Continue reading »]]> Since the Arab Spring dawned,Turkey’s potential value as an inspiration for and facilitator of reform in the Middle East and North Africa has been a heated topic of discussion. Critics have been concerned that this debate would both work against Turkey’s EU integration by distracting intellectual and political attention and complicate domestic political dynamics through overemphasis on Turkey’s Muslim identity — in essence making Turkey more Middle Eastern rather than spreading reform and open society.

Though Turkey’s intensified engagement in the MENA region is inevitable, the shape of Turkey’s influence is not predetermined. The concentration of the debate should already be on how to make Turkey’s influence a positive one, while mitigating potential risks.
Recalling the significant role that interaction between Turkish and European civil society played in driving Turkey’s positive change raises the question of whether Turkey’s civil society development and related institutional transition experiences are transposable to the EU’s southern neighborhood. Looking more closely at the concrete example of Turkey’s experiences in adapting European approaches to women’s rights can shed light on the feasibility of this notion.
Given vested interests and strategic limitations, Turkey’s official approach to democratization in the region is expected to involve contradictions and may on occasion strain relations with the Western alliance as well as with counterparts in the neighborhood. Ankara’s diplomatic efforts to counsel democratic reform in the region (with an initiative ongoing in Syria currently) have so far yielded little or no results. In contrast, Turkish civil society may be able to play a more consistent and active role in assisting neighbors who venture on the longterm endeavor of building a culture of democracy. For this to materialize, there is a need for synergy between Turkish and European counterparts, as well as an informed demand from Turkey’s respective neighbors. The continuation of Turkey’s Europeanization journey will also be important for Turkey’s far-reaching contribution to positive change among its neighbors.
Turkey’s Not-so-Unique Formula
The freedoms and opportunities enjoyed in Turkey that set it apart in Europe’s neighborhood have largely been a function of Turkey’s Europeanization. Over recent decades, Western literature and interaction with European counterparts played an important role in building awareness among Turkish journalists, activists, and intellectuals. Benchmarking of European standards by NGOs and EU leverage — particularly after candidacy was achieved in 1999 — played a central role. This was distinctly the case in bringing about revolutionary legal reform progressive state policies towards gender equality. Though these European influences have taken on a life of their own in Turkey, some of the most challenging steps lie ahead.
Turkey and the Muslim Middle East share traditions and structural economic challenges that obstruct women’s equal standing in public life and trap women in controlling social networks. Social services and public administration fall short of compensating for these socioeconomic realities. These problems do not mean Turkey is regressing. In fact, many of today’s challenges can be characterized as transition pains. Breaking through the current plateau in women’s empowerment requires holistic policy design, political will, and continued socioeconomic change
Just as the problems are not Muslim, neither are the solutions. The wheel needs neither to be re-invented, nor adapted to a Muslim context. Spain, also traditionally patriarchal, lagged behind Europe in gender equality and violence until recently. It has, over the past two decades, not only caught up, but surpassed most other European countries in terms of gender parity — with relevant legislation, strengthening of law enforcement institutions, and allocation of resources to this end. To the extent that Turkey takes Spain as a model, so can a country like Egypt take Turkey as one. In short, for more effective regional democracy inspiration and assistance, Turkey needs to deepen and consolidate its Europeanization journey, not stall mid-stream.
Dissecting Soft Power — The Place of Islam
Turkey’s potential influence in the Arab world is a function, among other things, of shared religion and the related cultural affinity. The Turkish Prime Minister’s high-profile defiance of Israel, and his defending various controversial Muslim leaders on Western platforms arguably compounded Turkey’s popularity on the Arab street. In fact, Turkey’s secularism and good relations with the West are seen as obstacles to Turkey serving as a model in the Middle East by a sizeable proportion of Arab societies. Should we conclude that it is mutually exclusive for Turkey to intensify its Eastern and Western engagement? Not necessarily.
The kind of engagement that empowering intellectuals in the Arab world calls for is not the same kind of populistic engagement that arousing the Arab street involves. Turkey’s having a seat at Euro-Atlantic tables and raising its democratic and development levels are important pillars of its traction in the neighborhood.
Informed choices by opinion leaders and politicians of the respective recipient neighboring countries will determine which aspects of the Turkish experience are utilized. Ultimately, the liberal young political activists of Tunisia who are cautious about alienating conservative voters can, for example, point to the legal framework in Turkey while advocating that equal rights for women does not mean a split from Islamic conviction. In their long struggle lobbying conservative parliamentarians for progressive reform, Turkish women’s movement activists have in the past also justified their demands by drawing on examples from other Muslim countries. Developing the relatively weak ties between Turkish human rights advocates, journalists, dissidents, youth movements, women’s civil society organizations, and civil society organizations in the common neighborhood of Turkey and the EU is important.
Turkey’s experiment with using faith to promote progressive change may also be relevant for some Muslim reform advocates. For example, in order to promote girls’ education, besides infrastructure development, monetary incentives, and penalties for families that withhold their daughters from school, Turkish Imams have been tasked with delivering supportive messages in Friday prayers across the country. Another case in point is the ongoing scholarly review of hadiths (sayings and traditions attributed to Prophet Muhammad), with a view to weed out the suggestions of women’s secondary status. Promoting progressive interpretation of religion can arguably empower women’s struggle against discrimination in conservative environments. However, such initiatives can not replace, but only supplement, law, effective enforcement, protection mechanisms, civic mobilization, and political will. Over-rating the role of Islam in solutions to basic problems that require strong institutions, civic participation, and economic development would be a mistake. Along the same lines, while Turkey’s Muslim culture can reinforce its inspirational strength, substantiating this influence will require more concrete engagement with the needs of the people.
Seeking Synergy
There is no clean-cut model for the winds of change in the neighborhood stretching from North Africa to Central Eurasia. Not only is each society in the region very different from the other, but they are also presented with a wide range of competing examples. Given how polarized Turkey is domestically, it should come as no surprise that different groups from Turkey itself attempt to export disperate so-called Turkey-models to prospective recipients. One need only look at Azerbaijan, to which ethnic nationalist networks and Muslim brotherhood networks from Turkey have been advocating contrasting visions for two decades. From that example, one can conclude that if there is a risk, it is that the West-oriented liberal democrats in Turkey — who have played the biggest role in Turkey’s own transformation — risk falling behind in the race to influence neighbors. Neighbors motivated by the liberalization phase of Turkey’s complex evolution need to play a proactive role to engage these segments of Turkish society.
While Turkish women’s NGOs have experience working in social settings defined by tribal structures in Eastern Turkey, European women’s NGOs have valuable experience gained by East European EU accession. On issues such as utilizing social media, the transmission may very well be reversed; Turkish social movements have much to learn from some of their neighbors’ more active use of such Internet resources. The United States may be most influential in spreading values and activism through education, while Georgia has the most recent example of radical reform of police force.
Rather than assuming Turkey possesses an upper hand on the basis of popularity among neighboring masses, more modesty is called for to find synergy. To get plugged into the causes of reformists in the region and to play a more active role in their affairs, Turkish civil society and media is already benefitting from the language skills, sources, experiences, and funding of their Western counterparts.
Until recently, those in Turkey with a Western-oriented outlook largely neglected Eurasia and the Middle East; vice versa, Turkish groups with networks and advocacy among Eastern neighbors were not plugged in to the Western policy community. This is slowly changing but to find synergy between Turkish and European civil society in a more substantial and lasting way, adaptation of visions, resources, and structures will be important.
Conclusion
The argument that Turkey does not need Europe because it possesses stand-alone regional power is misplaced, but it has been seeping into the Turkish mainstream. Turkey’s EU vocation is still critical not only for strategic reasons but also for more effective use of soft power and to be a stronger role model. Turkey is yet to prove that it can sustainably overcome some of the major problems it shares with its Eastern neighbors. How Turkey deals with the challenges ahead will also be critical in determining whether Turkey can continue to inspire its neighbors — Muslim or otherwise.
Though Turkey’s transformation itself is a work in progress, it is precisely because similar problems with its neighbors still exist that Turkey’s example is perceived to be “within reach.” That being said, Turkey needs to be moving forward on the challenging fronts in order for this element of inspiration to be sustained. Even though Turkey’s progress can be seen as a sign that a Muslim country can overcome these hurdles, the flipside is that a stalling or regression on the part of Turkey can perpetuate perceived civilizational divides.

source: http://www.todayszaman.com/news-242987-europes-neighborhood-can-turkey-inspire.html

Continue reading »]]> By Adri Wanto
December 20 2010

INDONESIAN MUSLIMS live in the largest Muslim country in the world and are well-known for their moderation. They embody the key ideas of democracy, tolerance, freedom, respect for human rights and equality. Instead of establishing an Islamic state, a majority of Muslims are actively involved in promoting democratic institutions. Many questions have been raised as to the factors that facilitate Muslim moderation in Indonesia, and specifically how democratic is Indonesian Islam?

To answer these questions, I argue that the local culture and the Islamic texts used in traditional Islamic boarding schools are the two most dominant factors in moulding inclusive and tolerant Muslims in Indonesia.

Islamic Law and Local culture

Snouck Hurgronje, the Dutch colonial scholar, had written about the Indonesian community in Mecca in the 1880s. Hurgronje pointed out that the relationship between Muslims in Indonesia and in the Middle East was very unique. On the one hand, the Indonesian people sought knowledge and inspiration from Muslims in the Middle East, but they then adapted this knowledge to their local culture which was different from the source. Hurgronje considered it as adaptive and intelligent of the Indonesian people to blend Islamic teaching with their local culture to create a very rich religious synthesis.

In Islam, culture is usually referred to as ‘urf or ‘Adah. The 21st century Islamic scholar Muhammad Yusuf Qardhawi explained that ‘urf is the habits and behaviour of people in everyday life which become hereditary customs. Because the ‘urf is an inseparable part of a person, it is used in formulating the fiqh (Islamic law).

Muslims in Indonesia recognised that there were many cultures that existed in the pre-Islamic era, some of which were Islamised and adopted by the prophet Muhammad. This indicates that Islam was not born in order to eliminate the entire culture that developed in pre-Islamic Arab society. Prophet Muhammad created many rules of customary law that legalised Arab society, to make space for the practice of customary law in the Islamic legal system as long as the law was not against Islamic principles.

For instance, the Haj was practised in Arab societies long before Islam arrived. Pre-Islamic Arab societies also conducted worship at the Kaabah, although they were idolators. After the arrival of Islam, the practices continued with some changes. For example idol worship was terminated. The tawaf — one of the rites of the haj involving walking around the Kaabah at the beginning and the conclusion of the pilgrimage — was previously performed naked by pre-Islamic Arab society. The Prophet banned this and instead carry out this worship fully dressed till today.

The laws established by Prophet Muhammad and his successors (Sahabat) always took into account the evolving culture of the community. In the establishment of fiqh we can see the influence of different cultures in the laws that were created. Abu Hanifa, one of Islam’s four great imams, took advantage of customs and social habits of a diverse range of communities as a secondary source to the law as long as they did not contradict the Quran. Similarly, Imam Malik was influenced by the indigenous communities in Medina when developing fiqh theory.

Fiqh and Flexibility

One important history which explains social influence in the cultural constructs of Islamic fiqh is related to the phenomenon of Imam Shafi’i, another great imam of Islam after the Prophet. Social conditions and circumstances affected most of his thoughts on fiqh law. The clearest example of this is the emergence of the so-called qaul qadim (the old statement) and qaul Jadid (new statement) in the spectrum of thought of Imam Shafi’i. Originally, Imam Shafi’i made a statement for fiqh. However, later this statement became Qaul qadim (old statement) because he came across a new situation which led him to create a new statement or qaul Jadid. This indicates the flexibility of fiqh.

Many of Islamic book references (kitab kuning) used in the traditional Islamic boarding school (Pesantren) in Indonesia highlight the need for Muslims to apply awareness and wisdom when making historical reflections or interpreting Islamic fiqh thought in the early Islamic period. This perspective of Islamic law teaches that new approaches must be in accordance with the legal consciousness of society, namely law which was formed by environmental awareness, or with the local culture and traditions.

It is necessary to consider the traditions of the indigenous people when formulating local forms of Islamic law in Indonesia. This concept is based on Islam’s egalitarian characteristics, so that all cultural elements in Indonesian society can be a source of Islamic law. This argument denies the idea that only Arab culture can be the basis for the formulation of Islamic law.

Religious Harmony and Social Stability

Not all ‘urf or culture conflicts with Islamic teachings and therefore, they can be used as the source of Islamic law. The late president Abdurrahman Wahid, when he was leader of the Islamic organisation Nahdahtul Ulama (NU), conceptualised local Islamic teachings. According to him, localised Islamic teaching is interpreted as an attempt to hold on to the cultural roots of Indonesia, while still trying to create a religious community. In his thinking, Abdurrahman Wahid tried to place Islam and other cultures in a position of dialogue. From this basis, he refused to accept any movement adopting a hegemonic position whether privileging “Islamisation”, “Arabisation” or “the formalisation of Islamic teachings in the cultural sphere”.

In the context of Indonesia, the Indonesian formulation of Islamic law is very important. This idea can develop two important paradigms in localising Islamic law. The first is contextual: Islamic law is understood as a doctrine associated with the dimensions of the time and place. Changing the time and place must influence the interpretation or Ijtihad (individual interpretation) in Islamic law. Since Islamic law is adaptive it can be applied to every era and place (fi kulli zamanin wa fi kuli makanin). Secondly, Islamic law respects local traditions as long as these traditions are not in conflict or can be reconciled with Islamic principles.

Therefore Islamic law should consider local tradition and should not view local tradition as an object that must be defeated. As Indonesia’s case highlights, religious harmony and socio-stability prevail when Islamic law is positioned in synthesis with local tradition.

