belonging to the former category there were several impostors as contemporaries with the true prophets like Mikha (Micah) and Jeremiah, and to the latter there were those who gave much trouble to Elijah, and caused the massacres of the true prophets and believers during the reign of Ahab and his wife Jezebel. Most dangerous of all to the cause of true faith and religion were the pseudo-prophets, who conducted the divine services in the temple as well as in the Misphas and pretended to deliver the oracles of God to the people. No prophet, perhaps, received at the hands of these impostors more of persecution and hardships than the Prophet Jeremiah.
While still a young man, Jeremiah began his prophetic mission about the latter quarter of the seventh century before the Christian era, when the Kingdom of Judah was in great danger of invasion by the armies of the Chaldeans. The Jews had entered into alliance with the Pharaoh of Egypt, but as the latter had been badly defeated by the troops of Nebuchadnezzar, Jerusalem's doom was merely a question of time. In these critical days, during which the fate of the remnant of the people of God was to be decided, the Prophet Jeremiah was stoutly advising the king and the leaders of the Jews to submit and serve the King of Babylon, so that Jerusalem might be saved from being burnt down to ashes and the people from being deported into captivity. He poured out all his eloquent and fiery discourses into the ears of the kings, the priests, and the elders of the people, but all of no avail. He delivered message after message from God, saying that the only remedy for saving the country and the people from the imminent destruction was to submit to the Chaldeans; but there was no one to lend ear to his warnings.
Nebuchadnezzar comes and takes the city, carries away with him the king, the princes, and many captives, as well as all the treasures of the temple, including the gold and silver vessels. Another prince, and a third one, is appointed by the Emperor of Babylon to reign as his vassal in Jerusalem. This king, instead of being wise and loyal to his master of Babylon, revolts against him. Jeremiah incessantly admonishes the king to remain loyal and to abandon the Egyptian policy. But the false prophets continue to harangue in the temple, saying: "Thus says the Lord of hosts, Behold, I have broken the yoke of the King of Babylon, and in two years' time all the Jewish captives and the vessels of the House of God will be returned to Jerusalem." Jeremiah makes a wooden yoke round his own neck and goes to the temple and tells the people that God has been pleased to place in this way the yoke of the monarch of Babylon upon the neck of all the Jews. He is struck on the face by one opponent prophet, who breaks to pieces the wooden yoke from Jeremiah's neck and repeats the harangue of the false prophets. Jeremiah is thrown into a deep dungeon full of mire, and is fed only on a dry loaf of barley a day until a famine prevails in the city, which is besieged by the Chaldeans. The pseudo-prophet Hananiah dies as Jeremiah had foretold. The wall of the city is thrown down somewhere, and the victorious army rushes into the city, the fleeing King Zedekiah and his retinue are seized and taken to the King of Babylon. The city and the temple, after being pillaged, are set on fire and all the inhabitants of Jerusalem are carried into Babylonia; only the poorer classes are left to cultivate the land. By order of Nebuchadnezzar, Jeremiah is granted a favor of staying in Jerusalem, and the newly appointed governor, Gedaliah, is charged to guard and well look after the prophet. But Gedaliah is killed by the rebellious Jews, and then they all flee to Egypt, carrying Jeremiah with them. Even in Egypt he prophesies against the fugitives and the Egyptians. He must have ended his life in Egypt.
His books, as it now stands, is quite different from the text of the Septuagint; evidently the copy from which the Greek text was written by the Alexandrian translators had a different order of chapters.
The Biblical critics consider that Jeremiah was the author, or, at any rate, a compiler, of the fifth book of the Pentateuch called Deuteronomy. I myself am of the same opinion. Jeremiah was a Levite and a priest as well as a prophet. There is much of Jeremiah's teachings in Deuteronomy which are unknown in the rest of the Old Testament writings. And I take one of these teachings for my present subject, which I consider as one of the gems or golden texts of the Old Testament and must be esteemed very precious and holy.
After this detailed explanation I hasten to the main point which I have selected for the topic of this article: How to distinguish a genuine prophet from a false prophet. Jeremiah has supplied us with a fairly satisfactory answer, namely:
"THE PROPHET WHO TEACHES ISLAM"
In the Book of Deuteronomy (xiii. 1- 5, xviii. 20 - 22) God the Almighty gives some instructions concerning the false prophets who may prophesy in the Name of the Lord and in such an insidious way that they could mislead His people. Further, he tells us that the best way to find out the impostor's perfidy was to anticipate the fulfillment of his predictions, and then to put him to death when his fraud was divulged. But, as is well known, the ignorant cannot well distinguish between the genuine prophet and the imposter, just as much as they to-day are unable to definitely discover which of the two, a Roman Catholic priest or a Calvinist minister, is a genuine follower of Jesus Christ! A false prophet would also foretell events, work wonders, and do other religious things similar - at least in appearance - to those performed by a true one. The competition between the Prophet Moses and the magicians of Egypt is an apt illustration of this statement. Thus it is Jeremiah who gives us the best way of testing the veracity, the genuineness, of a prophet, and that way is the sign of Islam. Please read the whole chapter xxviii. of Jeremiah, and then ponder and reflect on the ninth verse: -
"The prophet which foretells the Islam (Shalom), at the coming of the word of the Prophet, that prophet will be recognized to have been sent by God in truth" (Jer. xxviii. 9).
This translation is strictly literal. The original verb naba, usually translated as "to foretell" or "to prophesy," and the noun nabi, "a prophet" has given the impression that a prophet is a person who foretells the future or past events by the aid of divine revelation. This definition is only partially true. The complete definition of the word "Prophet" must be: "one who receives oracles or messages from God, and delivers them faithfully to the person or people intended." It is evident that a divine message need not necessarily be a foretelling of past and future events. In the same way verb "prophesy" does not necessarily mean to reveal the past or future occurrences, but rather to preach or promulgate the message from God. Consequently to prophesy is to deliver and utter a new oracle, its nature or character being quite immaterial. To read the words of a prophet would be to prophesy no more than would a prophet deliver an oracle when making a discourse or public speech of his own accord. In the Qur'an God orders His beloved worshiper Prophet Muhammad to declare: "Say: 'I am only human like you, revealed to me is that your God is One God....'" Ch. 18:110 so that we may be careful not to attribute to any of the prophets the quality of knowing and saying everything through the Revelation. The Divine Revelations used to come at intervals, while the prophets in their personal intercourse and knowledge might be liable to mistakes and errors. A prophet is not appointed by God to teach humanity physics, mathematics, or any other positive science. It would be very unjust on our part to blame a prophet for a slip of language or a mistake committed as a man.
A prophet, therefore, is the subject of test and examination only when he officially and formally delivers the Message he has received from his Lord. His private affairs, his family concerns, and his personal attainments do not concern us so much as his mission and office. In order to find out whether a prophet is genuine or an impostor, it is not fair to give a verdict against his prophetical character because he is reported to have been a little harsh or rude to his mother or because he believed in the literal inspiration and the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch. While making this observation, I have in mind the case of Jesus Christ, and many others in the history of Israel on other points.
It is mala fides and ill will to accuse prophets of sensuality, rudeness, ignorance in sciences, and of other personal frailties. They were men like ourselves and subject to the same natural inclinations and passions. They were protected from mortal sins and from the perversion of the message they had to hand further. We must be extremely careful not to exalt the prophets of God too high in our imagination, lest God be displeased with us. They are all His creatures and worshipers; they accomplished their work and returned to Him. The moment we forget God and concentrate our love and admiration upon the person of any of the messengers of God we are in danger of falling into the sin of polytheism.
Having so far explained the nature and the signification of the prophet and the prophecy, I shall now endeavor to prove that no prophet could be genuine unless, as Jeremiah expressly says, he preaches and propagates the religion of Islam.
In order to understand better the sense and the importance of the passage under our contemplation we should just cast a glance over the preceding verse where Jeremiah tells his antagonist Prophet Hananiah: "The prophets that have been before me and before thee from old (times) prophesied against many lands, and against great kingdoms, concerning war and evil and pestilence." Then he proceeds: -
"The prophet that prophesies concerning Islam as soon as the word of the prophet comes, that prophet is known to have been sent by the Lord in truth."
There can be raised no serious objection to the English wording of this passage excepting the clause "l shalom" which I have translated as "concerning Islam." The preposition "l" before "shalom" signifies "concerning" or "about," and places its subject in the objective case and not in the dative, as it would be if the predicate were a verb like "come," "go," or "give."
That "shalom" and the Syriac "Shlama," as well as the Arabic "salam" and "Islam," are of one and the same Semitic root, "shalam," and mean the same thing, is an admitted truth by all the scholars of the Semitic languages. The verb "shalam" signifies "to submit, resign oneself to," and then "to make peace;" and consequently "to be safe, sound, and tranquil." No religious system in the world has ever been qualified with a better and more comprehensive, dignified, and sublime name than that of "Islam.' The true Religion of the True God cannot be named after the name of any of His worshipers, and much less after the name of a people or country. It is, indeed, this sanctity and the inviolability of the word "Islam" that strikes its opponents with awe, fear, and reverence even when the Muslims are weak and unhappy. It is the name and title of a religion that teaches and commands an absolute submission and resignation of will and self to the Supreme Being, and then to obtain peace and tranquillity in mind and at home, no matter what tribulations or passing misfortunes may threaten us that fills its opponents with awe (1).
------------- Footnote (1) It is interesting and significant to note how the observations of the learned professor coincide with those of the ex-Kaiser of Germany who on the occasion of his seventieth birthday celebrations at Doorn, Holland, was reported to have said in his speech: "And understand this - if ever the Muhammadans should conceive the idea that it is the command of Allah to bring order into a declining West and subjugate to His will, then - with faith in God - they will come upon the godless Europeans like a tidal wave, against which even the reddest Bolshevist, full of eagerness for combat, will be helpless." (Evening Standard, London, January 26, 1929.) ------------- End of footnote
It is the firm and unshaking belief in the Oneness of Allah and the unswerving confidence in His Mercy and justice that makes a Muslim distinguishable and prominent among non-Muslims. And it is this sound faith in Allah and the sincere attachment to His Holy Qur'an and the Prophet that the Christian missionaries have been desperately attacking and have hopelessly failed. Hence, Jeremiah's words that "the Prophet who prophesies, namely, who preaches and speaks concerning the affairs of Islam as his religion, he will at once be known to have been sent by the Lord in truth." Let us, therefore, take into serious consideration the following points:-
1. The Prophet Jeremiah is the only prophet before Christ who uses the word Shalom in the sense of a religion. He is the only prophet who uses this word with the object of setting or proving the veracity of a messenger of God. According to the Qur'anic revelation, Prophets Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, and all the prophets were Muslims, and professed Islam as their religion. The term "Islam" and its equivalents, "Shalom" and Shlama," were known to the Jews and Christians of Mecca and Medina when Prophet Muhammad appeared to perfect and universalize the religion of Islam. A prophet who predicts "peace" as an abstract, vague and temporary condition cannot succeed in proving his identity thereby. In fact, the point of dispute, or rather the critical national question, controverted by the two eminent prophets known to the court and the nation like Jeremiah and Hananiah (Jer. xxviii.), could not be solved and definitely settled by the affirmation of the one and the denial of the other, of the imminent catastrophe. To predict "peace" by Jeremiah when he had all the time been predicting the great national disaster - either by the submission of the King Sidaqia to the Chaldean sovereign or by his resistance - would not only involve his failure, not to talk of his being a success in proving his veracity, but also it would make him even ridiculous. For, in either case, his presumed "peace" would mean no peace at all. On the contrary, if the Jews resisted the Chaldean army, it meant a complete national ruin, and if they submitted, an unconditional servitude. It is evident, therefore, that Jeremiah uses the term "Shalom" in the sense of a tangible, concrete, and real religious system which Islam comprises. To make it more clear, we should attentively listen to the arguments of the two opponent prophets discussing and disputing the national question in the presence of a wicked king and his court of vile flatterers and depraved hypocrites. Jeremiah has at heart the cause of God and His religion of peace, and in the vital interests of the religion of peace, or Islam, he advises the wicked king and his courtiers to submit to the yoke of Babylon and serve the Chaldeans and live. For there was no other alternative open to them. They had abandoned the God of their forefathers, polluted His temple, mocked and reviled His prophets, and committed evil and treachery (2 Chron. xxxvi. etc.). So God had delivered them into the hands of Nebuchadnezzar, and would not save them. For a true and sincere worshiper of God, the religion comes first and the nation after. It is the government and the nation - especially when they have forsaken God - that are to be sacrificed for the cause of religion, and not vice versa! The other Prophet of Gibeon, called Hananiah, sought to please his master the king; he was a courtier and favorite, rich and in splendor, whereas his antagonist was always languishing and starving in the prisons and dungeons. He cares not a fillip for the religion and the real welfare of the people. He is also a prophet, for so says the Book of Jeremiah, yet he is a villain, and has exchanged God for a depraved king! He prophesies in the name of the same God as does Jeremiah, and announces the return of the booty and the captives from Babylon in two years' time.
Now, from the above imperfect description of the prophets, which of the two would you qualify as the true worshiper of God and as the loyal defender of God's religion? Surely Jeremiah would at once attract your sympathy and choice.
2. It is only the religion of Shalom, of Islam, that can testify to the character and the office of a true prophet, Imam, or any minister of God on earth. God is One, and His religion is one. There is no other religion in the world like Islam, which professes and defends this absolute Oneness of the Deity. He who, therefore, sacrifices every other interest, honor and love for the cause of this Holy Religion, he is undoubtedly the genuine prophet and the minister of God. But there is still one thing more worthy of our notice, and that thing is this. If the religion of Islam is not the standard and the measure by which to test the veracity of a prophet or minister of God, then there is no other criterion to answer that purpose. A miracle is not always a sufficient proof, for the sorcerers also work wonders. The fulfillment of a prophecy or prediction, too, is not in itself a sufficient proof; for just as one holy Spirit reveals a future event to a true prophet, so does sometimes an evil spirit the same to an imposter. Hence it is clear that the prophet who "prophesies concerning Shalom - Islam - as being the name of Faith and path of life, as soon as he receives a message from God he will be known to have been sent by Him." Such was the argument which Jeremiah had recourse to and with which he wished to convince his audience of the falsity of Hananiah. But the wicked king and his entourage would not listen to and obey the Word of God.