Adri Wanto is a Research Analyst with the Indonesia Programme at the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University. He studied at a Pesantren in West Sumatra (Nurul Yaqin, Padang Pariaman), Indonesia.

source: http://www.eurasiareview.com/analysis/indonesian-islam-what-went-right-20122010/

Continue reading »]]> by Meryem Weld

The composition and history of Western civili zation is exceedingly complex and it is not an easy task to outline the importance of Christianity within it without over-simplifying and obscuring the question altogether. Christianity is itself a complex and multiform phenomenon that has undergone many transformations and divisions through the ages and the term should be defined carefully in whatever context it is being used. Having said that, we shall offer one or two points in the hope that it may point towards a way that true Christianity may take in order to draw closer to Islam.
From the very earliest days, sects and groups of the most diverse nature flourished in the Christian movement, each holding opposing views on the most fundamental tenets of Christian belief. The ‘orthodox’ views prevailed on the conversion of the Emperor Constantine in the early 4th century A.D. and from that event the course of future Christianity was set. Although they would later be developed into a complicated theology, the basic ideas on the nature of God as a trinity and the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ (Upon whom be peace) were accepted as fundamental and necessary beliefs. Also the nature of authority was established at that time and took the form of the Emperor as the head of the Church supported by a hierarchy of bishops, priests and deacons on the one hand, with the laity or ordinary believers on the other.
Subsequent centuries saw many developments and splits within what had then become accepted to be Christianity. In 1054 A.D. the Eastern Orthodox Churches rejected the claims of the papacy and broke away from the Western Catholic Church, but despite this their beliefs and the internal structures of their Churches remained broadly similar to the Roman Church. It was not until the Reformation that split the Western Church in the 16th century that not only was the authority of the papacy and the domination of the Church and its hierarchy challenged, but also there were serious attempts to return to the Bible and purify the Christian faith itself. Nevertheless, with a very few exceptions, the majority of the Protestant sects and Churches that emerged, with the exception of denying papal supremacy, cannot really be seen to have developed into anything radically different to the Catholic Church.
We may therefore make the two following points. Firstly, the institution of the Church came to be the representative of Christianity, although it had taken as its basis beliefs contrary to the pure monotheism taught by Jesus (UWP) and had superimposed these on the already existing Roman social and political system. And secondly, the internal structure of the Church, with its hier archy on the one hand, and ordinary Christians on the other was a rigid and oppressive institution that did not allow for the free exercise of reason and the development of knowledge. We may say, therefore, that a truly Christian civilization never developed, but that the Western civilization that did develop and that is known as Christian civili zation is in fact a development of classical Graeco-Roman civilization.
Nevertheless, as we.said to start with, it is an exceedingly complex question and while Western civilization is and always had as its base philoso phy rather than Revelation, it has also been one might say, leavened, tempered, or even softened by true Christianity, that is, those of Christ’s teachings that have been preserved in the New
Testament and the authentic parts of the Old Tes tament. The influence of this true Christianity on Western civilization has been stronger in some periods of history than in others. That it has been present is undeniable but to isolate and describe pure manifestations of it is difficult. Perhaps it can be said that at an individual level people have received and continue to receive genuine inspira tion and guidance through Jesus (UWP)’s teach ings and that this has been reflected in the society and civilization at large.
By the Early Middle Ages the Church had gained a stranglehold over all forms of cultural life. As mentioned above, the hierarchical struture itself of the church and power that the hierarchy enjoyed in relation to the laity prevented the growth of a spirit of enquiry. Education was lim ited to the clergy, so that the body of ordinary Christians merely followed them blindly in their ignorance. And among the clergy, the absolute power enjoyed by the papacy disallowed any advance in knowledge. Any new thought that threw into question the accepted dogmas of the Church, as all advances in knowledge could not fail to do, was branded as heresy and suppressed. These reasons, among others, therefore, meant that the society and civilization could only pro gress in so far as they could shake off this oppre-sive domination of the Church. As the strangle hold of the Church slackened, there was a great upsurge in scientific discovery and in progress inall fields of knowledge. However, it must be stated that it shared the same foundations as the Church and civilization that had preceeded it. In fact, what could it be other than the continuation of the Renaissance, that reaffirmation of the clas sical Graeco-Roman inspiration of Western civili zation?
In the Thirtieth Word, Bediuzzaman Said Nursi explains human history in terms of two cur rents or lines of thought, the line of prophethood and religion and that of philosophy and science, and he relates these to the human ego and describes the results they have yielded. The line of prophethood, which represents Divine revela tion, corresponds to man’s heart, and the line of philosophy, to his intellect or reason. The aim is for these two lines to be united, that is, for the line of philosophy to be obedient to and of service to the line of prophethood and religion. Whenever this has occurred, mankind has experienced true harmony and happiness, but when they have become separated, goodness and light have been drawn to the latter, and evil and misguidance to the former.
Thus, when man does not accept Divine revela tion he will rely on his own reason and will take his desires and impulses as his criteria. Since he imagines that he owns himself, he will be com pelled to imagine that everything else owns itself. This is the basis of the materialist philosophy which developed in the West. Instead of all causes, from the vastest galaxies to the minutest particles, being attributed directly their Creator, power is given to each of them. Each cause is imagined to have an actual effect, it is given the power to create. Such a man will attribute power and creativity to a false concept like Nature, or the laws of Nature, or the forces of Nature. Since he does not accept the key, the plan, the guide to understanding the universe that has been sent by its True Owner, he will not know how to approach it. Relying only on his own intellect and criteria he will run into immediate difficulties and contradictions. He will project these conflicts and contradictions that he experiences within himself as a result of acting contrary to the manner in which he has ben created on to the world outside himself. He will interpret what he sees in that world as struggle and competition and he will come up with such irrational claims as ‘life is a conflict,’ ‘might is right,’ ‘the survival of the fit test,’ ‘in power there is right,’ and so on. It is not difficult to see how accurately this describes Western thought.
Furthermore, such a man will see only the apparent face of the universe, he will not under stand its meaning. It will remain meaningless and purposeless for him. And this ownership and power that he claims will not bring him any real happiness, on the contrary, his endless desires will make him a slave to every cause he seeks to sat isfy them with. Since he denies his Creator and True Object of Worship, he will worship idols and false gods to the number of causes to which he gives power. He will fall from being the aim and fruit of creation to being abased and abject, groveling to every cause that will bring him per­sonal benefits,’ seeking to satisfy his greed and pride.
Thus, if we set aside for a moment the ele ments of true Christianity in Western civilization and their effects, we can see the results of the negative and rotten foundations of the line of science and philosophy. To quote Bediuzzaman, “Its aim and purpose are benefit and self-interest, after which everyone jostles and pushes without restraint. Its principle in life is conflict, which manifests itself in contention and discord. The tie between different groups is racialism and negative nationalism, which thrives on devouring others and which manifests itself in ghastly clashes. Its alluring service is encouraging the passions of the soul, satisfying its desires, and facilitating the attainment of its wishes.”
Since it does not spring from truth and reality and since its aim is not truth and reality, Western civilization has to resort to subterfuge and lies in order to perpetuate itself. Conflict, aggression, self-interest, discord, racialism and lust are indeed repugnant to man’s nature, therefore it both cloaks these ugly facts and deliberately perverts and dulls man’s nature. In order to maintain some sort of equilibrium among all those anarchic for ces, it pitilessly exploits the young and plays off group against group in the society. It excites aggression, animality and racialism through films, pornography, pop music, television and the media, and then seeks to control the release of those forces through seemingly innocent football and sport, pop concerts and festivals, political demonstrations, and minor though sustained con flict between different racial and social groups.
The major requirement in the perpetuation of this system is to stop people thinking, to deaden their perception, to smother their innate urge to find the truth. The whole edifice of Western art and culture is directed towards this aim. In partic ular it addresses the educated classes, satisfying their senses, flattering their conceit, and deceiving them into thinking that they are concerned with reality. The economic system, which is based on waste and consumption, aims to produce, at least for some sections of the society, a false, material paradise in which unfortunate Western man may drown in unthinking comfort and pleasure.
But what a hell they create, Man is not an ani mal. While his body wallows in glamour and affluence, his spirit, conscience, mind, and heart suffer the torments of hell.
The line of prophethood and religion, on the other hand, has as its base Divine revelation. A man who accepts this acknowledges that of him self he is nothing, he is a slave of God, his duty is to use his intellect and other faculties in learning to know God so that he may learn how to please Him with service and worship. He will learn from the revealed books not only what he is himself and his duty, but also the true nature of the uni verse and its duty. He will not get bogged down in its mere functioning, its apparent face of cau sality, beautiful, intricate and absorbing though it is; rather, his eyes will be directed through that wonderful functioning to the meaning behind it. He will see that each being from the minutest par­ticles to the vastest galaxies is performing endless duties in perfect submission and obedience, that beings are rushing to the assistance of the other beings in accordance with a law of co-operation that prevails over the cosmos, that singly and alto gether these beings are proclaiming the glory, beauty, and perfections of their single Compas sionate and Merciful Creator.
The firm and positive foundations of the line of prophethood result in a civilization the bases of which are as follows. Again to quote Bediuzza-man: “Its point of support is truth instead of force, which is manifest as justice and equity. Instead of benefit and self-interest its aims are vir tue and God’s pleasure, which are manifest as love and friendly competition. In place of racial ism and nationalism its means of unity are the bonds of religion, country, and class, which are manifest as sincere brotherhood and concord, and co-operation in only defending against outside aggression. The principle in life is that of mutual assistance and co-operation instead of conflict, which is manifest as unity and mutual support. In place of lust is guidance, which is manifest as progress for humanity and being perfected spiritu ally.”
Before concluding this section we shall analyse in more detail these principles quoted from Bediuzzaman Said Nursi and see how they actu ally manifest themselves both on the level of the individual and of society, concentrating firstly on Western civilization and society.
We saw above that if man does not acknow ledge the Creator and True Owner of the universe, he will claim ownership himself and be forced to attribute ownership or power to causes, that is, beings, outside himself; for example, to the sun, or the so-called forces and laws of Nature, such as gravity or nuclear forces. Therefore, since such a person does not believe that every single aspect of all the activity apparent in the universe is directly controlled, planned and created by One Ail-Powerful, Knowing, Wise, Compassionate, Merciful, and Just Creator, he will not only attrib ute its wonderful functioning to a manifestly absurd concept like chance or coincidence, but he will also see himself as justified in dominating and exploiting for his own benefits as much of the universe over which he can extend his power.
Power or force, therefore, becomes a fundamental principle of materialist philosophy, and man’s benefits the primary purpose or aim.
What does this mean in practice? We saw that Western civilization came to be fundamentally materialist. While it is undeniable that the Churches exert some influence over individuals and society, true Christianity, or pure monothe ism, failed to influence Western philosophy. Its aim, therefore, since it is not God’s pleasure and worship and service of Him through adhering to His law and commands, is man’s pleasure and man’s benefits. The ultimate purpose of the uni verse, in so far as it can be seen to have one, is to serve man’s interests. Man’s attitude towards the universe, then, becomes aggresssive and exploita tive; the universe, and all beings, are there for his use and benefit to whatever degree he can increase his power and thus his domination over them. This manifests itself plainly on all levels: political, national, international, societal. What is the real aim of much modern science and technol ogy? What is ‘Stars Wars’ and the race for space? And while ecologists and governments wring their hands over its effects ecologically and economi cally, let them consider the real causes.
This attitude necessarily expresses itself at the personal level as it does at the universal, for it is the manifestation of a basic belief. Although it is abhorrent to man’s true nature, and also although it may not immediately appear to be thus, a person who is not acting purely for God’s sake will seek to serve his own interests and follow his own benefits on the personal level, too, at the expense of others, whether they be his children, parents, spouse, friends or whatever. The results of this are plain for all to see in the West. Ever-increasing numbers of broken homes, divorce, and neglect of children, especially with regard to then-training and real education if not materially, just for a start.
Furthermore, the contradictions and conflicts that arise from adhering to such a view of the world result in a psychological imbalance that in turn all too often gives rise to both real mental ill ness and to the inhuman and distressing behaviour and crime that has become only too familiar to us in the news media. The reasons for the prisons and mental hospitals being crammed with increas ing numbers of inmates should be sought here and not in such matters as unemployment and social conditions, which, though real problems, can in no way be seen to be a fundamental cause.
Although the majority of people may not be driven to such extremes, their state is basically the same. Man is not designed to bear the burden of unbelief. He is impotent and at the same time sub ject to endless desires and needs. He therefore is in need of an All-Powerful, Wise, and Compas sionate Sustainer Who is able to answer all those desires and needs, that in fact reach to eternity. If he denies that Sustainer, he takes on himself not only all his own needs and problems, which he cannot secure, but also, since he is connected to the rest of the universe, he will be weighed down by all the problems and injustices in the world, which he is certainly powerless to solve. And then there is death, that inescapable reality that stands implacably at the end of the passage of life. What real hope or joy can death leave to someone who subscribes to materialist philosophy?
These great burdens of unbelief lead to a men tality of escapism. Western civilization compels people to entirely wrap themselves up in veils of oblivion in order to escape from the pain and despair that it inflicts on them. It is quite clear once one starts to notice it. Fiction, science-fiction, sport, music, television, video, films, ‘cul ture’; they are all universally used as’ means of escaping. Many people openly admit that they indulge in such pastimes and hobbies in order to escape from the realities of life. Walk down any street or even comb the universities or seek out the intellectuals and see how many will be pre pared to sit down and have a serious discussion of the meaning of life and death. They will avoid it at all costs. For if they do not recognize that Sin gle All-Compassionate Sustainer, the reality is just too painful and terrifying.
This escapism is strenunously encouraged in the West as the major means of perpetuating the system, but the true nature of Western civilization is now becoming inescapably clear. For four and a half centuries the West was engaged in a vigor ous expansion, and the aggressive forces men tioned above were directed outside itself and towards that expansion. But with its contraction an equilibrium cannot be maintained. The West ern materialist system necessitates the excitement and release of those aggressive forces, but in the restricted sphere they turn inwards, as it were, resulting in conflict and violence that can no longer be controlled. This conflict and violence, too, has become familiar to us in the form of foot ball hooliganism, racial violence, political Vio lence, violent crime. In many areas, it is no longer safe even to walk in the streets; there is an atmo sphere of anarchy, aggressiveness, and fear.
The society and civilization that revealed relig ion gives rise to presents a completely different picture. The need for force and aggression does not arise since all power and ownership is attrib uted directly to the True Owner of the universe. A believer recognizes that while being the aim and fruit of creation to whom the universe is in trust, the requirement of his exalted position is to use all the faculties and abilities he has been given in the service of that Ail-Powerful and Generous Owner. By conforming to the law and commands that He has revealed, he too will manifest the jus tice, balancé and equilibrium that is so apparent in the universe. Since he-recognizes God, the All-Wise and Compassionate Possessor of Absolute Power and Absolute Knowledge, and knows himself to be powerless and utterly needy, he understands that all benefits, bounty and good are given directly by God, so, while striving his utmost to receive God’s bounty and pleasure, he will gratefully receive what is given and will shrink from exploiting in any manner his fellow creatures. For to act in self-interest and to seek benefits for oneself is to caim ownership of one self and to attempt to extend that ownership over other creatures; it necessarily entails aggression in some form against them, as well as being a viola tion of the balance and order in the universe.
Since society is formed of individuals, a truly Islamic society and civilization can only come into being as a result of people understanding, believing and acting on these principles. Only when the True Owner of the universe is recog nized with all His functioning Names and attrib utes can believers act with true justice and mani fest love and sincere brotherhood and co operation in society. Only then can they rise above petty self-interest and that most damaging modern sickness, nationalism, which, together with racialism, is again the false claiming of own ership and constitutes an aggresssion against fel low creatures, let alone the damage that it does to the Muslim community. In fact, as the principle of jihad shows us, in no circumstances can there be aggression, only defence against outside aggression.
Furthermore, since a truly Islamic society reflects how each believer sees the universe and since the believer sees the universe not in terms of conflict, ‘the survival of the fittest,’ and such like, but as a vast system of mutual assistance and co-operation, he extends this principle to every aspect of his personal and social life. He attempts to conform to the wisdom, balance and order in the universe, to the Law and commands sent by its True Owner, to the practices of His Most Noble Prophet (Upon whom be blessings and peace), whom He sent as a mercy to all the worlds.
As we stated at the beginning, our aim in ana lysing Western civilization is not merely to deni grate it, but rather in discovering its foundations and true face to be able to learn something of the relationship of Christianity to that civilization, and thus to find ways in which true Christianity might draw closer to the complete religion of Islam, the religion of God Almighty’s final revealed book, the Qur’an, and His final prophet, the Prophet Muhammad (Upon whom be bless ings and peace), in the hope that together we. might fight our common enemies of atheism and irreligion. We therefore draw the following con clusions.
Firstly, that the churches as institutions do not represent true Christianity. Nevertheless, contem porary movements within them suggest a tendency towards it. For example, in the Catholic Church, the movement of ‘aggiornamento’

(bringing up to date) that was instigated by Pope John XXm in the late 1950′s and was then largely ratified by Vatican Countil II. It tackled some of the problems mentioned above and there was a devolvement of power and responsibility away from the clergy to the laity. The stress was on the greater involvement of ordinary Christians. As a result of this movement, a freer and more intellectually active theology began to emerge. And thoughout Christianity there is an uncoordinated questioning and seeking for a truer form of the religion that takes different forms in differ ent places. This general atmosphere of question ing and searching leads us to hope that sincere Christians will be able to draw closer to Islam.
This brings us to our second conclusion, that the easiest method of finding one’s way through the maze of Western civilization, Christianity, and their histories and relationship and arrive at the truth is through the analysis outlined above.
Bediuzzaman Said Nursi presented us with a model of how we should look at history, our- selves, and the universe. That was in terms of Divine revelation and religion on the one hand, and reason, science and philosophy on the other.
The latter must be subservient and of service to the former, and not vice versa, which is what happened in the Christian world. This analysis shows clearly the basis and nature of Western civilization and also points to the path that should be , taken by those Christians who wish to extricate
themselves from the bog of materialism and enter the complete and wholesome world of God Almighty’s revealed religion.

source: http://www.risaleinur.us/read/?art=2986&t=Western+civilization,+Christianity,+and+Islam

Continue reading »]]> Peaceful Muslim–Non-Muslim Co-existence in a Secular Context

by Farhod Alimuhamedov
23 November 2007

Abstract

This paper is about the conditions of inter-ethnic, inter-religious and inter-class relations in Gülen schools and looks into their operation in non-Turkish and non-Muslim settings. It aims to examine the relations among young people coming from different groups. The initial and main steps of the integration processes among different ethnic and religious entities are well observed at school – we hupothesize that it is much easier to transfer knowledge and values to young people with the same or closely similar identities. The field of research is in Russia because Russian society offers an interesting context for the observation of inter-ethnic and interreligious relations. There we observe the strong ethnic identity arising after the collapse of the Soviet Union with concomitant rise in social rivalry among different groups. The students at Gülen schools are initially selected on academic merit, and the results then obtained by the schools make their reputation. That reputation increases the attractiveness of the schools and the best young people from different ethinic groups try to get places in them. However, the major focus of my research is to check the level of social integration rather than of academic success and to observe how Muslim-based schools can transmit values in non-Muslim context. The example of these schools could be useful for ethnically changing societies like the French one. French society should be reassured by the ‘republican school’ model, and should question the academic and social effectiveness of its methods and approaches rather than the ethnic or religious belifs of the young French students who attend such schools.

1. Introduction

The reason of my interest in Gülen schools lies on my educational background. I studied at the Uzbek Turkish school in Tashkent which was opened in 1992 just after the first anniversary of the independence of the Republic of Uzbekistan. (1st September 1991). I spent 4 years at that school instead of 3 (we have to study at preparatory class first) in order to get the secondary level permitting to apply to the university. Nevertheless, I do not regret much about it, even if at that time one extra year seemed to be very important.

During these 4 years I had not learnt anything about Fethullah Gülen. Even after graduating the school I never questioned about him. The first information about Gülen I found was in Russian analytical paper named “Compass” in 1999 (in the same year all schools were closed in Uzbekistan) which described him as the leader of the “Nurcular” movement, Islamic oriented powerful stream with a strong financial and political support coming mainly from private funds in Turkey. Although that 10-page-article could not change my opinion about my 4-year-experience at school, it created a sort of suspicion towards the schools because that paper was and remained the only information about Fethullah Gülen and “his” schools for a long time.

2. Gülen and “His Schools”

I was informed lately that Gülen possesses no school by his own. He is not a businessman and he did not inherit enough to open hundreds of schools. The difference is clear between Gülen and other famous philanthropist like Soros, Ford or Gates who finance directly schools and education programmes by their own. He was a preacher in Edirne (Turkey) where he received the degree and later in Izmir city from 1966 to 1981 years. The functions of imam being not limited to preaching, but especially educating and writing (he has written about 60 books) he describes himself as an educator[1]. Modern education was not included at his early stages of activities, since at that time he played an important role in educating religion of Islam in Turkey. Therefore the name “Hocaefendi”, which comes for the role of religious title is often used to replace his name. The sector of contemporary (modern) education is one of the domains of his group activities behind the others. That field was actively taken into consideration after 1980[2] by the opening of private schools and became by the time the most discussed and publicly known sphere of activities. The schools which are associated with his name follow his line and vision of modern education which is based on both “mind and heart[3]». He thinks that modern education is job oriented and lacks the spirituality whereas madrasas[4] (Qur’ranic schools of Ottoman Empire) did not follow modern evaluation. However, he finds that Turkish secularism eliminates the religion from the public sphere and encourages the development of violent religious movements. Therefore he proposes the schools both compatible with and critical of modernity and Muslim traditions. Gülen does not see modernity and Islam as opposing entities, but in contrary suggest the participation of Islam in modern Secular State. Even if his points of view are taken from Turkish experience, he tries not to establish one model to all schools over the world.

There are some 250 Gülen schools in Turkey and even more abroad. They are located in different countries, but mainly in developing ones. In the countries closer to Turkey they are densely implanted. For example, they exist in different forms in the majority of the post communist countries bordering and closely located to Turkey. In some countries like Kazakhstan and Kyrgyzstan there are even universities which are linked to the Gülen movement. The schools, however, cover a large geographical area starting from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and Northern America and even in Europe.

Gülen’s role is not so much a planning one, but rather visionary one, since in new regions locally operating groups are better acquainted with needs and realities on the ground[5]. Therefore the forms of the schools are multiple. There are schools recognized as “lyceums” or “gymnasium” which are attached to the local schools. They share the building and interfere for the elder pupil. There are also Language and Computer centres that are in developing countries where the need for the subject is vital, but also in developed countries where difficulties to open the schools (mainly Europe) exist. Beside Gülen “has” several International Schools which is open to local pupil and for the children of diplomatic corpus residing at that country. However the main form is so called “Turkish” schools which undergo through intergovernmental agreements.

These schools obtained certain recognition in many countries. Famous political leaders, even presidents have claimed about them in public. For example, recently Afghan president Karzai demanded Turkish Minister of Foreign Affairs Gul in their meeting to multiply the numbers of Afghan Turkish schools[6]. The director of Crimean-Turkish School in Ukraine Mehmet Sevketoglu has received a medallion for his work by country president Youshenko. The students of Turkish school Horizon Japan International School) were received by Prime Minister Koizumi Junishiro, whereas the mother of Georgian president Saakashvili, Dr. Giuli Alasania Saakashvili works at one of the Turkish schools.[7]

3. The Missions of “Missionary Schools”

The success of Gülen schools is achieved almost everywhere they open. However, the question rises about the main aim of these schools from Turkish side, as well as from hosting country side. Several schools have been closed in Russia, and all schools in Uzbekistan. It is difficult to make parallel between these accidents, but in both cases the problems come from political and not from educational drive. In order to avoid all suspicion the schools keep a very strong control over the look of their students. The common characteristics of students are being well-bred, well-dressed and not having an ostentatious look. Traditional clothes are banned; students are obliged to have the uniform. The uniform is composed of jacket, trousers for young men and skirt for girls. In spite of “modern” image, the presence of these schools abroad was discussed in Turkey for several times as they were considered to be the drive for pro Islamic, missionary education. Gülen stated the purposes of these schools as follows: “Our schools are missionary like other missionary schools of Europeans and Americans. Our purpose is to carry out missionary activities to prepare the suitable conditions for creating Turkish lobby and to train bureaucrats”.[8]

In fact, making parallel between missionary schools and Gülen schools is somehow interesting. The presence of Christian missionary schools in Muslim countries is a fact, why it would be difficult to accept the vice versa? From other hand, it remains very difficult to understand the notion of “islamization” of Muslim societies. Central Asian societies have been Muslim societies for the centuries; even Turkey itself is composed of more than 90% of the population of Muslims. How it is possible “islamize” already Muslims? There is, undoubtedly rising ethnic and religious identity formation which is replacing more and more left/right or communist/capitalist identities. Therefore there is a need for schools giving religious education after the “revival” of the religion in post communist countries. There is a need for sharing the history of Turkic nations those were in the same geopolitical area before being annexed by Russia. Schools are by their composition and acts may be considered as the promoters of the modern and needed education. They offer in fact, what lacks to that society in academic and moral terms. Michel says that given the lack of integration between scientific knowledge and spiritual values, Gülen and his companions introduced a new style of education which reconciles the two.

I think, by his comparison Gülen does not want to oppose his schools to missionary schools. On contrary, he takes them partly for example which has a role to play in contemporary political and social conflicting situation among the religions. Islam is considered as an “enemy” for some especially after that theory was officially promoted by Huntington. Therefore he favours inter religious dialogue in order to avoid the clash, whether than discussing sticky points among the religions. Gülen advocates acceptance and dialogue with the non-Muslim community. To advocate this notion of tolerance, Gülen met important Christian and Jewish religious leaders including the Pope, Chief Rabbi of Israel and the Patriarch of the Greek Orthodox Church to promote inter-religious dialogue. If his role was to “islamize” or “re-islamize” he would better limit to Muslim societies, if his role was the revival of Panturkism he would better fix only on Central Asian countries. Therefore he favours opening the schools in non Muslim countries like Russia, Ukraine, Moldova, Brazil, Mexico, etc. which establishes another image of Muslims as educators and not as the “bombers” in a very crucial period called “post September 11th”. That lets non Muslims and non Turks get known abroad by the best image as he told above.

If there are similarities in the methods of education between Gülen schools and missionary schools, in the purpose they remain different. In fact, there is a “cliché” of missionary schools applied to Gülen schools. In methodology Gülen schools accent on family-like study which strengthen ties among the students. The schools are prevailing general level, in spite of individual which make an almost equal level of all the students. They have a strong discipline, strict control and very good information over each pupil. The parents are permanently enrolled in education processes and pupil stay at the dormitory during the week. By the functioning they may resemble to Christian “missionary” schools acting nowadays.

The purpose of “missionary” Gülen School is far from converting to Islam. In fact, it is impossible to convert somebody to Islam (we see the use of the terms to other context again) as according to Islam everybody is a Muslim by the birth. The parents make Muslims, Christians, Jews, Buddhists from them, that means if somebody decides to be Muslim, he would have “come back” to Islam. From that, we can say that, being different from Christianity where the “conversion” is the purpose, in missionary schools, it would be incorrect from religious point of view to suppose Gülen schools “convert” pupil to Islam. Briefly, we can’t use terms “islamization” or “conversion” as the purpose of these schools.Another divergence is based on the notion of Land. The missionary schools come from so called “Christian Land” to another “non Christian Land” that is located in between “10/40″ window (which points on territorial aspect). In contrary, Gülen points on society and schools act within the society and not on territorial basis. They knowledge should serve for the people and for the necessity of the nation, therefore one can find several schools in one small territory, and no school in large territories in spite of religious or ethnic proximity. The purpose of the missionary schools is to use the pupil in Christian drive once they obtain important leadership career, whereas Gülen School believes that the pupil would work for the sake of his/her society and be the good person whilst having an important role in the government. Gülen considers that the majority should obtain the knowledge and thinks that danger comes when only minority possess it. Therefore “his” schools do not have a “target group” and open to everybody, whereas Christian missionary schools are active among the vulnerable groups like orphans, minorities, etc.

The purpose, aim is more important than the method, because it effects to a long term result, whereas, the method effects to a short term result. Hereby, I would like to look through the activities of Gülen schools in Russian Federation.

4. Case study: Schools in contemporary Russia

The secondary education remains one of the high priorities of Russian education system. The country achieved almost 100 per cent of alphabetisation even before 1990s. Therefore, basic and general level of education was high in the country.

At the beginning of the 1990s many specialists spoke about the decline in educational sphere in almost all countries of former Soviet Union. It was linked to the decline of the salaries of all employees depending from the state budget. In fact, it would be true talking about the “transformation of the education” in general, with new priorities and new approaches. New education sector would shape a new face of the Russian society. In terms of society, Russia was no more cosmopolitan, but extremely nationalistic in its internal policy at the first stages of its independence. In terms of economy, country accepted market economy to state regulation which affected to all budget sectors. In terms of politics, the leaders established power based on multi class society, rather than on workers or agricultures as it was in Soviet time. The division into the classes was very quick after a long single class society. In sum, the country transformed its system from egalitarian to market oriented education even in primary levels and increasing in higher steps. Initially, authorities could not provide necessary basis to accomplish such education therefore they were open to accept foreign specialist who proposed their study systems.

Gülen schools entered Russia as to other ex communist countries from a very beginning of the independence as an actor partly linked to Turkey and less to Turkish education system. In fact, they were aware of that, Turkish education system did not achieve much success until the recent years. The country is still placed among the highest among OECD countries having attained only primary education level (64,2%). The part of those who continue in tertiary and advanced research programmes is lower than in Russian Federation (9,1% to 20,8%). Only in this year (2007) the best Turkish universities entered among 500 leading universities list. In terms of yearly expenditure for each student in secondary level both Russian Federation and Turkey have the same expenses. Briefly, Turkey itself cannot represent a better model of secondary or higher level education and lesser “export” it to other countries. Therefore, schools had to prove much in Russia.

In fact, Gülen’s schools represent elitist schools even in Turkey. The students are selected under the selective basis. They compose the best students and increase eventually better reputation of the school. As mentioned above, the schools have a relatively short experience even in Turkey. The possibility of acting abroad represents a double challenge for them. The results would have affected not only to Turkeys representation abroad, but also strengthening role of the schools inside the Turkey. Their ambassadorial role functioned with the best, young specialists who went to exercise teacher’s functions abroad, with a small experience in pedagogy, in general.

Russia has given a green light to promote “lyceums” or “gymnasiums” or other types of schools that distinguished by better level from other “ordinary” schools. The interest for learning foreign languages, especially English and Computer Sciences became important points of attractiveness. The country aimed to have not only national, but more and more internationally oriented youth accepting the importance of English which have a lesser use in Soviet political zone.

The change from equal level to stratified level of secondary education is very important in the Russian system where the entrance to higher education is done through the examinations. The competition on the secondary education based in two areas. If the first is national and partly international Olympiads, the second and most important is university entrance results.

Gülen schools have a different methodology in teaching at secondary level. They should adapt to each national education system which varies from one another even at post communist countries. In general, they try to keep the control over the teaching of natural sciences in English and leave social sciences teaching to local teachers. School programme is based on obligatory study (between 35-38 academic hours) and working hours (about 10-12 hours) controlled by educators in the evening time.

5. Academic results

These schools have spoken of them very quickly in Russia. Of course, their importance was not as strong as in Central Asia where they possessed unequal reputation based on domination in all sorts of competitions. However, with the small number of establishment, the schools achieved academic success in different fields, even though the education programme was not the same with the general secondary programme. For example, in 2007, Ms Katya Bikova, pupil of International Moscow Lyceum 56, obtained the second place in Russian national Ecology Olympiad. M Vasili Raska who studies at the same school obtained the first place with his project on the bio indicators. In sum, 8 pupil from that school participated successfully in 29th Lomonosov Olympiad organized by Moscow State University. The list of success is long and it is permanent each year. For example, only Tatar Turkish Girls School obtained 52 winning places within 10 years, which makes that each year they obtain more than 5 winning places in Olympiads.

University entrance statistics of Schools are also high. More than 90% of pupil enter the university from the first tentative, the data that is extremely high in comparison to national level.

6. Human Relationship

The force of the schools resides not only in academic, but especially humanistic aspects. In fact, it is still difficult for Russian families to release the education of their children to foreigners. Especially, when this foreigners come from developing country which was considered for the centuries as an enemy. The image of Turkey as the centre of education remains unwilling because for the Russians it represented during Soviet Union Islam and Pan Turkism vis-à-vis the conquered Central Asia.

Surprisingly, the relations between teachers and students remain in the very good basis. Although, the age scale which is admitted to schools remains the most difficult (12-17), and the fact that the difference of age is considered to be low between educators and students (5-15) the authority of the teacher is very strong. The respect of the teacher is gained very quickly, in spite of cultural, religious differences. The assimilation with the local people, studying the local languages and traditions let the young teachers get rapidly the respect and trust of the parents and authorities. Even though the fact the cadres are very young (between 20 and 30) and composed of majority from the male (in Russia school teachers are composed of mainly women).