3. As argued in the preceding paragraph, it should be noted that neither the fulfillment of a prediction nor the work- ing of a miracle was enough to prove the genuine character of a prophet; that the loyalty and strict attachment to the religion is the best and the decisive proof for the purpose; that "Shalom" was used to express the religion of peace. Once again we repeat the same assertion that Shalom is no other than Islam. And we demand from those who would object to this interpretation to produce an Arabic word be- sides Islam and Salam as the equivalent of the Shalom, and also to find for us another word in Hebrew besides Shalom that would convey and express the same meaning as Islam. It is impossible to produce another such an equivalent. Therefore we are forced to admit that Shalom is the same as "salam" or "peace" in the abstract, and "Islam" as a religion and faith in the concrete.
4. As the Qur'an in chap. ii expressly reminds us that Abraham and his sons and grandsons were the followers of Islam; that they were neither Jews nor Christians; that they preached and propagated the worship and the faith in the one God to all the peoples among whom they sojourned or dwelt, we must admit that not only the Jews, but several other nations that descended from the other sons of Abraham and many tribes converted and absorbed by them, were also Muslims; that is to say, believers in Allah and resigned to His Will. There were the people of Esau, the Edomites, the Midianites, and numerous other peoples living in Arabia, who knew God and worshipped Him like the Israelites. These peoples had also their own prophets and religious guides like Job, Jethro (the father-in-law of the Prophet Moses), Balaam, Hud, and many others. But they, like the Jews, had taken to idolatry until it was totally eradicated by the Prince of the prophets. The Jews, in about the fifth century B.C., produced the greater portion of their canonical books of the Old Testament, when the memories of the conquest of the land of Canaan by Joshua, the temple and Jerusalem of Solomon, were events buried in the past epochs of their wondrous history. A nationalistic and Judaistic spirit of solicitude and seclusion reigned among the small remnant of Israel; the belief in the coming of a great Savior to restore the lost throne and crown of David was regnant, and the old meaning of "Shalom" as the name of the religion of Abraham and common to all the different peoples descended from him was no longer remembered. It is from this point of view that I regard this passage of Jeremiah as one of the golden texts in the Hebrew sacred writ.
The Message of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.w.)
To deal with this subject in the framework of logic, there is one obvious question which arises first: why the message of Prophet Muhammad(pbuh), and none other?
Why, in particular, that of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and not that of any other Prophets or the founders of other religions? We must deal with this question at the outset. So that our minds may be fully satisfied that we can, in fact, obtain guidance not from any other ancient or modern personality, but from the character and personality of a Messenger of God alone. And of all the Messengers of God and the leaders of religion, it is the life of Muhammad (pbuh) alone which offers true and comprehensive guidance. Guidance of which we stand in dire need today.
Need for the Guidance of Allah
It is an undeniable fact that the source of all knowledge is Almighty Allah Who made this universe and created man to populate it. Who else but Him can know the realities of this universe. Who else possesses the knowledge of human nature and its true elements? The Creator alone knows His creatures. Human awareness is circumscribed by what has been
revealed by the Creator, for man has no independent means of his own to get at the truth.
In this connection, the difference between two different aspects of reality must be fully grasped so as to avoid any fallacy in discussion. There are things which you perceive through the senses, and having gathered a body of knowledge by means of these senses, you can proceed to classify this information with the help of reflection, argumentation, observation or experimentation and to deduce laws from them.
For this type of information no revelation from heaven is needed. This is the province of your personal discoveries, explorations, meditations, reflections, research and deductions. It has been left to you to explore the world around you and discover the forces which operate; to understand the laws under which these realities function, so that you may stride forward along the path of development. Yet in this matter too, your Creator has not deprived you of His help.
All through the course of history, Allah has been unfolding before you, no matter how imperceptibly, His created world through an evolutionary process. He has opened up new vistas of knowledge before you, and at certain points of history He has inspired men to invent new techniques or to discover new laws. But the fact remains that in this domain man must gather knowledge by himself, without the help of a Divine Messenger or a Divine Book. Man has been endowed with all the resources to collect the information necessary in this sphere.
But the second category of reality is transcendental , beyond the reach of our perception; things which we are powerless to comprehend; things which cannot be weighed or measured by scales, nor discovered by pressing into service any of the instruments for acquiring knowledge which we have at our disposal. The theories of philosophers and scientists on this subject are mere conjectures and they do not come under the scope of knowledge. Here our ultimate Realities and rational theories about them cannot be taken as definitive even by the very expounders of these theories. But if the authors of these theories possess any awareness of the boundaries of their limited knowledge, they cannot have faith in the validity of their notions. Nor can they call upon others to believe them.
Need for Following the Precedent of the Prophets (pbut)
Knowledge is obtained through the Guidance of Allah, for Allah alone is aware of realities. Allah offers this knowledge to man by means of Revelation. Revelation is transmitted to none but the Prophets (pbut). Allah has never published a Book and, having distributed to each individual, told him to study it to ascertain for himself the reality of his own existence and that of the universe. To realize his role in the practical world in the context of this reality, Allah has always appointed the Prophets (pbut) to convey this message to man, so that the Prophets (pbut) should not rest content with merely propagating their mandate, but driving it home, demonstrating it in action, recalling to the right path, those who defy the Divine mandates and organizing the believers into a society where every aspect bears practical evidence of this knowledge.
It is evident from this brief exposition that, for Guidance, we are wholly dependent upon the character displayed to the world by a Prophet of God (pbuh) A non-Prophet who does not believe in a Prophet is not eligible to be our leader, even though he may be a sage, a deeply learned and wise man. This is because such a person bereft of this knowledge is incapable of devising a true and just system of life for us.
Why we cannot obtain Guidance from the Prophets other than Muhammad (pbuh)
Let us now consider the question of why, of all of the venerable men whom we know as Prophets, and all the leaders of religions who conceivably may have been Prophets, we prefer to seek a message from the character of Muhammad (pbuh). Is this prejudice or is there a reasonable ground for doing so?
I submit that there is a rational basis for this. We certainly acknowledge and believe in the Prophethood of all those who have been named in the Holy Qur'an as Prophets. But, we lack reliable information by authentic sources on their teaching and their character. There is no doubt about the Prophethood of Hadrat Noah, Ibrahim, Ishaq, Yusuf, Moses and Jesus Christ (peace be upon them ) and we believe in all of them. But none of the Scriptures revealed to them has come down to us in its original form so that we may benefit from its pristine message. Similarly, the life-history of none of these Prophets (pbut) has been handed down by any authentic means enabling us to follow their example in the various spheres of individual and collective existence.
A person who undertakes to prepare an account of the teaching and characters of all these Prophets (pbut) cannot write more than a few pages and these too, entirely with the help of the Qur'an , for nowhere else is authentic material extant about them except in the Holy Qur'an.
The Jewish Scriptures and the Prophets (pbut)
It is said that an account of Moses and the later Prophets (pbut) and of their teachings is
contained in the Old Testament. But consider the Bible from the historical viewpoint. The original text of the Torah, as revealed to Hadrat Moses (pbuh), had been destroyed at the time of the sack of Bait-ul-Maqdas in 6 BC, and along with it the scriptures of the former Prophets (pbut) had perished. In 5 BC, when the tribe of Israel arrived in Palestine after their release from the Captivity in Babylon, the Prophet Ezra (pbuh), assisted by some venerable collaborators, prepared an account of the life of Moses (pbuh) as well as a history of the tribe of Israel. In this work were incorporated at appropriate places such verses of the Torah as were readily available to the author and his associates.
In the period falling between the fourth and second century BC, various authors penned down the Scriptures ( from which sources we know not) of those Prophets who had preceded them by several centuries. In 300 BC, to cite an instance, an unknown writer wrote a book in the name of Hadrat Yunus (pbuh) and incorporated it in the Bible, despite the fact that Hadrat Yunus was a Prophet of the 8th century BC. The Zubur (Psalms) were committed to writing five centuries after the death of Hadrat Daud (pbuh) and to them were added sonnets composed by some hundred poets. We have no knowledge of the sources from which the compilers of the Zubur (Psalms) had gleaned those Sonnets.
Hadrat Sulaiman (pbuh) died in 933 BC, and Amsal-i-Sulaiman ( An Anthology of Soloman's Proverbs) was compiled in the year 250 BC which also incorporated the maxims of several other sages.
In short, no book of the Bible bears an authentic connection with any Prophet to whom it is ascribed. Furthermore, even these books of the Jewish Bible perished at the second sack of Bait-ul-Maqdas in 70 AD, leaving only their Greek translation extant, a translation dating back to the period falling between 258 BC and the first century BC.
In the second century AD, the Jewish scholars prepared a Jewish Bible with the help of manuscripts which had survived the vicissitudes of time. The oldest copy of this Bible now extant dates back to 916 AD. Apart from this, no other Jewish manuscript exists anywhere today.
The Jewish scrolls discovered in the cave of Qumran on the Dead Sea are not older than the first and second century BC, and even those contain a few scattered fragments of the Bible.
The earliest manuscript comprising the first five books of the Bible current among the Samaritans was written in the eleventh century AD. The Greek translation prepared in the second and third century BC was marred by countless errors. A retranslation from Greek into Latin was done in the third century AD. By what standard can we judge this material as an authentic source of the life-histories and teachings of Moses (pbuh) and the later Prophets of the Jews?
Finally, there were certain unwritten legends known as oral law, current among the Jews. For a span of thirteen or fourteen centuries they remained unwritten until, in the later part of the second and the beginning of the third century AD, a priest known as Yahuda B. Sham'un committed them to writing under the title of ' Mishnah.' Commentaries on this work by the Palestinian Jewish scholars under the name of ' Halaka' and by Babylonian scholars under the title ' Haggada ' appeared in the third and fifth century respectively. The ' Talmud' is, in fact, an anthology of these three works. Significantly, authoritative evidence which may reveal the chain of transmission is lacking in the case of all traditions incorporated in these books.
Christian Scriptures
A similar state of affairs exists in the case of Hadrat Isa's character and teachings. Jesus (pbuh) conveyed orally to the people the Bible which God originally revealed to him. His disciples, too, propagated it among the people by the spoken word in such a manner that they presented an admixture of their Prophet's life-story and the revealed verses of the Bible. None of this material was put into writing during the lifetime of Jesus (pbuh) or even in the period following him. It fell to the lot of the Christians whose vernacular was Greek to transform these oral traditions into writing. It must be borne in mind that Christ's native tongue was Syriac or Aramaic and his disciples spoke the same language as well.
Most Greek-speaking authors heard these traditions in the Aramaic vernacular and committed them to writing in Greek. None of these writings is dated prior to the year 70AD; there is not a single instance in these works where the author has cited an authority for an event or maxim attributed to Hadrat Isa (pbuh) in order that we might construct a chain of transmission. Furthermore, even these works have not survived. Thousands of Greek manuscripts of the new Testament were collected, but none of them is older than the fourth century AD; the origin of most of them does not go beyond the period spanning the 11th to the 14th centuries.
Some scattered papyrus fragments found in Egypt can lay claim to no greater antiquity than the third century. We cannot say when the Bible was translated from Greek into Latin. Nor do we know the writer's name.
In the fourth century AD, the Pope commissioned a review of the Latin translation. In the sixteenth century, this version was discarded and a fresh translation from Greek into Latin was prepared. The Four Bibles were most probably rendered into the Syriac language from Greek in 200 AD, but the oldest Syriac manuscript extant was written in the 4th century. A handwritten copy dated back to the 5th century AD contains, in frequent parts, a different version.
Among the Arabic translations made from the Syriac none is known to have been prepared before the 8th century AD. It is curious that some seventy different versions of the Bible were prepared, four of which were approved by the leaders of the Christian religion, while the rest was rejected. We have no information concerning the grounds for their approval or rejection. But can this material be credited to any extent with authenticity as regards the character and message (gospel ) of Jesus (peace be upon him)?
With regards to other leaders of religion the situation is not dissimilar. Take, for example, Zoroaster whose birth date is not shrouded in mystery. The most that can be said about him is that there is evidence of his existence some 250 years before the subjugation of Persia by Alexander. In other words, his life can be dated some five centuries before Christ (pbuh). His book "Avasta," in its original language, is extinct today; the language in which the book was originally written or orally propagated is dead.
In the 9th century AD, a translation of "Avasta" was published in nine volumes, out of which the first two volumes perished. The earliest surviving manuscripts of the book dates from the middle of the 13th century. Such is the condition of Zoroaster's book. As for his character, our information does not extend beyond the detail that he began preaching his religion at the age of forty. Two years earlier, King Gustaph became his disciple and Zoroaster's creed turned into a State religion. Zoroaster lived to be 77, and after his death, as time went on, legends were spun around his life, all of them apocryphal.
One of the renowned religious personalities of the world was Buddha. Like Zoroaster, he might have been a Prophet. Yet he left no boo, nor did his followers claim that he had given one. A hundred years after his death, a movement was started which lasted for several centuries to collect his maxims and the account for his life. But no compiler of the Buddhist scriptures produced during this period furnishes a chain of evidence for the maxims and teachings of Buddha. It is evident that even if we wished to turn for guidance to other Prophets (peace be upon them) and religious leaders, we could not come by a reliable source from which might be derived authentic and unassailable information on their history and teachings.
We are left with no alternative but to turn to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who left a trustworthy Book free of any excisions or adulterations; the Prophet (pbuh) whose detailed history, sayings and practices were transmitted to us by authoritative sources so that we would be guided by his example. In the entire course of history such a leader could only be found in the sublimely gifted person in Muhammad (pbuh). The Holy Prophet (pbuh) put forth a Book ( the Holy Qur'an) with the definite claim that it was the Word of God which had been revealed to him. On scrutiny, we positively feel that this Book is free of interpolations. The Book does not incorporate a single maxim of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) ; rather, the inclusion in this Book of any sayings of the Prophet(pbuh) has been scrupulously avoided.