M Kuznetsov[9] says that the teachers are selected ones in Turkey. He notes that the relations between teachers and parents are in excellent stage which is the result of active relationships of teachers with parents. Things go even much farer by the example of the marriages of teachers with local women. For example, M Mustafa Boder (teacher of Turkish at Tuva Turkish College) married the daughter of president of Tuva M Serigo-ool Oorjak – Anyeta[10].

Teacher selection for Gülen schools is not based only in academic criteria. Yet, before being teacher, young people try to understand the teachings of Gülen and the aim of educating. Gülen writes that “those who want to reform the world should reform themselves before “[11] Therefore, teachers are firstly well educated and thereafter competent ones. That puts into the first plan the character of the school staff which is neglected actually in contemporary education system, based only on competences[12]. The school offer not only academic success, but also transfer good moral education. The schools give a parallel education and apprehension which is not offered by any other school in the region[13]. Ali Bayramoglu notes that, schools do not rely on religious (Islam) teaching, but to make moral education for the youth.[14]

In his article “Changing values: Russian youth in transition”, Mikhail F.Chernys, speaks about the rapid changing of post-soviet Russian youth. He indicates that so called rise of consumption needs among the younger people. They start to drink alcohol or smoke cigarettes, etc. much younger than previous generation[15]. He notes that, a sharp change within the several years create a great antagonism between two generations living together. Many parents in Russia noted that the choice of sending their children to Turkish schools was linked to the moral education. Some parents openly say that they prefer these school for their English and non smoking education. Hulusi Turgut[16] notes that, many pupils stopped drinking alcohol and smoking cigarettes after commencing studying.

Another aspect of the schools lay under the resolving multi ethnic or multicultural problems within the society. Gülen schools are attractive by having several ethic groups. Kuznetsov noted that Moscow school has pupil from 12 different origins. In Tatarstan Muslim and non Muslim pupil continue studying together. In spite of rising ethnic view all over the Russia, the schools keep attracting diverse ethnic groups. The schools have almost the same prestige in the big cities or in the smaller ones and even in the central cities like Moscow or Saint Petersburg though the ethnic portrait is completely different. These cities are the centres of competing educational institutions; therefore it remains very difficult to get known. It is notably that ethnic Russians from these cities choose Gülen schools in spite of the large choice of different international schools.

7. Conclusion: The Movement in Europe

Gülen schools exist also in developed countries like Japan, England, USA, etc. The role of these schools is determinant in putting into practice a new system of teaching as they make prior the teacher’s education.

Gülen movement in Europe has other priorities actually. They concerned with moral education and academic support to local citizens of Turkish origin. Turkish Diaspora is one of the biggest in Europe, therefore they have much activities to do. I suppose that the movement is aiming to multiply the number of schools in Europe because there is an increasing need for them.

The need is coming from the gap left by the society in the formation of the individuals. The role of human upbringing has much changed and therefore the institutions which play role in it have different power actually. The society is getting lesser role in human upbringing. Its role is reduced by non recognition as an institution like school, university or kindergarten. Therefore its share is partly taken by primary and secondary schools which make an important role in human development in European context. Parents leave all the responsibility to school which should play today the double role. If the task of the modern school is centred on knowledge transmission, the educating aspects are becoming more and more important. The schools are facing this problem in many European countries and this is clearly seen especially in immigrant families who are coming from the different context where society is still have a word to say in human upbringing.

For example, the French education system is very known by being republican, egalitarian. The state controls majority of primary, secondary schools and higher education institutions. The “égalité” is written in French constitution which is guaranteed in France by the equal conditions of education. But French sociologist Bourdieu has already shown that “egalitarian machine” was not working well throughout the years. The sector of education is the main factor of social stratification in the country. Recent studies show that primary and especially secondary education results very much from one part of the city to another. The so called “creation of ghetto schools” within the “ghetto districts” resulted in a very low degree of the pupil studying there. The school is reflecting social problems which are based on class, ethnic and religious tensions.

Actually, many critics come towards the school and education institutions in general as they are giving no chance to change the social status. Besides, the school is becoming the area of the conflict based on religious or ethic means. These conflicts show the different perceptions of the role of the school by diverse groups and the incapacity of the “republican school” to satisfy the needs of the new generation.

In actual French education system, there is an increasing need for education oriented schools. Parents leaving their children to the sake of society do not easily perceive its absence. Children have “individually” organized study programmes which are based under the stronger parental academic control. When it comes to immigrants or parents with low degree studies who can’t transmit necessary knowledge and control, it becomes clear that children are going towards fiasco. Therefore, parents are surprised to see their kids having not being necessarily educated, nor academically fit in spite of studying for several years at school.

It is no more surprising when we find some Muslim parents sending their children to Catholic schools in the search of the better education and qualification. The purpose is to avoid the risks and giving their children good moral education. However, Catholic schools are also known well for their academic success that means parents prefer them not for being religious but effective. One can go to Christian University of Paris to search for Christianity, but he/she find that the majority of the students are there not for Christianity, but the quality of higher education. Parents trust these schools, whereas the trust to “republican school” is diminishing especially in certain districts.

Today’s France is a multicultural, multi ethnic and multi religious society. Although major political drive tries to keep ancient identity vision, they are aware of the need of reforms in very transforming society. The best reforms go through the education, as it is better and easier to educate the younger than the older one. France and Russia resemble much in their vision of society, central governance and actually more and more multi ethnic society. The experience of Gülen schools in Russia may be tempting for French educators in search of rapid reforms in nowadays.

[1] Thomas Michel, S.J. «Islamic Modernities: Fethullah Gülen and Contemporary Islam», p.1

[2] Agai, B «Discursive and Organizational Strategies of Gülen Movement» p.3

[3] Thomas Michel, S.J. «Islamic Modernities: Fethullah Gülen and Contemporary Islam», p.6

[4] In fact, the word «madrasa» which is the same as «medersa», «madrasah», «medrese» literally means “a place where learning/teaching is done”. However, by the time this word lost its original meaning and stands for ancient schools which existed before establishing republican regime in Turkey. Therefore, people refer directly to Qur’anic school once they use the word «madrasa».

[5] Hermansen.M, «Understanding of Community within the Gülen Movement», p.9

[6] Zaman, 28-02-2007

[7] Zaman, 22-09-2006

[8] Cennet Engin Demir, Ayse Balci, Fusun Akkok «The rôle of Turkish schools in the educational system and social transformations of Central Asian countries: the case of Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan», Central Asian Survey (2000), 19 (1), p.151

[9] Hurriyet 19.01.1998

[10] Zaman (08/01/2007)

[11] Fethullah Gülen «The Necessity of Interfaith dialogue : A Muslim Approach», p.30

[12] Nelson, C «Fethullah Gülen, A Vision of Transcendent Education», p. 4

[13] Ali Unal «Fethullah Gülen : Bir Portre Denemesi», p. 272

[14] ibid

[15] Values and Post-Soviet Youth. The Problems of Transition, p. 166

[16] Sabah, 22.01.1998

source: http://en.fgulen.com/conference-papers/peaceful-coexistence/2521-peaceful-muslimnon-muslim-co-existence-in-a-secular-context

Continue reading »]]> by Ibrahim Kalin

About a year after the Sept. 11 attacks in the US, the British Home Office published a study on the “fundamental tenets of British citizenship.” The report defined them as “[to] respect human rights and freedoms, uphold democratic values, observe laws faithfully and fulfill our duties and obligations.”

Another report, this time focusing on the “common elements of nationhood,” proposed the following principles: “[A] more visible support for anti-discrimination measures, support for women’s rights, a universal acceptance of the English language … and respect for both religious differences and secular views.” A similar attempt was made in Germany, where “German-ness” was defined along the same lines of liberal democratic values. When looking at this list of civic values, one sees national language as the main difference between being British and German.
This may seem too naïve a definition of national identity in 21st century Europe. What separates a German from a Frenchman or a Turk is more than just language. There is shared history, memory, joy and suffering, blood relations, common ancestry, the home country and so on. But where does this list take us? If we press it too hard in the direction of history and/or ethnicity, we end up with some version of ethnic nationalism, a nationalism that will be exclusive and discriminatory.

How about religion? Religion too plays a significant role in identity formation. We cannot discard Christianity as a fundamental tenet of Western civilization. Even though many secular Europeans would not identify themselves with any particular religious faith or denomination, the historical identity of Europe is shaped by the Greco-Roman tradition, on the one hand, and Christianity on the other. One may also raise the question of Judaism. Is it part of Western identity? For centuries, Jews were not accepted as part of Europe. They have always been present in the history of Europe, but they have hardly been welcomed into the religious and ethnic family of Europe.

But what happens when we push the religious basis of identity too far in a secular age where one’s national identity is defined not by religion or ethnicity but by upholding the basic principles of human rights, equal citizenship and constitutional democracy? Most modern democracies define their code of national citizenship outside and beyond any particular religious and/or ethnic community. Universal human rights and civil liberties do not define individuals and communities on the basis of their religious and ethnic identity.

How do these principles apply to religious minorities and Muslim communities in Europe? A major conference in the German city of Wuppertal near Dusseldorf last weekend was convened to seek answers to this question. The conference was organized by the Islamic Community Milli Görüş (ICMG), a pan-European Turkish-Islamic organization based in Germany. The history of this particular community goes back to the 1970s, when immigrant Turkish communities began to organize themselves as civil society organizations and create intra-Turkish networks in Germany and other European countries with sizeable Turkish communities. Like a dozen other Turkish communities in Europe, the ICMG’s history is also the history of Turks from guest workers to established and organized communities.

After 30-some years of struggle to survive as a community, Turkish Muslims in Germany have changed the old meanings of integration. Most Turks in Germany share the German public space like any other minority group. But the third and now fourth generation of Turks do not see themselves as foreigners, immigrants and certainly not “guest workers.” They are as German as any immigrant generation can be. They speak German better than Turkish. They know German history and culture better than that of their parents. Furthermore, they now live out European values just like any other European. The problem is that even this level of integration is not enough for some cultural purists in Europe.

Some complain that Turks have not integrated, but the reverse is true: As far as language and cultural competence are concerned, the third and fourth generation Turks are increasingly losing their native language and becoming more confident in German language and culture. The reason why their parents support Turkish religious and cultural centers is because they want to ensure that their children grow up as bilingual and multicultural citizens of Europe. Groups like the ICMG reflect this reality.

Is this not what multiculturalism promises?

source: http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/columnists-209435-muslim-identities-and-europe.html

Continue reading »]]> Underlining the Obama administration’s respect for Islam’s diversity, Farah Pandith, the US State Department’s special representative to Muslim communities, refuses to use the expression “Muslim world,” stating that the United States is not endorsing a particular type of Islam in its efforts in building long-term dialogue and partnership with Muslim communities around the world.

The position occupied by Pandith, a Kashmiri-born Muslim, was created following US President Barack Obama’s Muslim outreach speech delivered in Cairo around one year ago and she is the first person to serve in this role. Her office is responsible for executing US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s vision for engagement with Muslims around the world on a people-to-people and organizational level and she reports directly to the secretary of state.

“I don’t use the word ‘Muslim world.’ The president changed the lexicon when he spoke in Cairo and he talked about Muslim communities around the world and I think that is very important.

This president has changed the tone and the way in which he is talking with Muslims. He is not talking to them, he is talking with them. He is respecting the diversity of Islam and so we don’t look at Muslims as a monolithic; we understand the texture and we’re trying our best to work on developing more mechanisms to actually reach young and future generations,” Pandith said in an exclusive interview with Today’s Zaman.

“We are trying to get into the space of working on initiatives that make sense, not one-size-fits-all,” she said.

Diversity, dialogue and partnership, mutual respect and mutual interest, fostering understanding and diligence were the words which were used several times by Pandith during the interview, reflecting her full embrace of this new lexicon without any slip of the tongue.

Pandith was in Ankara and İstanbul earlier this week as part of a long regional tour after visiting Iraq, Egypt and Morocco. Since she took office, she has visited 23 countries, including India, Indonesia, Mali and Norway. Her contacts in countries she visited are part of the State Department’s efforts to engage extensively with civil society, including influential people, whether they are religious leaders, scholars, academics, teachers or businesspeople.

“I’m very interested in the young generation. It is very important that we think about those people under the age of 30. When you think about the fact that a country like Turkey has more than 60 percent of its population under the age of 30 and you also think about the fact that many communities that are Muslim around the world have very high percentages of those people, how do we develop long-term partnerships? We have to develop them over the long-term, which means as they get older. We do not want to only get to know someone at the end of their career. We want to begin to know them as they are beginning as young leaders, as they think about how to be active in their societies and find ways for broad dialogue and partnership,” Pandith said.

“Some things are happening to these people of the young generation. And we are really focusing on understanding what that is. I mean, this is the Facebook generation; it is the generation that doesn’t need to meet each other in person, but they are meeting each other online and they are having conversations. They are also asking really important questions that our generations did not ask about issues such as identity; such as, ‘How do you be modern and Muslim?’ and ‘What is the difference between culture and religion?’” she explained.

“I think that it is really very important that we are able to hear what these questions are to understand what is going on and I also know, certainly even my conversations here in Turkey, these are people who want to be heard. Who is listening to the young people as they define their future and as they think about the tools that they need to do more. Or how important it was that they had a chance to be young entrepreneurs and how wonderful it is that your country will be hosting the entrepreneurship summit? I’m actually really interested in social entrepreneurship,” Pandith elaborated, while referring to the 2011 Summit on Entrepreneurship to be hosted by Turkey.

While here, Pandith saw a presentation by the US Embassy’s two Youth Innovation and Entrepreneurship Program (YIEP) winning teams. The purpose of the embassy-funded YIEP is to promote entrepreneurship, technology and innovation among high school students across Turkey and to connect Turkish student participants with their American counterparts.

Along with US Ambassador to Turkey James Jeffrey, she also met with Ali Bardakoğlu, the head of the Directorate of Religious Affairs, and the main theme of the conversation she and Jeffrey had with Bardakoğlu was the importance of young people and the importance of really understanding what is happening with today’s young generation.

interview with Farah Pandith

By EMINE KART
source: http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-214163-us-exploring-diversity-of-islam-by-reaching-out-to-youth.html

Continue reading »]]> by Fadel Abdallah

Introduction

Racial justice presupposes the existence of racial injustices, and that’s why in the original longer version of this presentation I began with few examples by way of documenting the existence of bigotry and racial injustices in the land where I come from and where I’ve been living for the last 28 years. In my adopted homeland of America, the country of immigrants and the most celebrated democracy in the world, and despite many years of progressive human legislation, racism, unfortunately, still exists and is practiced in subtle and less subtle ways. The point being is that racism is not merely a historical academic topic, but a real social problem, more noticed and pronounced in multi-racial, multi cultural and multi-religious societies. The First Racist God in the Qur’an tells us the story of the first racist soul, namely one of his creatures Satan. The group of creatures to which Satan belonged were created from fire, preceded the creation of Adam as the first man and were called ‘Jinn.’ The Jinn were given free will, and they, along with the Angels, who were devoid of free will, were inhabiting the heavenly layers of God’s creation. Islamic theology tells us that the Angels were involved in glorifying God and that the Jinn were mostly doing the same, except for one difference, which in the case of the Jinn was that their glorification of God was dictated by the choice of free will. Then the Almighty God, in His Master Plan, decided to create Adam from the clay (mud) of the Earth, with the vocation of becoming God’s Vicegerent (Khalifah) on Earth. Adam and his progeny were given even greater free will than the Jinn. But when informed about God’s Decision to create human beings and place them as Vicegerents on Earth, the Angels questioned the wisdom of that purpose having prior knowledge that man has the capacity of spreading corruption on Earth and shedding blood. God told them that He knew what they didn’t know. (Qur’an: Al-Baqarah 2:30) When God, further, asked the Angels and the Jinn, as the dwellers of the heavenly spheres, to prostrate themselves before Adam in respect for him, one rebel Jinn, to be known henceforth as the Cursed Satan, revolted with arrogance saying that he was better than Adam, for God Himself created him from fire, whereas Adam was created from dust. God condemned Satan, while at the same time, sparing his soul when He could have crushed him with just the word of ‘not to be.’ God, by letting His first rebellious enemy live, has proven that he was the ultimate democrat. Satan pleaded with God to be given respite to misguide his servants. God granted him his wished for vocation to be the advocate of evil, but telling him that he will have no power over his sincere servants. His followers would be from among the weak in faith. Thus Satan was allowed to survive as the first arrogant racist of God’s creatures. All arrogant racists of the world to come would be his followers and they are the ones who will continue to undo God’s glorious work. Satan is mentioned 11 times in the Qur’an by his first name Iblis. And he is mentioned under the name “Ash-Shaitan” 68 times. In Islam he is not a mere symbol of the advocate of evil, but a real creature, with a kingdom, banner, mission statement and a big army, whose mission is to mislead people of weak faith. His mission was a necessary creation to serve as a testing and trial for true faith, so that the faithful would stand out from the unfaithful, and have their own salvation as well-deservedly earned. The bad news about Satan in relation to man is that he has been given respite to do his work till the last day. Additionally, he is invisible and works in total secret in a language of whispers. Worse yet, he likes big company, so he is always active in recruiting functionaries who would do his dirty work. It is in light of these theological facts about Satan and his mission that we should not be unrealistically optimistic about total elimination of evil and racism from the worlds of humans. However, it is precisely because of Satan’s ever presence and his continued work against God’s Will and Vision that the work of the faithful among His Servants is sanctified as the ultimate vocation of the partisans of God.