In this Book, the Holy Prophet's life(pbuh) , the history of the Arabs and the events which occurred during the period of the revelation of the Qur'an have not been mingled with the Divine verses, as is the case with the Bible. The Qur'an is the pure Word of God. Not one word therein is not divine. Not a single word has been deleted from its text. The Book has been handed down to our age in its complete and original form since the time of Muhammad(pbuh). From the time the Book began to be revealed, the Holy Prophet(pbuh) had dedicated its text to the scribes. Whenever some Divine Message was revealed, the Holy Prophet(pbuh) would call a scribe and dictate its words to him. The written text was then read to the Holy Prophet(pbuh), who having satisfied himself that the scribe had committed no error in recording, would put the manuscript in safe custody. The Holy Prophet(pbuh) also used to instruct the scribe about the sequence in which a revealed message was to be placed in a particular Surah. In this manner, the Holy Prophet(pbuh) continued to arrange the texts of the Qur'an in systematic order until the end of the chain of revelations. Again, it was ordained from the beginning of Islam that a recitation of the Holy Qur'an must form an integral part of worship. Hence the illustrious Companions (pbut) would commit the Divine verses to memory as soon as they were revealed. Many of them learned the entire text by heart and an even greater number memorized different portions of it.
Besides, those of the Companions(pbut) who were literate used to keep a written record of several portions of the Holy Qur'an. In this manner, the text of the Holy Qur'an was preserved in four different ways during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet(pbuh):
1. The Holy Prophet(pbuh) had the whole text of the Divine Messages from beginning to end committed to writing by the scribes of revelations.
2. Many of the Companions(pbut) learned the entire text of the Qur'an, syllable upon syllable, by heart.
3. All the illustrious Companions(pbut), without exception, had memorized at least some portion of the Holy Qur'an, for the simple reason that it was obligatory for them to recite it during worship. An estimate of the number of the illustrious Companions(pbut) may be obtained from the fact that one
hundred forty thousand Companions(pbut) participated in the Last Pilgrimage performed by the Holy
Prophet(pbuh).
4. A considerable number of the literate Companions(pbut) kept a private record of the text of the Qur'an and satisfied themselves as to the purity of their record by reading it out to the Holy Prophet(pbuh).
It is an incontrovertible historical truth that the text of the Holy Qur'an extant today is, syllable for syllable exactly the same as the Holy Prophet(pbuh) had offered to the world as the Word of God. After the demise of the Holy Prophet(pbuh), the first caliph Hadrat Abu Baker(pbuh) assembled all the Huffaz (those who have memorized the Qur'an) and the written records of the Holy Qur'an and had the whole text written in Book form.In the time of Hadrat ' Uthman (pbuh) copies of this original version were made and officially dispatched to the capitals of the Islamic world. Of these copies extant in the world today, one is in Istanbul and the other in Tashkent. Whoever is so inclined may compare any printed text of the Holy Qur'an with those two copies. He shall find no variation. And how can one expect any discrepancy, when there have been several million Huffaz in every generation since the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh) and in our own time? Should anyone alter one syllable of the original text of the Qur'an, these Huffaz would at once expose the mistake. In the last century, an Institute of Munich University in Germany collected forty-two thousand copies of the Holy Qur'an including manuscripts and printed texts produced in each period in the various of the Islamic world. Research was carried out on these texts for half a century, at the end of which the researchers concluded that apart from copying mistakes, there was no discrepancy in the text of these forty-two thousand copies, though they belonged to periods spanning the first century Hijrah to the 14th century Hijrah and had been procured from all parts of the world. This Institute, unfortunately was destroyed in the bombing raids on Germany during World War ll , but the findings of the research project survived. Another point that must be kept in view is that the word in which the Qur'an was revealed is a living language in our own time. It is still current as the mother tongue of some hundred million people from Iraq to Morocco.In the non-Arab world also hundreds of thousands of people study and teach this language.
The grammar of the Arabic language, its lexicon, its phonetic system and its phraseology, have remained in tact for fourteen hundred years.
A modern Arabic speaking person can comprehend the Holy Qur'an with as much proficiency as did the Arabs of fourteen centuries ago. This, then, is an important attribute of Muhammad(pbuh), which is shared by no other Prophet or Leader of Religion. The Book which God revealed to him for the guidance of mankind today exists in its original language without the slightest alteration in its vocabulary.
Authenticity of the Character and Precedent of the Holy Prophet(pbuh)
Now take the second attribute of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) by which he stands unique among all Prophets(pbut) and leaders of religion. Just as the Book transmitted to him, amounts of his character have also been preserved to serve as a beacon for us in all walks of life. From early childhood to the close of his life, a large number of those who saw him, witnessed the events of his life and heard his conversation, addresses, exhortations or warnings, had retained them in memory and passed them onto their successors. Some of the research scholars believe that the number of those who had passed on to the next generation eyewitness accounts or reports of events that they had heard during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) number a hundred thousand people. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself dictated some commands and handed or dispatched them to certain people. These were later bequeathed to the succeeding generations.
There were at least six Companions (pbut) who had recorded the Traditions of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and tested the authenticity of their records by reading them out to the Holy Prophet(pbuh). These writings were also inherited by posterity. After the death of the Holy Prophet(pbuh), some fifty Companions (pbut) undertook to collect accounts of the circumstances and incidents of the Prophet's life and his holy utterances. The material gathered from this source also came into the hands of those who later accomplished the task of collecting and compiling the Traditions of the Holy Prophet (pbuh).
Besides, as I have mentioned earlier, the number of the Companions who transmitted orally their knowledge of the Holy Prophet's character(pbuh) runs to one hundred thousand, according to the estimate of some researchers. Little wonder, when we take into account the fact that the Holy Prophet (pbuh) performed his last Hajj, known as the Farewell Pilgrimage, in the company of one hundred and forty thousand people! All these believers saw him at the time of Hajj, learned from him the rituals of Hajj and listened to the addresses which the Holy Prophet (pbuh) delivered during this last Pilgrimage. It is improbable that when this assembly, who had attended such an important occasion as the Hajj, disperse to their own homes, their friends, relations and fellow-citizens should not have questioned them on the circumstances of their journey or failed to ascertain from them the injunctions about Hajj. One can well judge from this, after the Holy Prophet (pbuh) had departed from the world, how eagerly the people must have questioned those who had seen him and listened to his speech, on the details of his life, his sacred utterances, commands and instructions.
The procedure that had been adopted from the beginning regarding the traditions bequeathed to the later generations by the illustrious Companions(pbut) was that whoever ascribed an event or saying to the Holy Prophet(pbuh) had to state his source and furnish a chain of evidence. In this way, the sources of a particular tradition were traced through all connecting links back to the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh) in order to determine whether their connection with the person of the Prophet of God (pbuh) was demonstrably true. If any links were found to be missing in the chain of transmission, the authenticity of the tradition fell into suspicion. When in the cast of a tradition, a complete line of evidence had been set up to the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh), and even one of the reporters along the line had been recognized as unreliable, the tradition was discarded. If you ponder this a while, you will realize that circumstances relating to no other man in history have been recorded with such rigorous scrutiny. It is the distinction of Muhammed (pbuh) that no tradition ascribed to him has been accepted, save on authority. And while looking for the authority of a tradition, it was not considered sufficient to establish a chain of evidence up to the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh) , but each one of the successive transmitters was carefully scrutinized as well so as to determine his or her reliability. For this purpose, the circumstances of all the reporters were thoroughly investigated and full-scale books were compiled. Setting forth details as to who was trustworthy and who was not; what sort of character and personality each of them had; whose memory was sound and whose weak. Furthermore, the reporter who had actually met the source from whom he had derived the tradition was distinguished from the one who merely named the source without ever having met him. Information about all these reporters has been documented on such a comprehensive scale that today we can easily determine in the case of each tradition whether it has been derived from trustworthy or fake sources. Is there any other person in the history of mankind whose life story has been derived by such authentic means? Is there another single instance in which, while discovering the history of one individual person, comprehensive books were compiled on the life stories of thousands of reporters who had narrated some tradition about that person? The primary motive behind the vigorous campaign of the modern Christian and Jewish scholars is to cast doubt on the authenticity of the tradition is jealousy, for they know full well that the authority on the genuineness of their own Scriptures as well as for that of the histories of their Prophets is non-existent. It is owing to this jealousy that they have dispensed with all intellectual honesty in their criticisms on Islam, the Holy Qur'an and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
All Aspects of the Holy Prophet's(pbuh) Life Are Open and Fully Known
The authenticity of the sources for a reconstruction of this life and character is by no means the only distinction of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). Another factor which distinguishes him from all others is that we have access to far more details about each and every aspect of his life than we have with respect to other historical personages:His family background; the kind of life he led before the announcement of his Apostolic Mission; how he was invested with Prophethood; how the Divine Messages were transmitted to him; how he preached Islam; in what manner he faced opposition and resistance; how he prepared and trained his Companions; his domestic life; his conduct as a husband and father;his dealing with friends and foes; his precepts and practices, commands and warnings; the practices to which he did not object as well as the practices which he curbed- all these in their minute details may be read in the Books of Traditions and in the works on his pious life and character. The Holy Prophet(pbuh) was an ideal military general and we possess detailed accounts of all the battles fought under his command. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) was the head of state, and a complete history of his reign is available to us. He (pbuh) was a judge, and full proceedings of all the cases tried by him, along with the judgements awarded by him in those cases, are extant. The Holy Prophet(pbuh) visited the markets and watched how the people conducted their business. He (pbuh) forbade all he found to be unfair and fraudulent, while approving of all that was found to be just and equitable. In short, there is no sphere of life regarding which he did not lay down comprehensive guidelines. It is on this basis that we assert with full knowledge and conviction and without any prejudice that of all the Prophets(pbut) and religious leaders, it is the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) alone to whom humanity can turn for advice and guidance, because the Book as presented by him has been preserved in its original text in its pristine form and his character, with all such details as are needed for guidance, has been reported to us through the most authentic and reliable sources. We shall now see what message and instruction his pious character bears for us.
The Message of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) Is for All Mankind
The foremost feature we observe in his apostolic mission is that he (pbuh) addresses man in his capacity as a human being, setting aside all distinctions of color, race, language or country. He (pbuh) propounds tenets for the welfare of all mankind. Whoever has faith in these tenets is a Muslim and enters the fold of the universal brotherhood of Islam. Black or white, belonging to the East or the West,the Arab or the non-Arab, wherever a human being may be living, whatever the country, nation or race in which he is born;irrespective of the tongue he speaks or the color of his skin, the call of the Prophet (pbuh) is addressed to everyone. Taboos, inequality, racial or class distinctions, linguistic, territorial or geographic bias-nothing that divides man from man has any place in the society of Islam.
The Best remedy for Racial Prejudice or Color Bar
On reflection, one comes to appreciate that this is a great blessing vouchsafed to mankind through the Arabian Prophet, Muhammad (pbuh). It has been this differentiation between man and man that has , more than anything else, ruined mankind. In some places, man was declared to be polluted and it was argued that since he was an untouchable he could not enjoy the same rights as the Brahmans. Then, according to some, man was considered to be good only for destruction, for he had the misfortune to be born in America, Australia, or Palestine in an age when the foreign immigrants badly wanted his eviction from the land. In places, man was hunted, enslaved and forced to work like an animal merely for the offense of being born in Africa and the color of his skin ,black. In other words, these distinctions of nationality, country, race, color and language have, from time immemorial, been highly detrimental to mankind. These differentiations have caused wars. They have served as the basis of aggression by one country against the other. They have provoked a people to plunder another people. Generations
of human beings have been subjected to ruthless genocide for the satisfaction of these prejudices . The Holy Prophet (pbuh) treated this malady so effectually that the enemies of Islam now admit that never were the problems of color distinction, racial prejudice and national bias so successfully solved as in the religion of Islam. When the famous leader of the African- born nationals of America, Malcolm X, who at one time led an extremist Black Nationalist Movement against the Whites, undertook Hajj (pilgrimage to Makkah) after embracing Islam, he saw people of all races, colors and nationalities speaking different languages and converging at one central place from the East and the West and from the North and the South. They all wore the same garment, the Ihram, all chanted Labbaik, in the same language; all mingled to perform circumambulation, and they all formed one compact congregation under the of one leader to offer worship. Malcolm X observed this and exclaimed that it was the only correct answer to the questions of race and color and that the measures hitherto adopted by his compatriots were wrong. Malcolm X was murdered, but his autobiography survives to bear witness to the profound impact Hajj had made on him.
Hajj is but one of the articles of worship in the Islamic faith. Whoever surveys the Islamic religion as a whole with open eyes will not find even the smallest point to which he can refer and say that here Islam has tilted the balance in favor of a particular nation, tribe, race or class. The entire code of Islam testifies to the fact that it is applicable to the whole of humanity. It affirms that all human beings who acknowledge the principles of Islam and enter the fold of the universal brotherhood of Islam are equal. nay, the conduct of Islam towards the non- Muslim presents a happy contrast to the treatment of the Blacks by the Whites, and highlights, by contrast, the conduct of the imperialists toward the slave peoples as well as the behavior of the Communists governments towards their non-Communist subjects or toward their own dissident party members.
Let us now turn to the rules for human welfare which the Holy Prophet (pbuh) propagated through the teachings of Islam and the seizure of power to enable him not only to guarantee human well-being but to unite all human beings in one Ummah.
Widest Conception of the Oneness of God
The foremost of these principles is the belief in the Oneness of God, not just in the sense that God exists, nor merely that there is only One God, but in the sense that the Creator, Master, and All-Wise Sovereign of this universe is Allah alone. There is no comparable authority in the whole universe which is sovereign and has the right to command or forbid; or has the power to make certain things lawful and others unlawful by decree. These powers are vested in no one, save Allah. It is the sole prerogative of the Creator and master to allow certain things in this world at Will and to prohibit certain things at Will. Islam preaches that the belief in Allah signifies the acknowledgement of all these Powers of God. The belief in Allah is tantamount to the affirmation that we owe allegiance to no one except Him and that no power on earth has the right to enact a law that is inimical to His Commandments. The belief in Allah implies that man's head is made to bow to God alone and is consequently rendered incapable of bending down before anyone else. The belief in God carries the meaning that only Allah has the power to make or unmake our destiny; that He has absolute power in regard to life or death. He can take away our life whenever He pleases and He can keep us alive as long as it pleases Him. When he chooses to end our life, no power on earth can save us from death; when He chooses to give us life, no power on earth can put us to death. This, then, is the Islamic concept of God. According to this concept, the whole universe which stretches from the earth to the heavens operates under orders from Allah. It, therefore, behooves man, who subsists in this universe, to devote his life to carrying out the Will of God. Should man obtain a license to do what he likes or own obedience to some other power, his pattern of life would run counter to
the entire system of the universe. This may be expressed in other words better to grasp the point. That the whole universe functions under orders from God is an established fact which is unalterable by any power. Hence, if we carry out the behest of some authority other than Allah or follow an independent course of our own choice, our life would move in the direction opposite to the one the entire universe is taking. In this way, we shall be in a state of constant collision with the system of the universe.
Let us view this from another angle as well. The Islamic concept of God Affirms that the only valid way of life for man is to abide by the Will of Allah, for man is the creature and Allah is his Creator. As a creature, it is wrong on the part of the man to be independent of his Creator. It is also betrayal for him to offer worship to any other than the Creator. Either of these acts is opposed to reality. Whoever defies reality comes to grief. The reality stands inviolate.
The Call to Worship the Lord
The Holy Prophet (pbuh) calls for an end to this defiance. He (pbuh) teaches that the rules and patterns of our life should conform to the system which governs the whole universe. A person should neither assume the right of legislation nor acknowledge the prerogative of any other person to enact laws for God's creatures living on God's earth. The only valid law is the law given by the Lord of the Universe.All other laws are false and void.
The Call For Rendering Obedience To the Holy Prophet (pbuh)
We now come to the second point of the Holt Prophet's (pbuh) message. He (pbuh) categorically declared: "I am the Messenger of Allah. Allah has sent His mandate for mankind through me. I, too, am subject to this mandate.I can make no alterations in it. I have been appointed to obey the mandate, not to introduce innovations into it. The Qur'an embodies the Law which Allah has revealed to me and my practice is the law which I promulgate by the order and sanction of Allah.I am the first render obedience to the Law of God, and having done so, I call upon all men to relinquish their allegiance to every other law and abide by the Law of God alone."
Next to God, Obedience is due to the Messenger of God (pbuh)
No one should feel cynical as regards the query: How could the Holy Prophet (pbuh) be deemed to have obeyed and followed his own practice when it was really his personal precept or action? The truth of the matter is that just as the source of the Qur'an was God, so the source of all exhortations, prohibitions and regulations propagated by the Holy Prophet (pbuh) was also God. This is denoted by the term " Sunnah of the Prophet." The Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself followed the Sunnah in the same manner as it is obligatory for all the believers to follow it. This point was made abundantly clear on occasions when, in certain matters, the illustrious Companions (pbut) used to ask: "Allah's messenger, are you conveying the Will of God or is this your personal view? " The Holy Prophet (pbuh) used to observe: " No, this is not the Will of God; it is my opinion." On such occasions, the illustrious Companions (pbut) differed with the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and put forth their own way of thinking and the Holy Prophet (pbuh) allowed their suggestions to supercede his own opinion. Similarly, this point also became obvious on occasions when the Holy Prophet (pbuh) took counsel with his illustrious Companions (pbut). This consultation in itself was proof positive that Allah had revealed no mandate regarding the matter under consideration, for had the Divine Will been known in the matter, it could not have become subject for discussion. Such occasions, which have been elaborately recorded in the collections of Traditions, often arouse in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). The illustrious Companions(pbut) themselves have reported: " Never did we see a person who was engaged in councel more often than the Holy Prophet (pbuh)." If you reflect on this point, you will realize that holding councel in matters which God had not revealed His Will was also the Sunnah (Traditions) of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). When the Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself did not deem it proper to impose his personal opinion on the people as an inexorable law, what authority is there for another ruler to enforce his will upon the people? Thus did the Holy Prophet (pbuh) teach his Ummah to conduct their affairs by consultation and instructed the people to render unqualified obedience to the Will of God in those matters in which the Lord had not manifested His Will, the Holy Prophet (pbuh) exhorted the people to exercise their right of freedom of speech without fear.
True Charter of Freedom
This is the " Charter of Freedom" which only the true religion has conferred upon mankind. The creature of Allah should be the slave of Allah alone and owe service to none else, nay, not even as a servant of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). This charter freed man from offering worship to all others, save One God; and it terminated the divinity of man over man once and for all. Simultaneously, the greatest blessing conferred by this mandate upon mankind is the Supremacy of the Law, the Law which no monarch, dictator, democratic parliament or assembly of believers in Islam is empowered to tamper with for the purpose of altering it. This law bestows on man permanent values of Good and Evil, and no one has the power to transmute these values with a view to changing Good into Evil or vice versa.
The third message which the Holy Prophet (pbuh) preached to the servants of God was: " You are all answerable to God. You have been given unchartered freedom to act as you deem fit and to forage whatever pasture you like without being answerable to anyone. Rather you shall be held accountable before your Creator for each act, each word, in fact, for the whole course of your life wherein you have been given limited autonomy. You will be raised after death and presented in the court of your Lord for reckoning." When human conscience is permeated with such a stupendous moral force, it will be as if every human being were being guarded by a sentinel who challenges every evil thought that enters one's mind and hinders all action that may arise from an evil thought. Irrespective of the existence or non-existence of a vigilant police force and a retributive government in the external world, a censor will always preside over the human soul, and fear of seizure will deter a person from transgressing the Will of God even in privacy, in darkness or in a deserted wasteland. No greater means than this can be devised for the moral degeneration of man and for the forging of a stable human character. All other means which purport to reform the moral aspects of human character do not go beyond the dicta that is in this world " Good begets good and Evil begets Evil " and " Honesty is the Best Policy." Carried to the logical conclusion it clearly implies that if evil and dishonesty be found profitable for policy reasons, these should be freely practiced without compunction. It is in consequence of this philosophy of life that the same person who behaves well in his private life turns to being faithless, deceptive, rapacious, callous and ruthless in the conduct of his public life-nay, even in their private life, such people are good only in certain respects and very wicked in many other ways. You will find that, on the one hand, these people are fair and courteous in their business dealings, while on the other hand they are the worst drunkards, fornicators and gamblers, being the most depraved and wicked of people. Their motto is that a man's public life and his private life are two different spheres, distinct from each other. To one who accosts them on some faults in their private life, they offer a tailor-made answer, " Mind your own business." Contrary to this, there is the belief in Eternity which enjoins that evil remains evil in all circumstances, regardless of whether it proves profitable or disadvantageous in the world. The dichotomy between public and private spheres cannot exist in the life of a person who has a sense of accountability to God. This person does not adopt honesty just because it is the best policy, but because the person has cultivated honesty in his soul and nothing could be more distant from his thoughts than the practice of dishonesty. His belief teaches him that dishonesty must debase him to a level inferior to that of animals. As the Holy Qur'an observes: "We created Man in the finest form and then We turned him upside down and degraded him to a position lower than the lowest." In this way, by the kindly favor of the Holy Prophet's (pbuh) guidance, man has not only obtained an immutable law embodying permanent moral values, but also an unshakable foundation on which to build individual and national moral character. Man, therefore, does not require the agency of a government, a police force or a court of law to deter him from crimes and keep him on the right path.
Practice of Morality in the Mundane Activities of Life:Monasticism Rejected
The Holy Prophet's (pbuh) call bears yet another important message for us, which is that morality is not the preserve of the monks, to be practiced in the monasteries, nor the privilege of the mystics, to be observed within the precincts of the shrines. Morality is meant for practical application in all spheres of life. The highest spiritual and moral standards which the world sought in monks, priests and the mystics were transferred to the Holy Prophet (pbuh) to the seat of Government and the Judges' bench. He (pbuh) exhorted the businessmen to fear God and practice honesty in their dealings and transactions. He (pbuh) taught the policemen and the soldiers the lesson of piety and restraint. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) dispelled man's misconception that one who renounced the world and commemorated God in the wilderness was the friend of God.
He (pbuh) denied that true fellowship with God consisted in being a hermit. On the contrary, true saintliness consisted in participating in the affairs of the world as a ruler, magistrate, army commander, police inspector, businessman, industrialist. In fact, displaying through all other activities of the temporal life, a pious and honest character whenever one's faith is put to the test. In this way, the Holy Prophet (pbuh) retrieved morality and spirituality from the restrictions of monasticism and brought them into all spheres of practical life. He (pbuh) enforced morality and spirituality in economic, social and political affairs and in the conduct of peace or war, establishing the supremacy of the righteous moral code in all these fields of life.
The Blessings of the Holy Prophet's (pbuh) Teaching
It was through this blessed guidance that those whom the Holy Prophet (pbuh) had found to be thieves at the beginning of his Prophethood were transformed into trustworthy protectors of life, prospect and honor of the common people by the time the Holy Prophet (pbuh) departed from the mortal world; those whom he had found usurpers of rights were remolded by him into upholders, protectors and champions of the rights of the people. Prior to his time, the world had known only rulers who issued
their "Divine Writs" from magnificent palaces and held their subjects down by repressive measures. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) gave the world rulers who walked in the bazaars like ordinary people and held sway over the hearts of the people through an administration of justice and equity.Before him, the world had known armies penetrating into a country carrying fire and steel in all directions, raping the women of the prostrate people. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) introduced the world to the armies which after a triumphant entry into a city molested none except the enemy troops; and after a departure from a captured city returned the very taxes already received from its inhabitants. Human history is replete with accounts of conquests and victories over cities and countries. But the conquest of Makkah has no parallel in history. The Holy Prophet's (pbuh) triumphant entry into the city whose inhabitants had persecuted him and his adherents for thirteen long years was marked by glorious humanity, his sacred forehead leaning on the saddle of his camel in a posture of bowing before God. In his demeanor there was no trace of pride and arrogance.When the same people who had tormented him for thirteen years and forced him to migrate from the city of his birth, and even after his migration, had fought battles against him for eight years, were brought before him as supplicants, they begged him for mercy. Instead of wreaking vengeance upon them, the Holy Prophet (pbuh) observed: " Today there is NO censure upon you, now go, you are free."
Anyone who wishes to assess the impact of this precedent of the Holy Prophet(pbuh) on the Muslims should look at the pages of history. He should compare the behavior of the Muslim conquerors as they entered Spain with the conduct of the Christians as they subjugated the Muslims; and he should observe the contrast between
the treatment meted out to the Muslims when the Christians sacked Bait-ul-maqdas during the Crusades and the dispensation which the Christians received when the Muslims recaptured Bait-ul-Maqdas from them.
Gentleman! The personality of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) is a vast ocean of wisdom, and no work, however elaborate, can encompass it. A single address could hardly do justice to this subject. Nevertheless, I have endeavored to focus attention on some of the outstanding aspects of the Holy Prophet's (pbuh) personality. Fortunate, indeed, are those who follow the lead of this Supreme Guide.
In the end, we should say that all Praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Universe.
By Syed Abul Ala' Maududi (This address was delivered in the University (new Campus) at the invitation of the Punjab University Students' Union, Lahore, Pakistan on October 22, 1975)
Why, in particular, that of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) and not that of any other Prophets or the founders of other religions? We must deal with this question at the outset. So that our minds may be fully satisfied that we can, in fact, obtain guidance not from any other ancient or modern personality, but from the character and personality of a Messenger of God alone. And of all the Messengers of God and the leaders of religion, it is the life of Muhammad (pbuh) alone which offers true and comprehensive guidance. Guidance of which we stand in dire need today.
Need for the Guidance of Allah
It is an undeniable fact that the source of all knowledge is Almighty Allah Who made this universe and created man to populate it. Who else but Him can know the realities of this universe. Who else possesses the knowledge of human nature and its true elements? The Creator alone knows His creatures. Human awareness is circumscribed by what has been
revealed by the Creator, for man has no independent means of his own to get at the truth.
In this connection, the difference between two different aspects of reality must be fully grasped so as to avoid any fallacy in discussion. There are things which you perceive through the senses, and having gathered a body of knowledge by means of these senses, you can proceed to classify this information with the help of reflection, argumentation, observation or experimentation and to deduce laws from them.
For this type of information no revelation from heaven is needed. This is the province of your personal discoveries, explorations, meditations, reflections, research and deductions. It has been left to you to explore the world around you and discover the forces which operate; to understand the laws under which these realities function, so that you may stride forward along the path of development. Yet in this matter too, your Creator has not deprived you of His help.
All through the course of history, Allah has been unfolding before you, no matter how imperceptibly, His created world through an evolutionary process. He has opened up new vistas of knowledge before you, and at certain points of history He has inspired men to invent new techniques or to discover new laws. But the fact remains that in this domain man must gather knowledge by himself, without the help of a Divine Messenger or a Divine Book. Man has been endowed with all the resources to collect the information necessary in this sphere.
But the second category of reality is transcendental , beyond the reach of our perception; things which we are powerless to comprehend; things which cannot be weighed or measured by scales, nor discovered by pressing into service any of the instruments for acquiring knowledge which we have at our disposal. The theories of philosophers and scientists on this subject are mere conjectures and they do not come under the scope of knowledge. Here our ultimate Realities and rational theories about them cannot be taken as definitive even by the very expounders of these theories. But if the authors of these theories possess any awareness of the boundaries of their limited knowledge, they cannot have faith in the validity of their notions. Nor can they call upon others to believe them.