* * *

The Good News from the Qur’an: Having been given the bad news about Satan and his work, the Almighty and Merciful God did not leave humanity without clear guidance to guard against the evil work of Satan and consequently earn well-deserved salvation. “Praise be to God, the Lord of the Worlds (Universe),” declares God in the first Verse of the first Chapter in the Qur’an. This theme where God introduces Himself to us as the Lord of Humankind, and not the Lord of a certain ethnic or denominational group, will be repeated in numerous Verses of the Qur’an. Muhammad’s mission, as the Last Prophet and Messenger was intended to be for all humanity, not just for the “lost sheep of the Arabs” to paraphrase a Biblical statement about the mission of Jesus Christ. In regard to this the Qur’an declares: “Indeed, We sent you (Muhammad) as a mercy for the whole universe.” (Al-Anbiya’ 21:107) Abu Hurairah reported that, once the Prophet (peace be upon him) was asked to call upon God against the unbelievers. He said: “I was not sent as a cursor, rather, I was sent as a mercy.” This runs in clear contrast to the curse of the Biblical Noah, which was supposedly answered by the Lord, thus establishing Christian theological justification for the enslavement and inferiority of the black race. In another Hadith, the Prophet of Islam said: “I was sent to the red (the white) and the black.” In the Sight of the One God of Justice, humanity is one. He speaks in the Qur’an: “O humankind! We have created you from a single male and a female, and have made you unto nations and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the noblest of you, in the Sight of God, is the best in conduct. Indeed, God is All-Knower, All-Aware.” (Al-Hujurat 49:13) So here in this Verse, while God establishes His Act of creating all mankind from one single ancestry, He also draws our attention to the Wisdom of making them into distinct nations and tribes, not as basis for racial notions of superiority versus inferiority, but as the basis for recognizing His Power of Creation and celebrating that through acts of mutual attempts by different nations or tribes to get to know each others. So this Verse, while legitimizing ethnicity as a God-created will, it implicitly condemns ethnocentrism as un-Godly. So the only basis for distinction accepted by God is through righteousness and piety; a vocation open for all races, colors and linguistic groups. In another more direct Verse, God, speaking in the Qur’an, presents the difference in human colors and languages among peoples as a grace and pointers to His Power of Creation. Thus we read in the Qur’an: “And among His Signs is the creation of the Heavens and the Earth, and the difference of your languages and colors. Indeed, in that are Signs for men of knowledge.” (Ar-Rūm- 30:22) Again, this is the most enlightened progressive look at the issue of differences in colors and languages that only people of true faith and understanding can appreciate and recognize as a Sign of God’s Greatness. So racist people are, in fact, devoid of the light of knowledge and understanding; they are dangerously ignorant in need of the enlightenment of good education. Again, here one is prompted to compare the Qur’anic concept of the grace of God in creating the different wonderful languages with the concept of the Tower of Babel, where this aspect is related to a curse rather than to God’s Grace. Again to drive the issue more forcibly, God reminds us to contemplate the same phenomenon of color variation in the animal kingdom. So who can say that a white or black camel or horse can be the established criterion for a superior animal? The Qur’an says:

“Likewise, of people, and animals, and camels, are of various colors. It is only those who have knowledge among His Servants that are God-conscious. Indeed, God is All-Mighty, Forgiving.” (Fatir 35:28)

To dispel the misconception of those who might think that God’s Creation of different nations with distinct cultures and ethnicities might be a justification for strife and conflict, he tells us the following:

“And if your Lord had so willed, He verily would have made humankind one nation, yet they would cease not to differ.” (Hud 11:118)

Through these representative Qur’anic quotations, we learn that the Almighty God has vehemently ruled out race, color, sex, and language as a base for grace and favor in this world or salvation or punishment on the Day of Judgment. For instance, He condemned Abu Lahab, the paternal uncle of the Prophet (peace be upon him) because he was a staunch enemy of God, His Messenger (peace be upon him) and Islam. He says:

““Perish the two hands of Abu Lahab and perish he. His wealth and gains will not help him (on the Day of Judgment).” (Al-Lahab 111:1-2)

The message here is that Abu Lahab’s blood relationship to the Prophet did not save him because he was a disbelieving, wicked, impious man who fought the Prophet (peace be upon him) relentlessly. The concept of personal responsibility before the Creator are duly emphasized in the Qur’an entailing the ruling out of the value of blood ties, tribal ties or race ties in human salvation. Hence we read in the Qur’an:

“Your ties of kindred and your children will avail you naught on the Day of Resurrection. He will judge between you.” (Al-Mumtahinah 60:3)

And in another passage we read:

“O humankind! Keep your duty to your Lord and worry about a Day when the parent will not be able to avail the child in aught, nor the child to avail the parent.” (Luqman 31:33)

* * *

The Teaching of Prophet Muhammad and His Example on the Issue of Racial Justice: In anything and everything related to the teachings of Islam, the sayings of Prophet Muhammad, his conduct and life examples are considered as important legislative aspects which are supposed to supplement, complement and further explain and emphasize the teachings of the Qur’an. In light of this a representative sampling of what is collectively known as his Sunnah is relevant to the issue of racial justice in Islam. The Prophet (peace be upon him) implemented God’s teachings to us about our fate in the Hereafter by warning his daughter, his aunt, and his uncle that they should be pious, God-fearing people; else he will not be able to intercede with God on their behalf, on the Day of Judgment. He said: “O Fatimah, daughter of Muhammad! I will not be able to do anything for you with God. O Safiyyah, the Messenger of God’s aunt! I will not be able to do anything for you with God. O ‘Abbas, the son of ‘Abd al-Muttalib! I will not be able to do anything for you with God. O you all family of ‘Abd al-Muttalib! I will not be able to do anything for you with God.” (Ibn Hazm, Al-Mufadalah Baina As-Sahabah, p. 277)[1] On another occasion, the Prophet (peace be upon him) explicitly addressed his followers in the following words:

“Indeed your Lord is One, and your father is one, so there is no superiority for an Arab over a non-Arab, or for a non-Arab over an Arab, nor for a white over a black, or for a black over white except by piety.”[2]

(2: At-Tabarani, Al-Mu‘jam Al-Awsat, vol. 5, p. 86, Hadith 4749)

In another Hadith, the Prophet said: “There are people who boast of their dead ancestors, but in the Sight of God they are more contemptible than the beetle that rolls a piece of dung with its nose. Behold, God has removed from you the arrogance of the previous days of ignorance, with its boast of ancestral glories. People are now only pious or unfortunate sinners. All people are the Children of Adam.” Yet in another Hadith, we read: “He who calls for nationalism, tribalism, racism or who fight for nationalism, tribalism, racism, or who dies for nationalism, tribalism, or racism he is not one of us.” (Sahih Muslim) In addition, the Prophet (peace be upon him) was inspired by God to tell his followers that peoples’ colors, or ethnicities are not their own earned choices or privileges, but they are rather acts determined by the process of God’s Plan of creation. He said:

“God, the Exalted, created Adam from a handful of dust, which He picked from the whole earth; therefore, the children of Adam were born according to the nature of the earth; amongst them came the red, the white, the black, the dark, the yellow and something in between, and the easy going, the hard, the good and the evil.”[3]

(3: Abu Bakr al-Haithami, Majma‘ Az-Zawa’id, vol. 8, p. 84.)

Yet in another of instructive saying with bearing on this issue, the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) informs us that God does not look at our shapes, forms, or our origin or our wealth; He rather looks at our hearts and deeds.

(At-Tabari, Tarikh, vol. 1, p.91; at-Tirmidhi; Abu Dawud; Ahmad Ibn Hanbal; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, vol. 2, pp. 261-262.)

* * *

Testimony of History Regarding Islam’s Racial Justice: Since it’s always easier in the worlds of recalcitrant human beings to preach than to put what one preaches to practice through actions and deeds, it becomes important to give some illustrative examples of how the lofty ideals of Islam were put to practice by the early Muslims. In the early history of the Islamic movement, when Muslims counted in the hundreds only, and they were weak and persecuted by their fellow pagan Arabs, the Prophet thought about a way of relief for Muslims. He suggested that they emigrate to the Abyssinian land of a Christian king, named the Negus. That Ethiopian Christian king had a reputation for justice and kindness, known in the neighboring Arabia Peninsula. Despite the fact that Ethiopia was an African country of blacks and that they were Christians in religion, it was the Prophet’s first choice for the first emigration in Islam intended to provide sanctuary for the persecuted. Despite the Quraish enemies’ attempts to persuade the king to return the Muslims to be punished, after a moving and dramatic interview with the king, the Muslims were given sanctuary to live in peace and practice their religion. For further details of this historical episode in English, I suggest that you read The Life of Muhammad Based on Original Sources by Martin Lings. (Chapter , pp. ) Islamic literature records for us an episode of Abu Dharr Al-Gifari and Bilal Ibn Rabah, two Companions of the Prophet getting into disagreeable argument. Abu Dharr lost his temper and said to Bilal, “O you son of the black woman.” Bilal informed the Prophet about what happened. The Prophet was reported to have become angry and disturbed as he was not seen before. He went to see Abu Dharr and told him, “You’re a man in whom the pre-Islamic spirit is still resides.” Upon which Abu Dharr realized his great error, and in attempt to expiate for his sin went and got married to a black woman. Both in the Qur’an and the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammad Muslims were encouraged to marry believing slaves and emancipate them in preference to polytheists. (Qur’an: 2:221) The Prophet was the first to put into practice the progressive concept of inter-cultural, inter-racial marriages when he married Maria, the Christian Copt slave sent to him as a gift by the Patriarch of Egypt. She was freed and accepted Islam, and became the mother of his son Ibrahim who died in infancy. Following the Prophet’s example Hassan Ibn Thabit, kown as the Poet of Islam, married Maria’s sister Sirin, who gave birth to his son Abd ar-Rahman who became a poet no less famous than his father. Salman the Persian and Bilal the Abyssinian, these two great Companions of the Prophet, (peace be upon him) of non-Arab origin married Arab women. Likewise, Zaid Ibn Harithah, the adopted son of the Prophet (peace be upon him), of Arab origin, married the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) maid, ’Umm Aiman, Barakah, the Abyssinian, and she gave birth to ’Usamah Ibn Zaid, one of the great military commanders of Islam. The Prophet (peace be upon him) loved this ’Usamah as a grandson very much to the extent that the Companions of the Prophet nicknamed him, “The beloved, the son of the beloved one.” Even later on, we find that many ’Umayyad and most of the Abbasid caliphs were sons of non-Arab women. In other words, the caliphs of Islam married non-Arab women and their sons became the caliphs of Islam. Some Muslim scholars (Assad Busool for example) relish the fact that “one can go as far as the first Muslim Prophet Ibrahim (on him peace), who married a woman from different culture and race than his, i.e., Hagar the Egyptian maid, the mother of his son, Isma‘il, the father of the Arabs, who in turn married a woman from a different culture than his, she belonged to the tribe of Jurhum, who dwelled at Makkah after his arrival there, from this inter-cultural marriage, Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was born later on.” (Busool, page ………) In addition, Prophet Moses (on him peace) married the daughter of Prophet Shu‘aib (on him peace) who was from a different cultural and ethnic background. Therefore, Prophets from Ibrahim (on him peace) to Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) practiced inter-cultural marriage within the faith of islam. Concluding his section on the “Muslim Inter-Racial Marriage”, Assad Busool enthusiastically observes: “This non-prejudiced, multi-cultural and multi-racial society, which Islam created under the banner of ‘There is no god but Allah, and Muhammad is His Messenger’, produced the highest form of civilization which humankind ever knew in all its long history until our own time, the multi-cultural Islamic civilization was the torch which lighted the dark ages of Europe and brought about the rise of the European renaissance.” (Busool, pp. ) However, it is Fadel Abdallah who invites this dignified assembly to compare these lofty ideals of Islam with the Anti-Miscegenation Laws prevalent in Nazi Germany, the Apartheid System of South Africa, and many states of the United States, particularly in the South. And some of these laws were on the books as late as 1979 in Virginia. And though marrying out of the faith is considered the greatest sin in Judaism, in Islam marrying believing women from among the People of the Book is considered a privilege. The Issue of Slavery as Another Case-Study: The issue of slavery, in general, and black slavery, in particular, is one of saddest chapters of human history. It was a deep-rooted practice in human history and all ancient nations and civilizations practiced it as a legitimate and acceptable fact of human relations. There were the slaves of birth, of war, of debt, or sale of children by their families into slavery. Islam inherited this deeply rooted institution, so what it did about it? Though there was no direct Qur’anic Verse or Prophetic Hadith condemning slavery as an outright wrong to be prohibited for Muslims, Islam, nevertheless, brought dispensations which improved the slaves’ situation relative to that of pre-Islamic societies. These dispensations were tantamount to an implicit judgment that slavery was opposed to Islamic principles of justice and equality and that it was against the Godly norms. Islam looked at slavery as an aberration and exceptional condition resulting from unfortunate economic, social and war conditions. Then Islam put in place a strategy, the implementation of which will naturally result in abolishing it. First of all, Islamic law did not recognize all the classes of slaves from pre-Islamic Arabia, such as those sold or given into slavery by themselves or others, or those indebted into slavery. Capture in war, or birth into slavery were the two instances in which lawful enslavement was tolerated. Then the Qur’an established that from a spiritual perspective, the slaves have the same value as free men and the same eternity of salvation is in store for their souls once they believe. Hence, they are not to be considered as mere chattel since their humanity is directly addressed in terms of their susceptibility for believe and salvation. Therefore, Islamic teaching exhorted Muslims to treat their slaves kindly and consider them like other members of the household. On this, Brockopp wrote, “Other cultures limits a master’s right to harm a slave, but few exhort masters to treat their slaves kindly and the placement of slaves in the same category as other weak members of the society who deserve protection is unknown outside the Qur’an.” (……….) Slaves are mentioned in at least 29 Verses of the Qur’an, most of these Medinan Verses. They are broad and general propositions of an ethical nature, rather than specific legal formulation. Then the Qur’an proceeds with specific instructions related to slavery. The Qur’an, supplemented by the Prophetic Ahadith, established the manumission of current slaves to be meritorious deeds. It can be done as an act of charity (Sadaqah) and it can be practiced as expiations (Kaffarah) for sins. According to Brockopp, the idea of using alms for the manumission of slaves appears to be unique to the Qur’an. Similarly, the practice of freeing slaves in atonement for certain sins appear to be introduced by the Qur’an.” Moreover, the Qur’an urges believers to marry believing mates that your right hand possess.” (Qur’an: 4.25) Then the Qur’an exhorted masters to allow slaves to earn or purchase their own freedom through a manumission contract, called ‘Mukatabah.’ (Qur’an: 24:43) Then the contracting slaves were further helped by proceeds from the Zakah. (Qur’an: 2:177; 9:60) The slave liberated through Mukatabah becomes a ‘Mawla’ –supporter-friend- of the former master. Bernard Lewis, who lately proved to be no friend of Islam or Muslims, wrote in a moment of sobriety: “The Qur’anic legislation brought two major changes to ancient slavery, which were to have far reaching effects: presumption of freedom and the ban on the enslavement of free persons.”* (Lewis 1990, page 6) Lewis further writes: “The humanitarian tendency of the Qur’an and the early caliphs in the Islamic empire, was to some extend counteracted by other influences, notably the practices of various conquered people and countries Muslims encountered, especially in provinces previously under Roman Law (even the Christianized form of slavery was still harsh in its treatment of slaves.) In spite of this, Lewis also states, “Islamic practice represented a vast improvement on that inherited from antiquity, from Rome and from Byzantium.”* (Lewis, 1994, Chapter 1) The Prophet of Islam encouraged manumission of slaves and set an example to be followed by early Muslims. And manumission of slaves meant that they were to be purchased first, then set free. And here lies the wisdom of the Islamic strategy in dealing with the gradual abolishment of slavery. Had the Muslims early on been told to stay away from dealing with slaves, then the thousands of liberated slaves by Muslims after being purchased would have lingered in slavery perpetually. And this is the answer to the question of why didn’t the Qur’an clearly legislate for Muslims a total ban on dealing with slavery. It is because of this open window on slavery that the Prophet personally managed to purchase 63 slaves and liberate them. Likewise, his wife ‘A’ishah is reported to have freed 67 slaves. It is reported that the Prophet’s household and friends combined managed to free some 39,237 slaves; possibly the total number of slaves in Arabia at the time.* (Human Rights in Islam, by Nadvi, The Islamic Foundation, Leicester, 2000, page 453) Among the major works dealing with the issue of race, color and slavery in English are those of Bernard Lewis, “Race and Color in Islam” and that of David M. Goldenburg, “The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity and Islam,” (Princeton University Press, 2003) Reviewing this latest book on the subject Dean A. Miller, writing in the Journal of Social History (Spring 2005), states the following: “Goldenburg’s aim is specifically to trace the evolution of the idea, or perception, that the curse on Ham was not simply servitude, but, somehow the blackness of Ham, so that slavery and a particular chromatism (sic) went together down the ages-extending directly to mid-19th century America, when pro-slavery advocates, armed with Scriptures, could and did point to Genesis 9:18-25 as the Divine patent for black slavery. The curse of Ham was made to act, or created to act, as the prime rationale for black inferiority, rejection from civilization, and so as an understandable, even obligatory subjection to slave status.” * (Dean Miller, page 1)