Need for Following the Precedent of the Prophets (pbut)
Knowledge is obtained through the Guidance of Allah, for Allah alone is aware of realities. Allah offers this knowledge to man by means of Revelation. Revelation is transmitted to none but the Prophets (pbut). Allah has never published a Book and, having distributed to each individual, told him to study it to ascertain for himself the reality of his own existence and that of the universe. To realize his role in the practical world in the context of this reality, Allah has always appointed the Prophets (pbut) to convey this message to man, so that the Prophets (pbut) should not rest content with merely propagating their mandate, but driving it home, demonstrating it in action, recalling to the right path, those who defy the Divine mandates and organizing the believers into a society where every aspect bears practical evidence of this knowledge.
It is evident from this brief exposition that, for Guidance, we are wholly dependent upon the character displayed to the world by a Prophet of God (pbuh) A non-Prophet who does not believe in a Prophet is not eligible to be our leader, even though he may be a sage, a deeply learned and wise man. This is because such a person bereft of this knowledge is incapable of devising a true and just system of life for us.
Why we cannot obtain Guidance from the Prophets other than Muhammad (pbuh)
Let us now consider the question of why, of all of the venerable men whom we know as Prophets, and all the leaders of religions who conceivably may have been Prophets, we prefer to seek a message from the character of Muhammad (pbuh). Is this prejudice or is there a reasonable ground for doing so?
I submit that there is a rational basis for this. We certainly acknowledge and believe in the Prophethood of all those who have been named in the Holy Qur'an as Prophets. But, we lack reliable information by authentic sources on their teaching and their character. There is no doubt about the Prophethood of Hadrat Noah, Ibrahim, Ishaq, Yusuf, Moses and Jesus Christ (peace be upon them ) and we believe in all of them. But none of the Scriptures revealed to them has come down to us in its original form so that we may benefit from its pristine message. Similarly, the life-history of none of these Prophets (pbut) has been handed down by any authentic means enabling us to follow their example in the various spheres of individual and collective existence.
A person who undertakes to prepare an account of the teaching and characters of all these Prophets (pbut) cannot write more than a few pages and these too, entirely with the help of the Qur'an , for nowhere else is authentic material extant about them except in the Holy Qur'an.
The Jewish Scriptures and the Prophets (pbut)
It is said that an account of Moses and the later Prophets (pbut) and of their teachings is
contained in the Old Testament. But consider the Bible from the historical viewpoint. The original text of the Torah, as revealed to Hadrat Moses (pbuh), had been destroyed at the time of the sack of Bait-ul-Maqdas in 6 BC, and along with it the scriptures of the former Prophets (pbut) had perished. In 5 BC, when the tribe of Israel arrived in Palestine after their release from the Captivity in Babylon, the Prophet Ezra (pbuh), assisted by some venerable collaborators, prepared an account of the life of Moses (pbuh) as well as a history of the tribe of Israel. In this work were incorporated at appropriate places such verses of the Torah as were readily available to the author and his associates.
In the period falling between the fourth and second century BC, various authors penned down the Scriptures ( from which sources we know not) of those Prophets who had preceded them by several centuries. In 300 BC, to cite an instance, an unknown writer wrote a book in the name of Hadrat Yunus (pbuh) and incorporated it in the Bible, despite the fact that Hadrat Yunus was a Prophet of the 8th century BC. The Zubur (Psalms) were committed to writing five centuries after the death of Hadrat Daud (pbuh) and to them were added sonnets composed by some hundred poets. We have no knowledge of the sources from which the compilers of the Zubur (Psalms) had gleaned those Sonnets.
Hadrat Sulaiman (pbuh) died in 933 BC, and Amsal-i-Sulaiman ( An Anthology of Soloman's Proverbs) was compiled in the year 250 BC which also incorporated the maxims of several other sages.
In short, no book of the Bible bears an authentic connection with any Prophet to whom it is ascribed. Furthermore, even these books of the Jewish Bible perished at the second sack of Bait-ul-Maqdas in 70 AD, leaving only their Greek translation extant, a translation dating back to the period falling between 258 BC and the first century BC.
In the second century AD, the Jewish scholars prepared a Jewish Bible with the help of manuscripts which had survived the vicissitudes of time. The oldest copy of this Bible now extant dates back to 916 AD. Apart from this, no other Jewish manuscript exists anywhere today.
The Jewish scrolls discovered in the cave of Qumran on the Dead Sea are not older than the first and second century BC, and even those contain a few scattered fragments of the Bible.
The earliest manuscript comprising the first five books of the Bible current among the Samaritans was written in the eleventh century AD. The Greek translation prepared in the second and third century BC was marred by countless errors. A retranslation from Greek into Latin was done in the third century AD. By what standard can we judge this material as an authentic source of the life-histories and teachings of Moses (pbuh) and the later Prophets of the Jews?
Finally, there were certain unwritten legends known as oral law, current among the Jews. For a span of thirteen or fourteen centuries they remained unwritten until, in the later part of the second and the beginning of the third century AD, a priest known as Yahuda B. Sham'un committed them to writing under the title of ' Mishnah.' Commentaries on this work by the Palestinian Jewish scholars under the name of ' Halaka' and by Babylonian scholars under the title ' Haggada ' appeared in the third and fifth century respectively. The ' Talmud' is, in fact, an anthology of these three works. Significantly, authoritative evidence which may reveal the chain of transmission is lacking in the case of all traditions incorporated in these books.
Christian Scriptures
A similar state of affairs exists in the case of Hadrat Isa's character and teachings. Jesus (pbuh) conveyed orally to the people the Bible which God originally revealed to him. His disciples, too, propagated it among the people by the spoken word in such a manner that they presented an admixture of their Prophet's life-story and the revealed verses of the Bible. None of this material was put into writing during the lifetime of Jesus (pbuh) or even in the period following him. It fell to the lot of the Christians whose vernacular was Greek to transform these oral traditions into writing. It must be borne in mind that Christ's native tongue was Syriac or Aramaic and his disciples spoke the same language as well.
Most Greek-speaking authors heard these traditions in the Aramaic vernacular and committed them to writing in Greek. None of these writings is dated prior to the year 70AD; there is not a single instance in these works where the author has cited an authority for an event or maxim attributed to Hadrat Isa (pbuh) in order that we might construct a chain of transmission. Furthermore, even these works have not survived. Thousands of Greek manuscripts of the new Testament were collected, but none of them is older than the fourth century AD; the origin of most of them does not go beyond the period spanning the 11th to the 14th centuries.
Some scattered papyrus fragments found in Egypt can lay claim to no greater antiquity than the third century. We cannot say when the Bible was translated from Greek into Latin. Nor do we know the writer's name.
In the fourth century AD, the Pope commissioned a review of the Latin translation. In the sixteenth century, this version was discarded and a fresh translation from Greek into Latin was prepared. The Four Bibles were most probably rendered into the Syriac language from Greek in 200 AD, but the oldest Syriac manuscript extant was written in the 4th century. A handwritten copy dated back to the 5th century AD contains, in frequent parts, a different version.
Among the Arabic translations made from the Syriac none is known to have been prepared before the 8th century AD. It is curious that some seventy different versions of the Bible were prepared, four of which were approved by the leaders of the Christian religion, while the rest was rejected. We have no information concerning the grounds for their approval or rejection. But can this material be credited to any extent with authenticity as regards the character and message (gospel ) of Jesus (peace be upon him)?
With regards to other leaders of religion the situation is not dissimilar. Take, for example, Zoroaster whose birth date is not shrouded in mystery. The most that can be said about him is that there is evidence of his existence some 250 years before the subjugation of Persia by Alexander. In other words, his life can be dated some five centuries before Christ (pbuh). His book "Avasta," in its original language, is extinct today; the language in which the book was originally written or orally propagated is dead.
In the 9th century AD, a translation of "Avasta" was published in nine volumes, out of which the first two volumes perished. The earliest surviving manuscripts of the book dates from the middle of the 13th century. Such is the condition of Zoroaster's book. As for his character, our information does not extend beyond the detail that he began preaching his religion at the age of forty. Two years earlier, King Gustaph became his disciple and Zoroaster's creed turned into a State religion. Zoroaster lived to be 77, and after his death, as time went on, legends were spun around his life, all of them apocryphal.
One of the renowned religious personalities of the world was Buddha. Like Zoroaster, he might have been a Prophet. Yet he left no boo, nor did his followers claim that he had given one. A hundred years after his death, a movement was started which lasted for several centuries to collect his maxims and the account for his life. But no compiler of the Buddhist scriptures produced during this period furnishes a chain of evidence for the maxims and teachings of Buddha. It is evident that even if we wished to turn for guidance to other Prophets (peace be upon them) and religious leaders, we could not come by a reliable source from which might be derived authentic and unassailable information on their history and teachings.
We are left with no alternative but to turn to the Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) who left a trustworthy Book free of any excisions or adulterations; the Prophet (pbuh) whose detailed history, sayings and practices were transmitted to us by authoritative sources so that we would be guided by his example. In the entire course of history such a leader could only be found in the sublimely gifted person in Muhammad (pbuh). The Holy Prophet (pbuh) put forth a Book ( the Holy Qur'an) with the definite claim that it was the Word of God which had been revealed to him. On scrutiny, we positively feel that this Book is free of interpolations. The Book does not incorporate a single maxim of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) ; rather, the inclusion in this Book of any sayings of the Prophet(pbuh) has been scrupulously avoided.
In this Book, the Holy Prophet's life(pbuh) , the history of the Arabs and the events which occurred during the period of the revelation of the Qur'an have not been mingled with the Divine verses, as is the case with the Bible. The Qur'an is the pure Word of God. Not one word therein is not divine. Not a single word has been deleted from its text. The Book has been handed down to our age in its complete and original form since the time of Muhammad(pbuh). From the time the Book began to be revealed, the Holy Prophet(pbuh) had dedicated its text to the scribes. Whenever some Divine Message was revealed, the Holy Prophet(pbuh) would call a scribe and dictate its words to him. The written text was then read to the Holy Prophet(pbuh), who having satisfied himself that the scribe had committed no error in recording, would put the manuscript in safe custody. The Holy Prophet(pbuh) also used to instruct the scribe about the sequence in which a revealed message was to be placed in a particular Surah. In this manner, the Holy Prophet(pbuh) continued to arrange the texts of the Qur'an in systematic order until the end of the chain of revelations. Again, it was ordained from the beginning of Islam that a recitation of the Holy Qur'an must form an integral part of worship. Hence the illustrious Companions (pbut) would commit the Divine verses to memory as soon as they were revealed. Many of them learned the entire text by heart and an even greater number memorized different portions of it.
Besides, those of the Companions(pbut) who were literate used to keep a written record of several portions of the Holy Qur'an. In this manner, the text of the Holy Qur'an was preserved in four different ways during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet(pbuh):
1. The Holy Prophet(pbuh) had the whole text of the Divine Messages from beginning to end committed to writing by the scribes of revelations.
2. Many of the Companions(pbut) learned the entire text of the Qur'an, syllable upon syllable, by heart.
3. All the illustrious Companions(pbut), without exception, had memorized at least some portion of the Holy Qur'an, for the simple reason that it was obligatory for them to recite it during worship. An estimate of the number of the illustrious Companions(pbut) may be obtained from the fact that one
hundred forty thousand Companions(pbut) participated in the Last Pilgrimage performed by the Holy
Prophet(pbuh).
4. A considerable number of the literate Companions(pbut) kept a private record of the text of the Qur'an and satisfied themselves as to the purity of their record by reading it out to the Holy Prophet(pbuh).
It is an incontrovertible historical truth that the text of the Holy Qur'an extant today is, syllable for syllable exactly the same as the Holy Prophet(pbuh) had offered to the world as the Word of God. After the demise of the Holy Prophet(pbuh), the first caliph Hadrat Abu Baker(pbuh) assembled all the Huffaz (those who have memorized the Qur'an) and the written records of the Holy Qur'an and had the whole text written in Book form.In the time of Hadrat ' Uthman (pbuh) copies of this original version were made and officially dispatched to the capitals of the Islamic world. Of these copies extant in the world today, one is in Istanbul and the other in Tashkent. Whoever is so inclined may compare any printed text of the Holy Qur'an with those two copies. He shall find no variation. And how can one expect any discrepancy, when there have been several million Huffaz in every generation since the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh) and in our own time? Should anyone alter one syllable of the original text of the Qur'an, these Huffaz would at once expose the mistake. In the last century, an Institute of Munich University in Germany collected forty-two thousand copies of the Holy Qur'an including manuscripts and printed texts produced in each period in the various of the Islamic world. Research was carried out on these texts for half a century, at the end of which the researchers concluded that apart from copying mistakes, there was no discrepancy in the text of these forty-two thousand copies, though they belonged to periods spanning the first century Hijrah to the 14th century Hijrah and had been procured from all parts of the world. This Institute, unfortunately was destroyed in the bombing raids on Germany during World War ll , but the findings of the research project survived. Another point that must be kept in view is that the word in which the Qur'an was revealed is a living language in our own time. It is still current as the mother tongue of some hundred million people from Iraq to Morocco.In the non-Arab world also hundreds of thousands of people study and teach this language.
The grammar of the Arabic language, its lexicon, its phonetic system and its phraseology, have remained in tact for fourteen hundred years.
A modern Arabic speaking person can comprehend the Holy Qur'an with as much proficiency as did the Arabs of fourteen centuries ago. This, then, is an important attribute of Muhammad(pbuh), which is shared by no other Prophet or Leader of Religion. The Book which God revealed to him for the guidance of mankind today exists in its original language without the slightest alteration in its vocabulary.
Authenticity of the Character and Precedent of the Holy Prophet(pbuh)
Now take the second attribute of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) by which he stands unique among all Prophets(pbut) and leaders of religion. Just as the Book transmitted to him, amounts of his character have also been preserved to serve as a beacon for us in all walks of life. From early childhood to the close of his life, a large number of those who saw him, witnessed the events of his life and heard his conversation, addresses, exhortations or warnings, had retained them in memory and passed them onto their successors. Some of the research scholars believe that the number of those who had passed on to the next generation eyewitness accounts or reports of events that they had heard during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) number a hundred thousand people. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself dictated some commands and handed or dispatched them to certain people. These were later bequeathed to the succeeding generations.
There were at least six Companions (pbut) who had recorded the Traditions of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and tested the authenticity of their records by reading them out to the Holy Prophet(pbuh). These writings were also inherited by posterity. After the death of the Holy Prophet(pbuh), some fifty Companions (pbut) undertook to collect accounts of the circumstances and incidents of the Prophet's life and his holy utterances. The material gathered from this source also came into the hands of those who later accomplished the task of collecting and compiling the Traditions of the Holy Prophet (pbuh).
Besides, as I have mentioned earlier, the number of the Companions who transmitted orally their knowledge of the Holy Prophet's character(pbuh) runs to one hundred thousand, according to the estimate of some researchers. Little wonder, when we take into account the fact that the Holy Prophet (pbuh) performed his last Hajj, known as the Farewell Pilgrimage, in the company of one hundred and forty thousand people! All these believers saw him at the time of Hajj, learned from him the rituals of Hajj and listened to the addresses which the Holy Prophet (pbuh) delivered during this last Pilgrimage. It is improbable that when this assembly, who had attended such an important occasion as the Hajj, disperse to their own homes, their friends, relations and fellow-citizens should not have questioned them on the circumstances of their journey or failed to ascertain from them the injunctions about Hajj. One can well judge from this, after the Holy Prophet (pbuh) had departed from the world, how eagerly the people must have questioned those who had seen him and listened to his speech, on the details of his life, his sacred utterances, commands and instructions.
The procedure that had been adopted from the beginning regarding the traditions bequeathed to the later generations by the illustrious Companions(pbut) was that whoever ascribed an event or saying to the Holy Prophet(pbuh) had to state his source and furnish a chain of evidence. In this way, the sources of a particular tradition were traced through all connecting links back to the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh) in order to determine whether their connection with the person of the Prophet of God (pbuh) was demonstrably true. If any links were found to be missing in the chain of transmission, the authenticity of the tradition fell into suspicion. When in the cast of a tradition, a complete line of evidence had been set up to the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh), and even one of the reporters along the line had been recognized as unreliable, the tradition was discarded. If you ponder this a while, you will realize that circumstances relating to no other man in history have been recorded with such rigorous scrutiny. It is the distinction of Muhammed (pbuh) that no tradition ascribed to him has been accepted, save on authority. And while looking for the authority of a tradition, it was not considered sufficient to establish a chain of evidence up to the time of the Holy Prophet(pbuh) , but each one of the successive transmitters was carefully scrutinized as well so as to determine his or her reliability. For this purpose, the circumstances of all the reporters were thoroughly investigated and full-scale books were compiled. Setting forth details as to who was trustworthy and who was not; what sort of character and personality each of them had; whose memory was sound and whose weak. Furthermore, the reporter who had actually met the source from whom he had derived the tradition was distinguished from the one who merely named the source without ever having met him. Information about all these reporters has been documented on such a comprehensive scale that today we can easily determine in the case of each tradition whether it has been derived from trustworthy or fake sources. Is there any other person in the history of mankind whose life story has been derived by such authentic means? Is there another single instance in which, while discovering the history of one individual person, comprehensive books were compiled on the life stories of thousands of reporters who had narrated some tradition about that person? The primary motive behind the vigorous campaign of the modern Christian and Jewish scholars is to cast doubt on the authenticity of the tradition is jealousy, for they know full well that the authority on the genuineness of their own Scriptures as well as for that of the histories of their Prophets is non-existent. It is owing to this jealousy that they have dispensed with all intellectual honesty in their criticisms on Islam, the Holy Qur'an and the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh).
All Aspects of the Holy Prophet's(pbuh) Life Are Open and Fully Known
The authenticity of the sources for a reconstruction of this life and character is by no means the only distinction of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). Another factor which distinguishes him from all others is that we have access to far more details about each and every aspect of his life than we have with respect to other historical personages:His family background; the kind of life he led before the announcement of his Apostolic Mission; how he was invested with Prophethood; how the Divine Messages were transmitted to him; how he preached Islam; in what manner he faced opposition and resistance; how he prepared and trained his Companions; his domestic life; his conduct as a husband and father;his dealing with friends and foes; his precepts and practices, commands and warnings; the practices to which he did not object as well as the practices which he curbed- all these in their minute details may be read in the Books of Traditions and in the works on his pious life and character. The Holy Prophet(pbuh) was an ideal military general and we possess detailed accounts of all the battles fought under his command. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) was the head of state, and a complete history of his reign is available to us. He (pbuh) was a judge, and full proceedings of all the cases tried by him, along with the judgements awarded by him in those cases, are extant. The Holy Prophet(pbuh) visited the markets and watched how the people conducted their business. He (pbuh) forbade all he found to be unfair and fraudulent, while approving of all that was found to be just and equitable. In short, there is no sphere of life regarding which he did not lay down comprehensive guidelines. It is on this basis that we assert with full knowledge and conviction and without any prejudice that of all the Prophets(pbut) and religious leaders, it is the Prophet Muhammad(pbuh) alone to whom humanity can turn for advice and guidance, because the Book as presented by him has been preserved in its original text in its pristine form and his character, with all such details as are needed for guidance, has been reported to us through the most authentic and reliable sources. We shall now see what message and instruction his pious character bears for us.
The Message of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) Is for All Mankind
The foremost feature we observe in his apostolic mission is that he (pbuh) addresses man in his capacity as a human being, setting aside all distinctions of color, race, language or country. He (pbuh) propounds tenets for the welfare of all mankind. Whoever has faith in these tenets is a Muslim and enters the fold of the universal brotherhood of Islam. Black or white, belonging to the East or the West,the Arab or the non-Arab, wherever a human being may be living, whatever the country, nation or race in which he is born;irrespective of the tongue he speaks or the color of his skin, the call of the Prophet (pbuh) is addressed to everyone. Taboos, inequality, racial or class distinctions, linguistic, territorial or geographic bias-nothing that divides man from man has any place in the society of Islam.
The Best remedy for Racial Prejudice or Color Bar
On reflection, one comes to appreciate that this is a great blessing vouchsafed to mankind through the Arabian Prophet, Muhammad (pbuh). It has been this differentiation between man and man that has , more than anything else, ruined mankind. In some places, man was declared to be polluted and it was argued that since he was an untouchable he could not enjoy the same rights as the Brahmans. Then, according to some, man was considered to be good only for destruction, for he had the misfortune to be born in America, Australia, or Palestine in an age when the foreign immigrants badly wanted his eviction from the land. In places, man was hunted, enslaved and forced to work like an animal merely for the offense of being born in Africa and the color of his skin ,black. In other words, these distinctions of nationality, country, race, color and language have, from time immemorial, been highly detrimental to mankind. These differentiations have caused wars. They have served as the basis of aggression by one country against the other. They have provoked a people to plunder another people. Generations
of human beings have been subjected to ruthless genocide for the satisfaction of these prejudices . The Holy Prophet (pbuh) treated this malady so effectually that the enemies of Islam now admit that never were the problems of color distinction, racial prejudice and national bias so successfully solved as in the religion of Islam. When the famous leader of the African- born nationals of America, Malcolm X, who at one time led an extremist Black Nationalist Movement against the Whites, undertook Hajj (pilgrimage to Makkah) after embracing Islam, he saw people of all races, colors and nationalities speaking different languages and converging at one central place from the East and the West and from the North and the South. They all wore the same garment, the Ihram, all chanted Labbaik, in the same language; all mingled to perform circumambulation, and they all formed one compact congregation under the of one leader to offer worship. Malcolm X observed this and exclaimed that it was the only correct answer to the questions of race and color and that the measures hitherto adopted by his compatriots were wrong. Malcolm X was murdered, but his autobiography survives to bear witness to the profound impact Hajj had made on him.
Hajj is but one of the articles of worship in the Islamic faith. Whoever surveys the Islamic religion as a whole with open eyes will not find even the smallest point to which he can refer and say that here Islam has tilted the balance in favor of a particular nation, tribe, race or class. The entire code of Islam testifies to the fact that it is applicable to the whole of humanity. It affirms that all human beings who acknowledge the principles of Islam and enter the fold of the universal brotherhood of Islam are equal. nay, the conduct of Islam towards the non- Muslim presents a happy contrast to the treatment of the Blacks by the Whites, and highlights, by contrast, the conduct of the imperialists toward the slave peoples as well as the behavior of the Communists governments towards their non-Communist subjects or toward their own dissident party members.
Let us now turn to the rules for human welfare which the Holy Prophet (pbuh) propagated through the teachings of Islam and the seizure of power to enable him not only to guarantee human well-being but to unite all human beings in one Ummah.
Widest Conception of the Oneness of God
The foremost of these principles is the belief in the Oneness of God, not just in the sense that God exists, nor merely that there is only One God, but in the sense that the Creator, Master, and All-Wise Sovereign of this universe is Allah alone. There is no comparable authority in the whole universe which is sovereign and has the right to command or forbid; or has the power to make certain things lawful and others unlawful by decree. These powers are vested in no one, save Allah. It is the sole prerogative of the Creator and master to allow certain things in this world at Will and to prohibit certain things at Will. Islam preaches that the belief in Allah signifies the acknowledgement of all these Powers of God. The belief in Allah is tantamount to the affirmation that we owe allegiance to no one except Him and that no power on earth has the right to enact a law that is inimical to His Commandments. The belief in Allah implies that man's head is made to bow to God alone and is consequently rendered incapable of bending down before anyone else. The belief in God carries the meaning that only Allah has the power to make or unmake our destiny; that He has absolute power in regard to life or death. He can take away our life whenever He pleases and He can keep us alive as long as it pleases Him. When he chooses to end our life, no power on earth can save us from death; when He chooses to give us life, no power on earth can put us to death. This, then, is the Islamic concept of God. According to this concept, the whole universe which stretches from the earth to the heavens operates under orders from Allah. It, therefore, behooves man, who subsists in this universe, to devote his life to carrying out the Will of God. Should man obtain a license to do what he likes or own obedience to some other power, his pattern of life would run counter to
the entire system of the universe. This may be expressed in other words better to grasp the point. That the whole universe functions under orders from God is an established fact which is unalterable by any power. Hence, if we carry out the behest of some authority other than Allah or follow an independent course of our own choice, our life would move in the direction opposite to the one the entire universe is taking. In this way, we shall be in a state of constant collision with the system of the universe.
Let us view this from another angle as well. The Islamic concept of God Affirms that the only valid way of life for man is to abide by the Will of Allah, for man is the creature and Allah is his Creator. As a creature, it is wrong on the part of the man to be independent of his Creator. It is also betrayal for him to offer worship to any other than the Creator. Either of these acts is opposed to reality. Whoever defies reality comes to grief. The reality stands inviolate.
The Call to Worship the Lord
The Holy Prophet (pbuh) calls for an end to this defiance. He (pbuh) teaches that the rules and patterns of our life should conform to the system which governs the whole universe. A person should neither assume the right of legislation nor acknowledge the prerogative of any other person to enact laws for God's creatures living on God's earth. The only valid law is the law given by the Lord of the Universe.All other laws are false and void.
The Call For Rendering Obedience To the Holy Prophet (pbuh)
We now come to the second point of the Holt Prophet's (pbuh) message. He (pbuh) categorically declared: "I am the Messenger of Allah. Allah has sent His mandate for mankind through me. I, too, am subject to this mandate.I can make no alterations in it. I have been appointed to obey the mandate, not to introduce innovations into it. The Qur'an embodies the Law which Allah has revealed to me and my practice is the law which I promulgate by the order and sanction of Allah.I am the first render obedience to the Law of God, and having done so, I call upon all men to relinquish their allegiance to every other law and abide by the Law of God alone."
Next to God, Obedience is due to the Messenger of God (pbuh)
No one should feel cynical as regards the query: How could the Holy Prophet (pbuh) be deemed to have obeyed and followed his own practice when it was really his personal precept or action? The truth of the matter is that just as the source of the Qur'an was God, so the source of all exhortations, prohibitions and regulations propagated by the Holy Prophet (pbuh) was also God. This is denoted by the term " Sunnah of the Prophet." The Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself followed the Sunnah in the same manner as it is obligatory for all the believers to follow it. This point was made abundantly clear on occasions when, in certain matters, the illustrious Companions (pbut) used to ask: "Allah's messenger, are you conveying the Will of God or is this your personal view? " The Holy Prophet (pbuh) used to observe: " No, this is not the Will of God; it is my opinion." On such occasions, the illustrious Companions (pbut) differed with the Holy Prophet (pbuh) and put forth their own way of thinking and the Holy Prophet (pbuh) allowed their suggestions to supercede his own opinion. Similarly, this point also became obvious on occasions when the Holy Prophet (pbuh) took counsel with his illustrious Companions (pbut). This consultation in itself was proof positive that Allah had revealed no mandate regarding the matter under consideration, for had the Divine Will been known in the matter, it could not have become subject for discussion. Such occasions, which have been elaborately recorded in the collections of Traditions, often arouse in the lifetime of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). The illustrious Companions(pbut) themselves have reported: " Never did we see a person who was engaged in councel more often than the Holy Prophet (pbuh)." If you reflect on this point, you will realize that holding councel in matters which God had not revealed His Will was also the Sunnah (Traditions) of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). When the Holy Prophet (pbuh) himself did not deem it proper to impose his personal opinion on the people as an inexorable law, what authority is there for another ruler to enforce his will upon the people? Thus did the Holy Prophet (pbuh) teach his Ummah to conduct their affairs by consultation and instructed the people to render unqualified obedience to the Will of God in those matters in which the Lord had not manifested His Will, the Holy Prophet (pbuh) exhorted the people to exercise their right of freedom of speech without fear.