* * *

Our Collective Responsibility: Racism, along with its sisters called bigotry, ethnocentrism, prejudice, crude nationalism-tribalism and religious fanaticism, are the antithesis of human rights and human dignity, whereby certain disadvantaged ethnic or religious minority groups are made to bear the brunt of its disastrous consequences. Racial prejudice runs deep and has shown itself thus far, in human history, to be nearly impossible to totally eradicate through progressive man-made legislation. Therefore, it is necessary that people of faith need to bear a leading collective responsibility to educate others on the Godliness and morality of being anti-racism versus the un-Godliness and immorality of being racist or bigot. It’s my conviction, I dare to say, that the real test of the validity of any religion, democracy or way of life, is how good the minority within these systems are treated. And by the minority I mean those who do not adhere to the culture, beliefs and value system of the dominant group. The case has been made that in the theology of Islam, God Himself, did not intend to make all humanity of one race, one color or one religion. He meant diversity for humanity, though in the Last Day we will be judged only on the basis of righteousness. In connection to this, one might ask the question, “Can individual Muslims be bigots or racists? The answer to this is “yes, you bet!” So do individual Christians, Jews, and others. Racism is a disease of the heart and as long as it remains an individual matter it can be treated and / or tolerated. However, when it becomes a collective social disease it leads to greater evils. It has been said that “some marriages are made in heaven.” However, there are marriages that are made in Hell, with no less than Satan himself officiating over them. There are two types of marriages that we all collectively have the responsibility of preventing them from taking place; one of them is the marriage of religious fanaticism to politics, and the other is the marriage of racism to politics. When these two types of marriages occurred in human history, they produced great calamities and savage human rights violations. When, for example, religious fanaticism got married to politics it produced the Pharaohs of ancient Egypt and their atrocities against the Israelites, the Spanish Inquisition and their atrocities against Jews and Muslims, and the medieval Crusades and their atrocities against both Muslims and Eastern Christians, and more recently the North Ireland-British conflict. And when, for example, racism or crude chauvinistic nationalism got married to politics, it produced Nazism, Fascism, Communism, Colonialism and Zionism and the apartheid system in South Africa with all the atrocities committed in the name of these ideologies. Part of our collective responsibility is for all of us to embrace a “humanitarian agenda” that transcends our particular formal religions and ethnic or racial identities; an agenda that focuses on the beauty of the human forest, rather than the charm of the individual trees which make up that forest. The Qur’an also contains the theological basis for that when it says: “Say: O People of the Scripture! Come to an agreement between us and you: That we worship none but the One God, and that we associate no partners with Him, and that none of us take others for Lords beside God. And if they turn away, then say: Bear witness that we are Muslims.” (Al ‘Imran 3: 64) Yet in another passage of the Qur’an we read: “And argue not with the People of the Scripture, except in the best way, save with wrong-doers amongst them; and say: We believe in that which had been revealed unto us and revealed unto you; our God and your God is One, and it is to Him we surrender in Islam.” (Al-‘Ankabut 29:46) I am sure that all monotheistic faiths, as well as man made religions, must contain some theological basis to embrace all humanistic values. I am aware, for instance, of Christ’s command to “love thy neighbor as thyself.” And I am also aware of the universalistic humanistic teachings of the Hebrew Prophet Amos. In connection to this, in addition to all the quotations from the Qur’an and Hadith cited above, we might want to add here the saying of Ali, “A man is either our brother in religion or our brother in humanity.” Another thought about our collective responsibility is that all people of good will and faith should consider themselves as warriors against anything that goes contrary to racial justice, human dignity and human rights; worriers without weapons of mass destruction or mass deception, only armed with wisdom, knowledge, big hearts and open minds, to combat racism, bigotry, prejudice as abominations. In this regard, let’s remember and embrace the lofty teaching of Prophet Muhammad in his saying: “Whoever sees an abomination, let him change it with his hand; if un-capable, let him change it with his tongue; and if un-capable, let him change it with his heart; and this last one is the weakest degree of faith.”

soruce: http://www.bridgesoffaith.org/?page_id=104

Continue reading »]]> by Dr. Ibrahim Abu-Rabi

When Professor Mahmoud Ayoub asked me to talk about Muslim identity, I said to myself, this would be an easy topic. However, the more I pondered this, the more I came to realize that discussing identity in Islamic theology and history is not an easy matter. I would like to discuss my topic from the perspective of the field of Islamic Studies, which is the field I have been trained in as a scholar. Let me just begin with these two quotations from two contemporary Muslim thinkers:

1) “There does not exist progressive Islam, or radical Islam or political Islam or sultan’s Islam, on the one hand, and reactionary or pacifist Islam on the other. There is one Islam only and one book, which God revealed to his prophet and which the prophet conveyed to the people.” Fahmi Huwaydi.

2) “Today, Islam is a wounded religion; the majority of the nations that belong to it are the poorest of the third world.” Muhammad Ghazali;

In today’s world, we have two distinct fields of Islamic Studies that are somewhat ambivalent about each other; the first is the form undertaken in the West and the second is that undertaken in the Muslim world. These two fields have distinct epistemological and historical formations and serve two different audiences. In the Muslim world, the field of Islamic Studies is known as Shari‘ah Studies, except in Turkey, where the use of the term Shari‘ah is legally banned in academic and media discourses. Research in this field is focused on the Islamic tradition of Qur’anic exegesis, Hadith tradition, Islamic jurisprudence, mysticism, and, in certain cases, classical Islamic philosophy, especially in Iran.

Books written by Islamic Studies scholars in the Muslim world are usually about Islamic tradition and appear in several Islamic languages, especially Arabic. These books usually lack the rigorous approach found in Western books on Islamic tradition, since many of their authors refuse to incorporate recent discoveries in the fields of social sciences and humanities.

In the past three decades, a new school of thought has emerged in the Muslim world and the West known as the “Islamization of knowledge” school. Its main proponents have been the late Ismai‘l R. al-Faruqi, Seyyed Hossein Nasr, Zaiduddin Sardar, and Seyyed Naquib Alatas. The IIIT has published a number of books in both Arabic and English on Islamic tradition and on the Islamization of sciences, such as the Islamization of history, sociology, economics, etc. However, this school of thought has failed so far to articulate a critical discourse in the field of Islamic Studies in the West.

In spite of the rigor evidenced by Islamic Studies scholars in the West, a plethora of books on Islam in the West have recently appeared that have gained prominence not because they have something profound or new to say about Islam, but because of the fame of their authors in certain circles. Examples of authors of this type are Bernard Lewis and Daniel Pipes. Similarly, many new publications exist solely because they address the subject of radical or political Islam, which is seen as a threat to the status quo and therefore feared in the West. A few of these post-9/11 titles include: B. Lewis, The Crisis of Islam: Holy War and Unholy Terror and What Went Wrong: The Clash Between Islam and Modernity in the Middle East; Gilles Kepel, The Roots of Radical Islam; and Bruce Bawer, While Europe Slept: How Radical Islam is Destroying the West from Within, though there are many other examples.

In the West, the field of Islamic Studies, sometimes called the field of Oriental Studies or Near Eastern Studies, has been driven by a number of factors: religious, missionary, Western economic and military interests in the Muslim world, etc. In his classic work Orientalism, Edward Said presents a comprehensive critique of the field. He points out that Orientalism as a field is complex indeed, and has been with us for the past 500 years.

Said defines Orientalism as a dimension of modern European intellectual and political culture that sees the world as divided into two unequal halves that are vastly different from one another. In other words, Orientalism is a style of thought based upon an ontological and epistemological distinction between the Orient and the Occident. Although I am aware of the significant contributions made by Orientalism to the fields of Arabic and Islamic Studies, I do not share its basic epistemological premises and ideological biases.

Although Orientalism has been mainly text-oriented, some Orientalists have taken their knowledge of philology and ventured beyond this domain to mix with the local people, especially the missionary type Orientalist. In his magnificent book, The Arabists, Robert Kaplan depicts the missionary Orientalist as one who is at first more concerned about converting him- or herself to the local culture than with converting people to his or her religion. So, initially, the missionary does not so much bother about converting people as much as tapping into the true stream of Christianity that is still somewhat preserved in modern Arab literature, culture and people.

No doubt Orientalism has been promoted to a higher status after the tragic attacks on the US. However, one of the most positive results of 9/11 has been the steadily increasing involvement of Western Muslim communities in their local milieus and educational institutions.

I believe the time is ripe to rethink the question of Islamic identity for the following reasons:

The first is because of the evolving internal debate in the Muslim world about the meaning of Islam and the best way to revive, reform, and reactivate Islamic religious tradition and institutions in the modern world. This debate has been ongoing since at least the early part of the 19th century. It is fascinating, nuanced and has taken place in several Islamic languages.

The second reason is because of the intense debate in the West about the meaning of Islam and the relationship between the West and the Muslim world. I do not claim that the debate in North America and Europe began after 9/11; however, 9/11 and the other tragic attacks in London and Madrid made that debate a cultural necessity. Islam has become the subject of popular culture in the West as never before.

The third reason is because of the insights we have gained from progress in the fields of the social sciences and humanities in the past century or so, and how we can utilize these insights in order to understand Islam, Islamic history and the Muslim world.

In examining the Islamic phenomenon in the 21st century, one can discern the following salient features:

First, at the level of the production of knowledge, we can point to a distinguished intellectual/theological/philosophical Islamic tradition based upon a number of primary sources such as the Qur’an, the Hadith and the Tadwin of Islamic religious sciences in the formative phase of Islam. It is impossible to understand Islamic intellectual history or Islamic intellectualism without referring to these sources. Study in these sciences has seen fruition over a long period of time. In addition, their epistemological formation owes a debt to all sorts of intellectual influences from other cultures and civilizations, such as Greek, Persian, African, Hindu, and Buddhist. In other words, we can talk about a plurality of Islamic sciences and intellectual perspectives guiding the traditional worldview of the Muslim world.

Second, the Muslim world is distinguished by a multiplicity of cultures, which define the multiplicity of identity in the classical and modern Muslim world. One can point to the following cultural zones in the contemporary Muslim world: 1) Arab; 2) African; 3) Persian; 4) Turkic; 4) South Asian or Indian; 5) Malayo/Javanese; 6) Chinese, and 7) Western. In other words, we cannot talk about a monolithic Muslim culture but rather a web of cultures that have greatly influenced Islamic identity. To take it a step further, multiple Muslim identities emerged in the classical as well as modern phases as a product of the cross-fertilization of various epistemologies, perspectives, cultures, and societies.

Third, since the 19th century, at least, the Muslim world has responded to aggressive Western modernity in a variety of ways: 1) Pan Islamism; 2) Nationalism; and 3) Westernization.

Pan-Islamism was formulated by the Muslim political and religious elite in a number of Muslim regions in the world in the 19th century, most notably in the Ottoman Empire, India, and Indonesia.

In the Ottoman case, the political elite introduced the Tanzimat reforms at the beginning of the 19th century for the purpose of modernizing the Empire and reviving the Ottoman military, political, educational, and religious institutions. The Tanzimat were reforms implemented in such regions of the Empire as Albania, Bosnia, Asia Minor, Syria, Iraq, Libya, Tunisia, and the Sudan.

In the Indian case, the Muslim intelligentsia of the defeated Mughal elite were trying to come to grips with the changing tide of new times by adopting a new system of education for the Muslims of India. This project was spearheaded by Ahmad Khan, founder of the Mohammedan-Anglo College. This school came to be called Aligarh Muslim University after 1910.

In Indonesia, the Red Sarekat Islam and later on Muhammadiyyah movements were created in order to rebuild the foundations of Muslim education for the Muslims of Indonesia under Dutch hegemony.

In the 20th century, for all sorts of political and social reasons, Pan-Islamism mutated to become a number of significant Islamic movements in the world: 1) The Muslim Brotherhood of Egypt and the Arab world; 2) The Jama‘at al-Islami of India and later Pakistan, 3) the Tablighi Jama‘at, founded by Mawlana Elias in 1938 in India, and 4) the Muhammadiyyah and Nahdatu al-Ulama movements in S.E. Asia. Some of these movements have chosen politics as the field in which to articulate their worldviews, whereas others have chosen an educational or non-political path to express their identities.

According to British sociologist Anthony Giddens in The Consequences of Modernity, nationalism is one of the main consequences of modernity in the modern period. A serious academic debate has taken place about the historical genesis of nationalism, its philosophical underpinnings, and its transfer to the Muslim world in the latter part of the 19th century.