True Charter of Freedom
This is the " Charter of Freedom" which only the true religion has conferred upon mankind. The creature of Allah should be the slave of Allah alone and owe service to none else, nay, not even as a servant of the Holy Prophet (pbuh). This charter freed man from offering worship to all others, save One God; and it terminated the divinity of man over man once and for all. Simultaneously, the greatest blessing conferred by this mandate upon mankind is the Supremacy of the Law, the Law which no monarch, dictator, democratic parliament or assembly of believers in Islam is empowered to tamper with for the purpose of altering it. This law bestows on man permanent values of Good and Evil, and no one has the power to transmute these values with a view to changing Good into Evil or vice versa.
The third message which the Holy Prophet (pbuh) preached to the servants of God was: " You are all answerable to God. You have been given unchartered freedom to act as you deem fit and to forage whatever pasture you like without being answerable to anyone. Rather you shall be held accountable before your Creator for each act, each word, in fact, for the whole course of your life wherein you have been given limited autonomy. You will be raised after death and presented in the court of your Lord for reckoning." When human conscience is permeated with such a stupendous moral force, it will be as if every human being were being guarded by a sentinel who challenges every evil thought that enters one's mind and hinders all action that may arise from an evil thought. Irrespective of the existence or non-existence of a vigilant police force and a retributive government in the external world, a censor will always preside over the human soul, and fear of seizure will deter a person from transgressing the Will of God even in privacy, in darkness or in a deserted wasteland. No greater means than this can be devised for the moral degeneration of man and for the forging of a stable human character. All other means which purport to reform the moral aspects of human character do not go beyond the dicta that is in this world " Good begets good and Evil begets Evil " and " Honesty is the Best Policy." Carried to the logical conclusion it clearly implies that if evil and dishonesty be found profitable for policy reasons, these should be freely practiced without compunction. It is in consequence of this philosophy of life that the same person who behaves well in his private life turns to being faithless, deceptive, rapacious, callous and ruthless in the conduct of his public life-nay, even in their private life, such people are good only in certain respects and very wicked in many other ways. You will find that, on the one hand, these people are fair and courteous in their business dealings, while on the other hand they are the worst drunkards, fornicators and gamblers, being the most depraved and wicked of people. Their motto is that a man's public life and his private life are two different spheres, distinct from each other. To one who accosts them on some faults in their private life, they offer a tailor-made answer, " Mind your own business." Contrary to this, there is the belief in Eternity which enjoins that evil remains evil in all circumstances, regardless of whether it proves profitable or disadvantageous in the world. The dichotomy between public and private spheres cannot exist in the life of a person who has a sense of accountability to God. This person does not adopt honesty just because it is the best policy, but because the person has cultivated honesty in his soul and nothing could be more distant from his thoughts than the practice of dishonesty. His belief teaches him that dishonesty must debase him to a level inferior to that of animals. As the Holy Qur'an observes: "We created Man in the finest form and then We turned him upside down and degraded him to a position lower than the lowest." In this way, by the kindly favor of the Holy Prophet's (pbuh) guidance, man has not only obtained an immutable law embodying permanent moral values, but also an unshakable foundation on which to build individual and national moral character. Man, therefore, does not require the agency of a government, a police force or a court of law to deter him from crimes and keep him on the right path.
Practice of Morality in the Mundane Activities of Life:Monasticism Rejected
The Holy Prophet's (pbuh) call bears yet another important message for us, which is that morality is not the preserve of the monks, to be practiced in the monasteries, nor the privilege of the mystics, to be observed within the precincts of the shrines. Morality is meant for practical application in all spheres of life. The highest spiritual and moral standards which the world sought in monks, priests and the mystics were transferred to the Holy Prophet (pbuh) to the seat of Government and the Judges' bench. He (pbuh) exhorted the businessmen to fear God and practice honesty in their dealings and transactions. He (pbuh) taught the policemen and the soldiers the lesson of piety and restraint. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) dispelled man's misconception that one who renounced the world and commemorated God in the wilderness was the friend of God.
He (pbuh) denied that true fellowship with God consisted in being a hermit. On the contrary, true saintliness consisted in participating in the affairs of the world as a ruler, magistrate, army commander, police inspector, businessman, industrialist. In fact, displaying through all other activities of the temporal life, a pious and honest character whenever one's faith is put to the test. In this way, the Holy Prophet (pbuh) retrieved morality and spirituality from the restrictions of monasticism and brought them into all spheres of practical life. He (pbuh) enforced morality and spirituality in economic, social and political affairs and in the conduct of peace or war, establishing the supremacy of the righteous moral code in all these fields of life.
The Blessings of the Holy Prophet's (pbuh) Teaching
It was through this blessed guidance that those whom the Holy Prophet (pbuh) had found to be thieves at the beginning of his Prophethood were transformed into trustworthy protectors of life, prospect and honor of the common people by the time the Holy Prophet (pbuh) departed from the mortal world; those whom he had found usurpers of rights were remolded by him into upholders, protectors and champions of the rights of the people. Prior to his time, the world had known only rulers who issued
their "Divine Writs" from magnificent palaces and held their subjects down by repressive measures. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) gave the world rulers who walked in the bazaars like ordinary people and held sway over the hearts of the people through an administration of justice and equity.Before him, the world had known armies penetrating into a country carrying fire and steel in all directions, raping the women of the prostrate people. The Holy Prophet (pbuh) introduced the world to the armies which after a triumphant entry into a city molested none except the enemy troops; and after a departure from a captured city returned the very taxes already received from its inhabitants. Human history is replete with accounts of conquests and victories over cities and countries. But the conquest of Makkah has no parallel in history. The Holy Prophet's (pbuh) triumphant entry into the city whose inhabitants had persecuted him and his adherents for thirteen long years was marked by glorious humanity, his sacred forehead leaning on the saddle of his camel in a posture of bowing before God. In his demeanor there was no trace of pride and arrogance.When the same people who had tormented him for thirteen years and forced him to migrate from the city of his birth, and even after his migration, had fought battles against him for eight years, were brought before him as supplicants, they begged him for mercy. Instead of wreaking vengeance upon them, the Holy Prophet (pbuh) observed: " Today there is NO censure upon you, now go, you are free."
Anyone who wishes to assess the impact of this precedent of the Holy Prophet(pbuh) on the Muslims should look at the pages of history. He should compare the behavior of the Muslim conquerors as they entered Spain with the conduct of the Christians as they subjugated the Muslims; and he should observe the contrast between
the treatment meted out to the Muslims when the Christians sacked Bait-ul-maqdas during the Crusades and the dispensation which the Christians received when the Muslims recaptured Bait-ul-Maqdas from them.
Gentleman! The personality of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) is a vast ocean of wisdom, and no work, however elaborate, can encompass it. A single address could hardly do justice to this subject. Nevertheless, I have endeavored to focus attention on some of the outstanding aspects of the Holy Prophet's (pbuh) personality. Fortunate, indeed, are those who follow the lead of this Supreme Guide.
In the end, we should say that all Praise is due to Allah, the Lord of the Universe.
By Syed Abul Ala' Maududi (This address was delivered in the University (new Campus) at the invitation of the Punjab University Students' Union, Lahore, Pakistan on October 22, 1975)
Rulers and Governments
This article is an analysis of the state of the rulers and governments of the world today.
Allah T’ala says in the Holy Quran,
إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِندَ اللّهِ الإِسْلاَمُ وَمَا اخْتَلَفَ الَّذِينَ أُوْتُواْ الْكِتَابَ إِلاَّ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءهُمُ الْعِلْمُ بَغْيًا بَيْنَهُمْ وَمَن
يَكْفُرْ بِآيَاتِ اللّهِ فَإِنَّ اللّهِ سَرِيعُ الْحِسَابِ
3:19 The Religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His Will): Nor did the People of the Book dissent therefrom except through envy of each other, after knowledge had come to them. But if any deny the Signs of Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account.
The Arabic word “Deen” is not just religious rituals, it includes guidance and rules for social, economic, political, and other aspects of life.
In another place in the Holy Quran, Allah T’ala tells us:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ ادْخُلُواْ فِي السِّلْمِ كَآفَّةً وَلاَ تَتَّبِعُواْ خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ إِنَّهُ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِينٌ
O ye who believe! Enter into Islam whole-heartedly; and follow not the footsteps of the evil one (Satan); for he is to you an avowed enemy. (2:208)
Enter into the fold of Islam fully. Islam is it! This is your home. Don’t look elsewhere for anything. Look it up right here in the fold of Islam and be happy and satisfied with it. Islam is the complete way of life and the only way for success.
We did begin our life on earth on Deen-ul-Islam, as one Ummah. We were an Islamic Muslim community. With time, atheists, idol-worshippers (Mushriks) and ascetics, materialists, servants of Satan came out of the Muslim community.
كَانَ النَّاسُ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً فَبَعَثَ اللّهُ النَّبِيِّينَ مُبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ وَأَنزَلَ مَعَهُمُ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ فِيمَا اخْتَلَفُواْ
فِيهِ وَمَا اخْتَلَفَ فِيهِ إِلاَّ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوهُ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءتْهُمُ الْبَيِّنَاتُ بَغْيًا بَيْنَهُمْ فَهَدَى اللّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لِمَا اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ مِنَ
الْحَقِّ بِإِذْنِهِ وَاللّهُ يَهْدِي مَن يَشَاء إِلَى صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ
2:213 Mankind was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear Signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace Guided the believers to the Truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guided whom He will to a path that is straight.
Allah T’ala sent Prophet Muhammad (s.a.a.w.) as a Mercy for the world and by the Grace of Allah T’ala, he successfully established one Islamic ummah. It stayed that way during the period of khulufa-ur-Rashidoon. But then soon after the martyrdom of Ali ibne Abi Talib (karamullah wajhu), the khilafah changed into kingship. That is when in the Ummah of Muhammad (s.a.a.w.), for the first time, Deen-ul-Islam was sliced as what the westerners call “Separation of Church and State.” That is when the focus of the people shifted from aspiring for Akhirah to worldly lusts and ambitions. So in the history, for example, you will find during the time of a caliph, houses became the topic of the town. In another caliph’s time, sex became the topic of the town.
All this happened at a time, when millions of people of the world have come into the fold of Islam and they needed proper Islamic education. The Muslim government was the best source to provide that education and it failed. No doubt, the task of educating the masses was taken up by great Imams, but obviously, it had its limitations.
These caliphs unfortunately, instead of leaving behind a Sadaqa-Jariah, left behind a Fitnahe-Jariah. What a terrible thing to do!
Be happy and grateful to Allah T’ala that you are not one of those. There is a blessing to be an ordinary person.
Muslim ummah remained in the hands of such caliphs for centuries. Great punishments thru crusaders and Mongols came to the ummah. Then came slavery and colonialism by the western powers. Eventually, freedom came, but what a freedom. Western powers left behind anti-Islamic systems of governments and their minions and cronies. That is how one can describe today’s governments of most of the Muslim countries.
When the system of government, the constitution, the by-laws, judgments and rulings in a country or community are not based on the Holy Quran and Sunnah, the rulers and administrators of that country or community are nothing but kafirs, Zalims and Fasiqs. That is not what I say. That is what Allah T’ala says.
Fourteen centuries ago, Allah T’ala revealed ayaat 44-47 in Surah Al-Maidah (Chapter 5), which speak about the deviations of the Jews and Christians. They were revealed for the Muslim ummah to learn a lesson and not fall into the same errors.
Ayat 44 in Surah 5 says:
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُواْ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُواْ وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُواْ
مِن كِتَابِ اللّهِ وَكَانُواْ عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاء فَلاَ تَخْشَوُاْ النَّاسَ وَا خْشَوْنِ وَلاَ تَشْتَرُواْ بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلاً وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا
أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ
5:44 It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are Unbelievers.
In the next Ayat, Allah T’ala says:
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأ ُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are Zalimoon (wrong-doers, unjust, oppressors).
Then two verses down in Ayaat 47:
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are Fasiqoon (rebels, disobedients).
Kufr is unbelief. Kafir is unbeliever. Zulm is injustice and oppression. Oppression can be against others like you see violations of basic human rights committed by Muslim rulers and the so-called most civilized countries. Oppression can be self-oppression also. Oppression against one’s own self leads oneself into misery and punishment by Allah T’ala.Zulm can be so severe that it can put the person into the Jahannum. In Surah Luqman, Shirk is given as Zulmun-Azeem. And shirk is unforgivable sin. Fisq is disobedience. Fisq is rebellion, breaking the Law of Allah T’ala.Fisq can also be so great that it makes a person Kafir and puts him in Jahannum. When Allah T’ala ordered angels to prostrate to Adam (a.s.) and Shaitan refused to prostrate, as Allah T’ala says in Surah Kahf, Ayat 50, he committed Fisq.
وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ كَانَ مِنَ الْجِنِّ فَفَسَقَ عَنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّهِ أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ أَوْلِيَاء مِن دُونِي وَهُمْ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ بِئْسَ لِلظَّالِمِينَ بَدَلًا
18:50 Behold! We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam": They bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? And they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers!
It is evident that non-Muslim governments do not follow Islamic Shariah. We don’t expect them to, as they are disbelievers. The more serious problem is that Muslim countries are doing the same. Today, you will find secular Muslim governments, socialist Muslim governments, communist Muslim governments, Democratic Muslim governments, but hardly any Islamic Muslim government.
Muslim rulers, instead of prostrating to Allah T’ala, the One and Only Deity, prostrate to the false deities of democracy, secularism, nationalism, socialism, communism, the deities of their own lust and Baghi (iniquity). That has put the Muslim ummah into such a terrible state that we find it difficult to get back to the Straight path.
As the great poet of Islam, Allamah Iqbal said:
The one Sajdah that you find cumbersome, is the Sajdah that saves man from thousands of prostrations. The prostrations to democracy, secularism and the like have brought nothing but ruins to the Muslim Ummah. When Muslim countries leave Islamic Shariah, they are competing with non-Muslim countries in sin!
The ayaat of Surah Al-Maidah I have read to you are not just for rulers of nations and communities. They do apply on all of us. Ibn `Umar (May Allah be pleased with them) reported: I heard Messenger of Allah (PBUH) saying, "All of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards. The ruler is a guardian and responsible for his subjects; the man is a guardian and responsible for his family; the woman is a guardian and is responsible for her husbands house and his offspring; and so all of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards.'' [Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
We all have to worry about falling into the traps of kufr, zulm and fisq.Let us do our best to seek guidance in all affairs of our life from the Holy Quran and the sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.a.w.).Standing still in the face of the wind of troubling time will push us back. Let us try to move forward. Let us read Quran for guidance, seek knowledge and act upon it.
May Allah T'ala forgive our sins and have a lot more of His Mercy on the Muslim Ummah. Ameen
by Ishaq Zahid
Allah T’ala says in the Holy Quran,
إِنَّ الدِّينَ عِندَ اللّهِ الإِسْلاَمُ وَمَا اخْتَلَفَ الَّذِينَ أُوْتُواْ الْكِتَابَ إِلاَّ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءهُمُ الْعِلْمُ بَغْيًا بَيْنَهُمْ وَمَن
يَكْفُرْ بِآيَاتِ اللّهِ فَإِنَّ اللّهِ سَرِيعُ الْحِسَابِ
3:19 The Religion before Allah is Islam (submission to His Will): Nor did the People of the Book dissent therefrom except through envy of each other, after knowledge had come to them. But if any deny the Signs of Allah, Allah is swift in calling to account.
The Arabic word “Deen” is not just religious rituals, it includes guidance and rules for social, economic, political, and other aspects of life.
In another place in the Holy Quran, Allah T’ala tells us:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ ادْخُلُواْ فِي السِّلْمِ كَآفَّةً وَلاَ تَتَّبِعُواْ خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ إِنَّهُ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِينٌ
O ye who believe! Enter into Islam whole-heartedly; and follow not the footsteps of the evil one (Satan); for he is to you an avowed enemy. (2:208)
Enter into the fold of Islam fully. Islam is it! This is your home. Don’t look elsewhere for anything. Look it up right here in the fold of Islam and be happy and satisfied with it. Islam is the complete way of life and the only way for success.
We did begin our life on earth on Deen-ul-Islam, as one Ummah. We were an Islamic Muslim community. With time, atheists, idol-worshippers (Mushriks) and ascetics, materialists, servants of Satan came out of the Muslim community.
كَانَ النَّاسُ أُمَّةً وَاحِدَةً فَبَعَثَ اللّهُ النَّبِيِّينَ مُبَشِّرِينَ وَمُنذِرِينَ وَأَنزَلَ مَعَهُمُ الْكِتَابَ بِالْحَقِّ لِيَحْكُمَ بَيْنَ النَّاسِ فِيمَا اخْتَلَفُواْ
فِيهِ وَمَا اخْتَلَفَ فِيهِ إِلاَّ الَّذِينَ أُوتُوهُ مِن بَعْدِ مَا جَاءتْهُمُ الْبَيِّنَاتُ بَغْيًا بَيْنَهُمْ فَهَدَى اللّهُ الَّذِينَ آمَنُواْ لِمَا اخْتَلَفُواْ فِيهِ مِنَ
الْحَقِّ بِإِذْنِهِ وَاللّهُ يَهْدِي مَن يَشَاء إِلَى صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ
2:213 Mankind was one single nation, and Allah sent Messengers with glad tidings and warnings; and with them He sent the Book in truth, to judge between people in matters wherein they differed; but the People of the Book, after the clear Signs came to them, did not differ among themselves, except through selfish contumacy. Allah by His Grace Guided the believers to the Truth, concerning that wherein they differed. For Allah guided whom He will to a path that is straight.
Allah T’ala sent Prophet Muhammad (s.a.a.w.) as a Mercy for the world and by the Grace of Allah T’ala, he successfully established one Islamic ummah. It stayed that way during the period of khulufa-ur-Rashidoon. But then soon after the martyrdom of Ali ibne Abi Talib (karamullah wajhu), the khilafah changed into kingship. That is when in the Ummah of Muhammad (s.a.a.w.), for the first time, Deen-ul-Islam was sliced as what the westerners call “Separation of Church and State.” That is when the focus of the people shifted from aspiring for Akhirah to worldly lusts and ambitions. So in the history, for example, you will find during the time of a caliph, houses became the topic of the town. In another caliph’s time, sex became the topic of the town.
All this happened at a time, when millions of people of the world have come into the fold of Islam and they needed proper Islamic education. The Muslim government was the best source to provide that education and it failed. No doubt, the task of educating the masses was taken up by great Imams, but obviously, it had its limitations.
These caliphs unfortunately, instead of leaving behind a Sadaqa-Jariah, left behind a Fitnahe-Jariah. What a terrible thing to do!
Be happy and grateful to Allah T’ala that you are not one of those. There is a blessing to be an ordinary person.
Muslim ummah remained in the hands of such caliphs for centuries. Great punishments thru crusaders and Mongols came to the ummah. Then came slavery and colonialism by the western powers. Eventually, freedom came, but what a freedom. Western powers left behind anti-Islamic systems of governments and their minions and cronies. That is how one can describe today’s governments of most of the Muslim countries.
When the system of government, the constitution, the by-laws, judgments and rulings in a country or community are not based on the Holy Quran and Sunnah, the rulers and administrators of that country or community are nothing but kafirs, Zalims and Fasiqs. That is not what I say. That is what Allah T’ala says.
Fourteen centuries ago, Allah T’ala revealed ayaat 44-47 in Surah Al-Maidah (Chapter 5), which speak about the deviations of the Jews and Christians. They were revealed for the Muslim ummah to learn a lesson and not fall into the same errors.
Ayat 44 in Surah 5 says:
إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَا التَّوْرَاةَ فِيهَا هُدًى وَنُورٌ يَحْكُمُ بِهَا النَّبِيُّونَ الَّذِينَ أَسْلَمُواْ لِلَّذِينَ هَادُواْ وَالرَّبَّانِيُّونَ وَالأَحْبَارُ بِمَا اسْتُحْفِظُواْ
مِن كِتَابِ اللّهِ وَكَانُواْ عَلَيْهِ شُهَدَاء فَلاَ تَخْشَوُاْ النَّاسَ وَا خْشَوْنِ وَلاَ تَشْتَرُواْ بِآيَاتِي ثَمَنًا قَلِيلاً وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا
أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْكَافِرُونَ
5:44 It was We who revealed the law (to Moses): therein was guidance and light. By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed (as in Islam) to Allah's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear me, and sell not my signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are Unbelievers.
In the next Ayat, Allah T’ala says:
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأ ُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الظَّالِمُونَ
And if any fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are Zalimoon (wrong-doers, unjust, oppressors).
Then two verses down in Ayaat 47:
وَمَن لَّمْ يَحْكُم بِمَا أَنزَلَ اللّهُ فَأُوْلَـئِكَ هُمُ الْفَاسِقُونَ
If any do fail to judge by (the light of) what Allah hath revealed, they are Fasiqoon (rebels, disobedients).
Kufr is unbelief. Kafir is unbeliever. Zulm is injustice and oppression. Oppression can be against others like you see violations of basic human rights committed by Muslim rulers and the so-called most civilized countries. Oppression can be self-oppression also. Oppression against one’s own self leads oneself into misery and punishment by Allah T’ala.Zulm can be so severe that it can put the person into the Jahannum. In Surah Luqman, Shirk is given as Zulmun-Azeem. And shirk is unforgivable sin. Fisq is disobedience. Fisq is rebellion, breaking the Law of Allah T’ala.Fisq can also be so great that it makes a person Kafir and puts him in Jahannum. When Allah T’ala ordered angels to prostrate to Adam (a.s.) and Shaitan refused to prostrate, as Allah T’ala says in Surah Kahf, Ayat 50, he committed Fisq.
وَإِذْ قُلْنَا لِلْمَلَائِكَةِ اسْجُدُوا لِآدَمَ فَسَجَدُوا إِلَّا إِبْلِيسَ كَانَ مِنَ الْجِنِّ فَفَسَقَ عَنْ أَمْرِ رَبِّهِ أَفَتَتَّخِذُونَهُ وَذُرِّيَّتَهُ أَوْلِيَاء مِن دُونِي وَهُمْ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ بِئْسَ لِلظَّالِمِينَ بَدَلًا
18:50 Behold! We said to the angels, "Bow down to Adam": They bowed down except Iblis. He was one of the Jinns, and he broke the Command of his Lord. Will ye then take him and his progeny as protectors rather than Me? And they are enemies to you! Evil would be the exchange for the wrong-doers!
It is evident that non-Muslim governments do not follow Islamic Shariah. We don’t expect them to, as they are disbelievers. The more serious problem is that Muslim countries are doing the same. Today, you will find secular Muslim governments, socialist Muslim governments, communist Muslim governments, Democratic Muslim governments, but hardly any Islamic Muslim government.
Muslim rulers, instead of prostrating to Allah T’ala, the One and Only Deity, prostrate to the false deities of democracy, secularism, nationalism, socialism, communism, the deities of their own lust and Baghi (iniquity). That has put the Muslim ummah into such a terrible state that we find it difficult to get back to the Straight path.
As the great poet of Islam, Allamah Iqbal said:
The one Sajdah that you find cumbersome, is the Sajdah that saves man from thousands of prostrations. The prostrations to democracy, secularism and the like have brought nothing but ruins to the Muslim Ummah. When Muslim countries leave Islamic Shariah, they are competing with non-Muslim countries in sin!
The ayaat of Surah Al-Maidah I have read to you are not just for rulers of nations and communities. They do apply on all of us. Ibn `Umar (May Allah be pleased with them) reported: I heard Messenger of Allah (PBUH) saying, "All of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards. The ruler is a guardian and responsible for his subjects; the man is a guardian and responsible for his family; the woman is a guardian and is responsible for her husbands house and his offspring; and so all of you are guardians and are responsible for your wards.'' [Al-Bukhari and Muslim].
We all have to worry about falling into the traps of kufr, zulm and fisq.Let us do our best to seek guidance in all affairs of our life from the Holy Quran and the sunnah of Prophet Muhammad (s.a.a.w.).Standing still in the face of the wind of troubling time will push us back. Let us try to move forward. Let us read Quran for guidance, seek knowledge and act upon it.
May Allah T'ala forgive our sins and have a lot more of His Mercy on the Muslim Ummah. Ameen
by Ishaq Zahid
Ahad - The One and Only
أَحَد
The One and Only.
Fourteen hundred years ago, when people asked the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.a.w.), who is your Lord. The answer came in the following verse of the Holy Quran:
قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ
Say: "He is Allah, the One and Only. (The Holy Quran, Surah Al-Ikhlas, Ayah 1, 112:1)
The scholars have explained the sentence Huwa-Allah Ahad syntactically, but in our opinion its explanation which perfectly corresponds to the context is that Huwa is the subject and Allahu its predicate, and Ahad-un its second predicate. According to this parsing the sentence means: "He (about Whom you are questioning me) is Allah, is One and only one. Another meaning also can be, and according to language rules it is not wrong either: "He is AIIah, the One."
Here, the first thing to be understood is the unusual use of ahad in this sentence. Usually this word is either used in the possessive case as yaum ul-ahad (first day of the week), or to indicate total negative as Ma ja a a-ni ahad-un (No one has come to me), or in common questions like Hal `indaka ahad-un (Is there anyone with you?), or in conditional clauses like Inja'a-ka ahad-un (If someone comes to you), or in counting as ahad, ithnan, ahad ashar (one, two, eleven). Apart from these uses, there is no precedent in the pre-Qur'anic Arabic that the mere word ahad might have been used as an adjective for a person or thing. After the revelation of the Qur'an this word has been used only for the Being of Allah, and for no one else. This extraordinary use by itself shows that being single, unique and matchless is a fundamental attribute of Allah; no one else in the world is qualified with this quality: He is One, He has no equal.
Then, keeping in view the questions that the polytheists and the followers of earlier scriptures asked the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) about his Lord, let us see how they were answered with ahad-un after Huwa-Allah.
First, it means: "He alone is the Sustainer: no one else has any share or part in providence. and since He alone can be the Ilah (Deity) Who is Master and Sustainer, therefore, no one el
The One and Only.
Fourteen hundred years ago, when people asked the Prophet Muhammad (s.a.a.w.), who is your Lord. The answer came in the following verse of the Holy Quran:
قُلْ هُوَ اللَّهُ أَحَدٌ
Say: "He is Allah, the One and Only. (The Holy Quran, Surah Al-Ikhlas, Ayah 1, 112:1)
The scholars have explained the sentence Huwa-Allah Ahad syntactically, but in our opinion its explanation which perfectly corresponds to the context is that Huwa is the subject and Allahu its predicate, and Ahad-un its second predicate. According to this parsing the sentence means: "He (about Whom you are questioning me) is Allah, is One and only one. Another meaning also can be, and according to language rules it is not wrong either: "He is AIIah, the One."
Here, the first thing to be understood is the unusual use of ahad in this sentence. Usually this word is either used in the possessive case as yaum ul-ahad (first day of the week), or to indicate total negative as Ma ja a a-ni ahad-un (No one has come to me), or in common questions like Hal `indaka ahad-un (Is there anyone with you?), or in conditional clauses like Inja'a-ka ahad-un (If someone comes to you), or in counting as ahad, ithnan, ahad ashar (one, two, eleven). Apart from these uses, there is no precedent in the pre-Qur'anic Arabic that the mere word ahad might have been used as an adjective for a person or thing. After the revelation of the Qur'an this word has been used only for the Being of Allah, and for no one else. This extraordinary use by itself shows that being single, unique and matchless is a fundamental attribute of Allah; no one else in the world is qualified with this quality: He is One, He has no equal.
Then, keeping in view the questions that the polytheists and the followers of earlier scriptures asked the Holy Prophet (upon whom be peace) about his Lord, let us see how they were answered with ahad-un after Huwa-Allah.
First, it means: "He alone is the Sustainer: no one else has any share or part in providence. and since He alone can be the Ilah (Deity) Who is Master and Sustainer, therefore, no one el