Nationalism has been a major intellectual and political fact in the Muslim world in the past century or so. As Benedict Anderson argues in his classic Imagined Communities, nationalism has been able to invent a nation where it did not previously exist. The nation is imagined or invented as a limited and sovereign political and national community, an entity that is somewhat different from the traditional Islamic imagining of the ummah or the Christian imagining of Christendom. In other words, the boundaries of religious imagining, be it Islamic or Christian, are more elastic and unlimited than national imagining tends to be.

Before the age of nationalism in the Muslim world, one could speak of a trans-Islamic Arabic-writing Islamic clerisy, which was augmented by another class of trans-Islamic Persian-writing Islamic clerisy in the case of the Mughal Empire or Safavid Empire and a trans-Islamic Ottoman-writing Islamic clerisy in the case of the Ottoman Empire.

What happened to the status of the Islamic clerisy under nationalism? Usually, orthodoxy is the hallmark of clerisy. That is to say, the clerisy in any religious tradition fulfills the function of preserving and transmitting sacred knowledge. In Islamic history, the clerisy began to take shape after the first century of Islam and has been an important part of the Islamic tradition.

However, the religious intelligentsia are not the most dominant intelligentsia in modern Muslim societies, although this does not mean that they have lost all of their power. In certain cases, the nation-state has restored the power of the religious intelligentsia and given them new powers in exchange for political alliances. In the case of Iran, the clergy or the ulama are in control of state and society.

Since the 19th century, new types of intelligentsia have begun to emerge in Muslim societies under the impact of Western missionary training or Western-style Muslim educational institutions. It is in this context that we must understand the rise of the first generation of nationalist thinkers and leaders in the Muslim world. Let us briefly take the examples of Indonesia and Pakistan, which both achieved independence in 1940s.

In the case of Indonesia, it is helpful to consider the life of Ahmad Sukarno, first president of Indonesia, who is credited with creating the Pancasila philosophy. As a young man after WWI, Sukarno went to Holland to study engineering. However, during his student years, he was very much influenced by the European ideologies of the inter-war period, especially nationalism and fascism. The Pancasila summarized his nationalist outlook. He chose not to establish a Shari‘ah state, but a nationalist state that would respect all the religions of Indonesia.

As a young nationalist, he was exiled by the Dutch to the distant Bakja islands and over there began searching for meaning in the Islamic religious texts. However, he was not satisfied with the formulations of Islamic movements in Indonesia at the time. In 1934, he had this to say about Islam: “Present-day Islam is half-dead, has no life, spirit or fire because Muslims drown themselves in the books of Fiqh, instead of flying like the Garuda bird in the sky of living religion. I want to learn but have no guide. I go back to the books that I have. But even the books written by Muslim authorities have parts that do not satisfy me. In a more lively place, it would certainly easier to spread my wings.”

Compare the above to what the most eminent Muslim authority in the contemporary Muslim world, Shaykh Yusuf Qaradawi, has to say about the ulama in the 1980s: In his very interesting book, Islamic Awakening Between Rejection and Extremism, “Our own hypocrisy and self-contradictions as ulama have alienated the young, who have sought to understand Islam without assistance or guidance from us.”

Muhammad Ali Jinnah, founder of Pakistan, was a student at Aligarh Muslim University, established by Sir Ahmad Khan in the 19th century, before he went to Cambridge. Jinnah worked tirelessly to build a nationalist state for the Muslims of India. After independence and a few months before his death, he addressed some high school teachers in Lahore, saying: “Now that we have got our state, it is up to you to establish a viable, productive and sound system of education suited to our needs. It should reflect our history and sound system of education.”

What has become of the system of education in Pakistan? In 1975, Professor Ishtiaq Husain Qureshi, minister of education at the time, lamented the state of both secular and religious education in Pakistan. He said, “ Our secular educated elite are the most spineless and most mercenary in the world. What has gone wrong during this quarter of a century that has eaten into the vitals of our society and the grit of its leaders except the continuation of a faulty, aimless, and diseased system of education that has bred no social virtues, no depth of feeling, no sense of responsibility, nothing except selfishness, corruption and cowardly lack of initiative and courage.”

As for the religious education and madrassah system in Pakistan, he argues, “The leaders of traditional madrassas have neglected modern knowledge to an extent that there is no scope left for dialogue between those who have received a modern education and the graduates of the madrassas. The madrassas are doing some useful work in preserving the classical theological education. However, they are providing ill-paid, ill-educated and ill-informed imams of the mosques. It is quite obvious that such education cannot help the growth of religious consciousness.” Qureshi, Education in Pakistan, 1975.

Thus, we can say that the first generation of nationalist intellectuals were mostly bi-lingual people who had gone to either missionary or Western-type schools, such as the American University in Beirut, Aleppo College for Women, Gordon College in Khartoum, Roberts College in Istanbul, Lahore Government College, Calcutta University or Aligrah Muslim University in India.

Because of the rise of the liberal and nationalist intelligentsia at the beginning of the 20th century, the intellectual scene in the Muslim world has been dominated by religious, nationalist and liberal/Westernized intelligentsia. This is still the case in the contemporary Muslim world.

There have been a number of responses from the three strata of intelligentsia to the question of the West. The Muslim intellectual position has ranged from a total rejection of the West, as in the case of Wahabiyyah and Jama’at al-Islami, to some form of eclectic acceptance, as in the case of Pan-Islam. In the case of nationalism, the ideology of the West was accepted whereas its politics were rejected. In the case of the liberal intelligentsia, Westernization and Western thought were embraced, though sometimes uncritically, as in the case of the famous Egyptian man of letters Taha Hussein, especially in his major work, The Future of Culture in Egypt.

For our discussion of the modern and contemporary Muslim world to be thorough, we must take into account Islamism, also known as Islamic revivalism or Islamic fundamentalism.

As I have said before, Islamism is not the product of nationalism, but to a certain extent a product of modernity. In many ways, it preceded the emergence of nationalism in the Muslim world. One can distinguish three broad types of Islamism: pre-colonial; colonial, and postcolonial. Take the example of the Wahabiyyah movement in Arabia, which was established in the 18th century for the purpose of reforming Islamic tradition and practice.

In fact, we need a whole lecture just on the Islamic movement. What we can do here is point out quickly that the goal of the Islamic movement has been, by and large, to create an Islamic state. It has proposed through its leading intellectuals that “authentic or correct Islam” can only be practiced in an Islamic political system. This has been the major argument of such Islamic movements as the Jama‘at Islami of South Asia, the Muslim Brotherhood of the Arab world, the Khomeini movement of Iran, the Ma‘sumi of Indonesia, the Refah party of Turkey, and the Hizb al-Tahrir of Jordan and Central Asia.

However, it is clear that the only successful Islamic revolution thus far has been waged by Khomeini, and Iran, to my knowledge, is the only state in the contemporary Muslim world where the clerisy is in firm political control. This is not true in Pakistan, or even Saudi Arabia.

One can talk about mainstream and non-mainstream Islamic movements. The mainstream movements have chosen to be part of the political process in their countries, such as the Jama’at in Pakistan, the Islamic Action party in Jordan and Refah party in Turkey. The non-mainstream ones, emerging in the 1970s and 80s, are usually critical of the older and more established Islamist political movements and believe that the only way to implement Islamic Shari‘ah is through violent confrontation with the regime.

Thus, the following questions are raised:

1) How has the modern nation-state dealt with Islamic education at the academic level? And,

2) What has been the relationship between the nation-state in the Muslim world and Islamic orthodoxy as an institution, as well as a current of thought?

Despite the spread of nationalism in the Muslim world in the 19th and 20th centuries, Islamic orthodoxy has not diminished or faded away. As a matter of fact, in some Muslim regions, Islamic orthodoxy emerged in the 19th century, as in the case of Indonesia. Here, I am not using the term “Islamic orthodoxy” in a pejorative fashion. I believe that the institutions of the nation-state gave new power to the proponents of orthodoxy in exchange for allegiance to the political status quo.

Arabic is the theological lingua franca of Muslim orthodoxy. I remember I attended a conference in Malaysia about 8 years ago and was surprised to discover that the 400 people who attended the conference had all gone to Al-Azhar University and, as a result, spoke excellent Arabic. Also, in my visits to madrassas in Pakistan, Indian Kashmir, Kerala, and Myanamar, I was surprised to meet many of young students who were conversant in Arabic and the traditional Islamic sciences.

English is becoming the lingua franca of a great number of Muslims born and residing in the West. This is true also of the Muslim educated elite in such regions as South Asia, South Africa and East Africa.

Some scholars ascribe the interest in Arabic and traditional Islamic Studies in these non-Arab countries to the influence of Wahabiyya and oil money on Muslim communities in Africa, South Asia and South East Asia. While this is partially true, the interest in Arabic and Islamic Studies in these regions is due first to the fact that contemporary Muslims are aware that they need to connect to traditional Islamic Studies if they are to preserve and enhance their Islamic identity in the modern world, and, second, Islamic Studies is used as a reaction against the encroachment of chauvinistic nationalism, such as in the case of the Muslims of Myanamar.

Where do we go from here?

İt is clear so far that I am advocating the creation of a new discipline of Islamic Studies which is synthetic in approach, and sensitive to both critical theory and traditional Islamic sciences. This field should be interdisciplinary in nature and sensitive to the importance of traditional Islamic Studies and their relevance to the formation of contemporary Muslim identities in the several cultures mentioned above.

The Muslim world, as well as the Muslim communities in the West, face challenges at all levels, and it is important to understand the nature of these challenges and the relevance of traditional Islamic sciences to the present. Some of the ulama in the contemporary Muslim world have been able to voice these challenges in their own way. I believe that they need our help in articulating these challenges in a critical fashion. I also believe that we need their help in relating to the colossal Islamic tradition and Islamic sciences, since these sciences will help us connect to the spiritual and ethical dimensions of Islamic life and thought.

Against the above background, we must be able to conclude with the following:

It is essential for the discipline of Islamic Studies to include a comparative study of the notion of the beginnings, foundations or origins of Islam in history, and even in the history of other religious traditions, such as Judaism, Christianity, Hinduism and Buddhism;

1) It is important to be in conversation with the multiple expressions of Islamic intellectualism or the various traditions of knowledge in Islam, just as it is imperative to be in conversation with the traditions of knowledge in the West. For the Muslims of South Asia and South East Asia, it is crucial for them to be in conversation with the traditions of knowledge in both the Hindu and Buddhist worlds.

2) To my mind, one major tradition we need to incorporate is that of spirituality in Islam and the role played by many male and female spiritual leaders in this field.

We must also seriously consider the following questions: How have traditional

Islamic sciences been transmitted in the modern Muslim world, especially in the context of the rivalry between the three types of intelligentsia I mentioned above? How do we close the gap between traditional Islamic sciences and modern social sciences?

What is the nature of Islamic orthodoxy, the Muslim religious class interested in preserving tradition, in the modern period and what is its relationship to political authority? How can we study contemporary Islamic intellectual history and what are the issues making up this history?

I hope I have made it clear that I am not only interested in the term “Islam.” I am interested in understanding the classical and contemporary Muslim discourses on the relationship between Islam, Muslims, and Muslim history or histories. When the eminent Muslim Shaykh Muhammad Ghazali says: “Today, Islam is a wounded religion; the majority of the nations that belong to it are the poorest of the Third World,” she means that contemporary Muslims need to face difficult challenges in order to overcome their wounds and suffering. We must locate these challenges in the interaction, forced or voluntary, between the Muslim world and modernity. Also, when the contemporary Indonesian thinker Seyyed Hossein Alatas said that Islam is a progressive religion in its essence, he did not mean that there is a progressive Islam on the one hand and a reactionary, backward Islam on the other. What he meant is that Muslim teachings are progressive and dynamic in nature.

Bearing in mind the formation of Muslim identities in the contemporary world, Islamic Studies should focus on the notion of Islamic expansion in its geographical sense, as well in its theological/intellectual sense. Throughout Islamic history, Muslims have been open to assimilating all sorts of ideas from the Greek/Byzantine, Persian/Zoroastrian and Hindu civilizations. That is to say, Muslims in the past never dismissed the scientific, philosophical, mystical, literary and historical achievements of other civilizations. Islamic civilization is a complex construct permitting the inclusion of all sorts of influences, without causing intellectuals to lose sight of the original sources of Islam.

In the early modern period, when Islam came to Indonesia in the 14th and 15th centuries, Muslims appropriated the syncretistic Hindu/Buddhist culture of Indonesia. Far from destroying this culture, Islam melded it into its own traditions. According to the late Clifford Geertz in Islam Observed, although the Javanese elite converted to Islam and discarded their rituals, they remained tied to the Javanese temperament and philosophy. Islam has been syncretistic, malleable, tentative, and multi-voiced. There is no doubt that the emergence of Muslim orthodoxy in Indonesia in the 19th century was a response to this malleable form of Islam.

It is therefore imperative to study the articulation of Muslim identities in the West, an articulation that does not shy away from engaging the political, social, and cultural realities of the West or from engaging the construction of Islamic tradition in the classical phase of Islam.

For example, how can we approach the issue of Islamic faith and belief in the context of migration? What happens to religious communities in the context of migration? Do they become more active in their new societies or not? Migration has been another major consequence of modernity. Millions of people have gone through that in the past century. There are lots of examples, of Gujaratis and Ismailis migrating to East Africa in the 19th century; of Chinese migrating all over SE. Asia in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Finally, I would like to share with you a story I heard from a brilliant Saudi journalist in Jedda, Saudia Arabia, a year after the Gulf war of 1991. He said, “Before the Gulf war, we Gulf people used to dream of being married to a Japanese wife, living with her in a spacious house in the British countryside, and eating Chinese food, while being supported by an American salary. After the war we have become forcibly married to an American wife whom we do not love; we have to live with her in a tiny Japanese apartment and support her with a meager Chinese salary while eating British food, which we do not like at all.”

One can interpret the above story in two ways: one, there is indeed a clash of civilizations between Islam and the West, and/or, two, “Islam is pregnant with Europe and Europe is pregnant with Islam.” I prefer the latter, following in the footsteps of the famous Muslim Imam Ustadh Badi‘ al-Zaman Said Nursi. This is more consonant with the plurality of Islamic knowledge and the expression of Muslim identities in both the classical and modern periods.
email: aburabi@hartsem.edu
source: http://www.bridgesoffaith.org/?page_id=108

Continue reading »]]> Full Text of the Madina Charter

1. This is a document from Muhammad the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), governing relations between the Believers i.e. Muslims of Quraysh and Yathrib and those who followed them and worked hard with them. They form one nation — Ummah.

2. The Quraysh Mohajireen will continue to pay blood money, according to their present custom.

3. In case of war with any body they will redeem their prisoners with kindness and justice common among Believers. (Not according to pre-Islamic nations where the rich and the poor were treated differently).

4. The Bani Awf will decide the blood money, within themselves, according to their existing custom.

5. In case of war with anybody all parties other than Muslims will redeem their prisoners with kindness and justice according to practice among Believers and not in accordance with pre-Islamic notions.

6. The Bani Saeeda, the Bani Harith, the Bani Jusham and the Bani Najjar will be governed on the lines of the above (principles)

7. The Bani Amr, Bani Awf, Bani Al-Nabeet, and Bani Al-Aws will be governed in the same manner.

8. Believers will not fail to redeem their prisoners they will pay blood money on their behalf. It will be a common responsibility of the Ummat and not of the family of the prisoners to pay blood money.

9. A Believer will not make the freedman of another Believer as his ally against the wishes of the other Believers.

10. The Believers, who fear Allah, will oppose the rebellious elements and those that encourage injustice or sin, or enmity or corruption among Believers.

11. If anyone is guilty of any such act all the Believers will oppose him even if he be the son of any one of them.

12. A Believer will not kill another Believer, for the sake of an un-Believer. (i.e. even though the un-Believer is his close relative).

13. No Believer will help an un-Believer against a Believer.

14. Protection (when given) in the Name of Allah will be common. The weakest among Believers may give protection (In the Name of Allah) and it will be binding on all Believers.

15. Believers are all friends to each other to the exclusion of all others.

16. Those Jews who follow the Believers will be helped and will be treated with equality. (Social, legal and economic equality is promised to all loyal citizens of the State).

17. No Jew will be wronged for being a Jew.

18. The enemies of the Jews who follow us will not be helped.

19. The peace of the Believers (of the State of Madinah) cannot be divided. (it is either peace or war for all. It cannot be that a part of the population is at war with the outsiders and a part is at peace).

20. No separate peace will be made by anyone in Madinah when Believers are fighting in the Path of Allah.

21. Conditions of peace and war and the accompanying ease or hardships must be fair and equitable to all citizens alike.

22. When going out on expeditions a rider must take his fellow member of the Army-share his ride.

23. The Believers must avenge the blood of one another when fighting in the Path of Allah (This clause was to remind those in front of whom there may be less severe fighting that the cause was common to all. This also meant that although each battle appeared a separate entity it was in fact a part of the War, which affected all Muslims equally).

24. The Believers (because they fear Allah) are better in showing steadfastness and as a result receive guidance from Allah in this respect. Others must also aspire to come up to the same standard of steadfastness.

25. No un-Believer will be permitted to take the property of the Quraysh (the enemy) under his protection. Enemy property must be surrendered to the State.

26. No un-Believer will intervene in favour of a Quraysh, (because the Quraysh having declared war are the enemy).

27. If any un-believer kills a Believer, without good cause, he shall be killed in return, unless the next of kin are satisfied (as it creates law and order problems and weakens the defence of the State). All Believers shall be against such a wrong-doer. No Believer will be allowed to shelter such a man.

28. When you differ on anything (regarding this Document) the matter shall be referred to Allah and Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace).

29. The Jews will contribute towards the war when fighting alongside the Believers.

30. The Jews of Bani Awf will be treated as one community with the Believers. The Jews have their religion. This will also apply to their freedmen. The exception will be those who act unjustly and sinfully. By so doing they wrong themselves and their families.

31. The same applies to Jews of Bani Al-Najjar, Bani Al Harith, Bani Saeeda, Bani Jusham, Bani Al Aws, Thaalba, and the Jaffna, (a clan of the Bani Thaalba) and the Bani Al Shutayba.

32. Loyalty gives protection against treachery. (loyal people are protected by their friends against treachery. As long as a person remains loyal to the State he is not likely to succumb to the ideas of being treacherous. He protects himself against weakness).

33. The freedmen of Thaalba will be afforded the same status as Thaalba themselves. This status is for fair dealings and full justice as a right and equal responsibility for military service.

34. Those in alliance with the Jews will be given the same treatment as the Jews.

35. No one (no tribe which is party to the Pact) shall go to war except with the permission of Muhammed (may Allah bless him and grant him peace). If any wrong has been done to any person or party it may be avenged.

36. Any one who kills another without warning (there being no just cause for it) amounts to his slaying himself and his household, unless the killing was done due to a wrong being done to him.

37. The Jews must bear their own expenses (in War) and the Muslims bear their expenses.

38. If anyone attacks anyone who is a party to this Pact the other must come to his help.

39. They (parties to this Pact) must seek mutual advice and consultation.

40. Loyalty gives protection against treachery. Those who avoid mutual consultation do so because of lack of sincerity and loyalty.

41. A man will not be made liable for misdeeds of his ally.

42. Anyone (any individual or party) who is wronged must be helped.

43. The Jews must pay (for war) with the Muslims. (this clause appears to be for occasions when Jews are not taking part in the war. Clause 37 deals with occasions when they are taking part in war).

44. Yathrib will be Sanctuary for the people of this Pact.

45. A stranger (individual) who has been given protection (by anyone party to this Pact) will be treated as his host (who has given him protection) while (he is) doing no harm and is not committing any crime. Those given protection but indulging in anti-state activities will be liable to punishment.

46. A woman will be given protection only with the consent of her family (Guardian). (a good precaution to avoid inter-tribal conflicts).

47. In case of any dispute or controversy, which may result in trouble the matter must be referred to Allah and Muhammed (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), The Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) of Allah will accept anything in this document, which is for (bringing about) piety and goodness.

48. Quraysh and their allies will not be given protection.

49. The parties to this Pact are bound to help each other in the event of an attack on Yathrib.

50. If they (the parties to the Pact other than the Muslims) are called upon to make and maintain peace (within the State) they must do so. If a similar demand (of making and maintaining peace) is made on the Muslims, it must be carried out, except when the Muslims are already engaged in a war in the Path of Allah. (so that no secret ally of the enemy can aid the enemy by calling upon Muslims to end hostilities under this clause).

51. Everyone (individual) will have his share (of treatment) in accordance with what party he belongs to. Individuals must benefit or suffer for the good or bad deed of the group they belong to. Without such a rule party affiliations and discipline cannot be maintained.

52. The Jews of al-Aws, including their freedmen, have the same standing, as other parties to the Pact, as long as they are loyal to the Pact. Loyalty is a protection against treachery.

53. Anyone who acts loyally or otherwise does it for his own good (or loss).

54. Allah approves this Document.

55. This document will not (be employed to) protect one who is unjust or commits a crime (against other parties of the Pact).

56. Whether an individual goes out to fight (in accordance with the terms of this Pact) or remains in his home, he will be safe unless he has committed a crime or is a sinner. (i.e. No one will be punished in his individual capacity for not having gone out to fight in accordance with the terms of this Pact).

57. Allah is the Protector of the good people and those who fear Allah, and Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) is the Messenger of Allah (He guarantees protection for those who are good and fear Allah).

source: http://www.constitution.org/cons/medina/macharter.htm

Continue reading »]]> by Fethullah Gulen
Since “real” life is only possible through knowledge, those who have neglected learning and teaching are considered to be “dead,” even when they are biologically alive. We were created to learn and to communicate what we have learned to others.

Real life is lived at the spiritual level. Those whose hearts are alive, those who conquer the past and the future, transcend the restrictions of time. Such people are never overly distressed by past sorrows or overly anxious about the future. Those who are not able to experience full existence in their hearts, those who lead banal, shallow lives, are always gloomy and inclined to hopelessness. They consider the past as a horrifying grave, and see the future as a bottomless well. They live in agony, wondering whether they will live or die.

All of us are travelers, and the world is a multicolored exhibition and a rich and colorful book. We were sent to study this book, to increase our spiritual knowledge, and to uplift others. This colorful and pleasurable journey is a onetime event. For those whose feelings are alert and whose hearts are awake, this journey is more than enough to establish a Paradiselike garden. But for those whose eyes are covered, it is as if all goes by in a single breath.

The humble and modest are highly regarded by the created and by the Creator. The haughty and selfconceited, those who belittle others and put on haughty airs, are always disliked by the created and are punished by the Creator.

Humility is a sign of virtue and maturity, whereas haughtiness and selfconceit indicate an imperfect, low spirit. The most perfect human beings are those who are at ease and intimate in the company of others. In contrast, those who are too proud to join in with others and to form warm friendships are considered to be mere representatives of imperfectness. Humility makes people into true human beings. One sign of humility is that people do not change after they have obtained rank or wealth, learning or fame, or whatever else may be publicly esteemed. If any of these circumstances causes people to alter their ideas, attitudes, and behavior, then they cannot be regarded as having attained true humanity or true humility.

When interacting with others, always use as a measure what you find pleasing or displeasing. Wish for others what you wish for yourself and do not forget that whatever conduct displeases you will also displease others. If you do this, you will be safe from misconduct and bad behavior, and will not hurt others.

Maturity and perfection of spirit mean that you should be just in your treatment of others, especially those who have done you an injustice. Return their bad action with goodness. Do not cease doing good even to those who have harmed you. Rather, treat them with kindness and nobility, for harming someone is cruel. Repaying evil with evil implies a deficiency in character; the opposite is nobility.

There is no limit of goodness that can be done for others. Those who dedicate themselves to doing good for humanity are so altruistic that they can even sacrifice their lives for others. However, such altruism is a great virtue only if it originates in sincerity and purity of intention; it should be far removed from racial or tribal superstitions.

Those who regard even the greatest favor they have done for others as being insignificant, yet greatly appreciate even the smallest favor done for themselves are perfected ones who have acquired the Divine standards of behavior and have found peace in their conscience. Such individuals never remind others of the good that they may have done for them, and never complain when others appear to be indifferent to them.

* This collection of aphorisms was written in 1984 and recently appeared in one volume Ölçü veya Yoldaki Işıklar, Kaynak, Izmir, 2000; English edition Pearls of Wisdom, The Fountain, New Jersey, 2000, pp. 13, 23, 41, 42, 49, 50.
source: fgulen.org

Continue reading »]]> by Fethullah Gulen
Religion, particularly Islam, has become one of the most difficult subject areas to tackle in recent years. Contemporary culture, whether approached from the perspective of anthropology or theology, psychology or psychoanalysis, evaluates religion with empirical methods. On the one hand, religion is an inwardly experienced and felt phenomenon, one that, for the most part, is related to the permanent aspects of life. On the other hand, believers can see their religion as a philosophy, a set of rational principles, or mere mysticism. The difficulty increases in the case of Islam, for some Muslims and policy-makers consider and present it as a purely political, sociological, and economic ideology, rather than as a religion.

If we want to analyze religion, democracy, or any other system or philosophy accurately, we should focus on humanity and human life. From this perspective, religion in general, and Islam in particular, cannot be compared on the same basis with democracy or any other political, social, or economic system. Religion focuses primarily on the immutable aspects of life and existence, whereas political, social, and economic systems or ideologies concern only certain variable social aspects of our worldly life.

The aspects of life with which religion is primarily concerned are as valid today as they were at the dawn of humanity and will continue to be so in the future. Worldly systems change according to circumstances and so can be evaluated only according to their times. Belief in God, the hereafter, the prophets, the holy books, the angels, and divine destiny have nothing to do with changing times. Likewise, worship and morality’s universal and unchanging standards have little to do with time and worldly life.

Therefore, when comparing religion or Islam with democracy, we must remember that democracy is a system that is being continually developed and revised. It also varies according to the places and circumstances where it is practiced. On the other hand, religion has established immutable principles related to faith, worship, and morality. Thus, only Islam’s worldly aspects should be compared with democracy.

The main aim of Islam and its unchangeable dimensions affect its rules governing the changeable aspects of our lives. Islam does not propose a certain unchangeable form of government or attempt to shape it. Instead, Islam establishes fundamental principles that orient a government’s general character, leaving it to the people to choose the type and form of government according to time and circumstances. If we approach the matter in this light and compare Islam with the modern liberal democracy of today, we will be better able to understand the position of Islam and democracy with respect to each other.

Democratic ideas stem from ancient times. Modern liberal democracy was born in the American (1776) and French Revolutions (1789-1799). In democratic societies, people govern themselves as opposed to being ruled by someone above. The individual has priority over the community in this type of political system, being free to determine how to live his or her own life. Individualism is not absolute, though. People achieve a better existence by living within a society and this requires that they adjust and limit their freedom according to the criteria of social life.

The Prophet says that all people are as equal as the teeth of a comb.[1] Islam does not discriminate based on race, color, age, nationality, or physical traits. The Prophet declared:

You are all from Adam, and Adam is from earth. O servants of God, be brothers [and sisters.]“[2]

Those who were born earlier, who have more wealth or power than others, or who belong to certain families or ethnic groups have no inherent right to rule others.

Islam also upholds the following fundamental principles:

1. Power lies in truth, a repudiation of the common idea that truth relies upon power.
2. Justice and the rule of law are essential.
3. Freedom of belief and rights to life, personal property, reproduction, and health (both mental and physical) cannot be violated.
4. The privacy and immunity of individual life must be maintained.
5. No one can be convicted of a crime without evidence, or accused and punished for someone else’s crime.
6. An advisory system of administration is essential.

All rights are equally important, and the rights of the individual cannot be sacrificed for the sake of society. Islam considers a society to be composed of conscious individuals equipped with freewill and having responsibility toward both themselves and others. Islam goes a step further by adding a cosmic dimension. It sees humanity as the “motor” of history, contrary to the fatalistic approaches of some nineteenth century Western philosophies of history, such as dialectical materialism and historicism.[3] Just as the will and behavior of every individual determine the outcome of his or her life in this world and in the hereafter, a society’s progress or decline is determined by the will, worldview, and lifestyle of its inhabitants. The Qur’an says:

God will not change the state of a people unless they change themselves (with respect to their beliefs, worldview, and lifestyle). (Ar-Rad 13:11)

In other words, each society holds the reins of its fate in its own hands. The prophetic tradition emphasizes this idea: “You will be ruled according to how you are.”[4] This is the basic character and spirit of democracy; an idea which does not conflict with any Islamic principle.

As Islam holds individuals and societies responsible for their own fate, people must be responsible for governing themselves. The Qur’an addresses society with such phrases as: “O people!” and “O believers!” The duties entrusted to modern democratic systems are those that Islam assigns to society and classifies, in order of importance, as “absolutely necessary, relatively necessary, and commendable to carry out.” The sacred text includes the following passages:

Establish, all of you, peace. (Al-Baqara 2:208)

Spend in the way of God and to the needy of the pure and good of what you have earned and of what We bring forth for you from the Earth. (Al-Baqara 2:267)

If some among your women are accused of indecency, you must have four witnesses (to prove it). (An-Nisa 4:15)

God commands you to give over the public trusts to the charge of those having the required qualities and to judge with justice when you judge people. (An-Nisa 4:58)

Observe justice as witnesses respectful for God, even if it is against yourselves, your parents and relatives. (An-Nisa 4:135)

If they (your enemies) incline to peace (when you are at war), you also incline to it. (Al-Anfal 8:61)

If a corrupt, sinful one brings you news (about others), investigate it so that you should not strike a people without knowing. (Al-Hujurat 49:6)

If two parties among the believers fight between themselves, reconcile them. (Al-Hujurat 49:9)

In short, the Qur’an addresses the whole community and assigns it almost all the duties entrusted to modern democratic systems.

People cooperate with one another by sharing these duties and establishing the essential foundations necessary to perform them. The government is composed of all of these basic elements. Thus, Islam recommends a government based on a social contract. People elect the administrators and establish a council to debate common issues. Also, the society as a whole participates in auditing the administration. During the rule of the first four caliphs (632-661) in particular, the fundamental principles of government mentioned above—including free elections—were fully observed. The political system was transformed into a sultanate after the death of Ali, the fourth caliph, due to internal conflicts and the global conditions at that time. Unlike the caliphate, power in the sultanate was passed down through the sultan’s family. However, even though free elections were no longer held, societies maintained other principles that are found at the core of liberal democracy of today.

Islam is an inclusive religion. It is based on the belief in one God as the Creator, Lord, Sustainer, and Administrator of the universe. Islam is the religion of the whole universe. That is, the entire universe obeys the laws laid down by God; everything in the universe is “Muslim” and obeys God by submitting to His laws. Even a person who refuses to believe in God or who follows another religion has to be a Muslim perforce as far as bodily existence is concerned. Our entire life, from the embryonic stage to the body’s dissolution into dust after death, every tissue of the muscles, and every limb of the body follows the course prescribed for each by God’s laws. Thus, in Islam, God, nature, and humanity are neither remote from one another nor are they alien to one another. It is God who makes Himself known to humanity through nature and humanity itself, and nature and humanity are two books (of creation) through which each word of God is made known. This leads humankind to look upon everything as belonging to the same Lord, to whom it itself belongs, and therefore regarding nothing in the universe as being alien. His sympathy, love, and service do not remain confined to the people of a particular race, color, or ethnicity. The Prophet summed this up with the command, “O servants of God, be brothers (and sisters)!”

A separate but equally important point is that Islam recognizes all religions that came before it. It accepts all the prophets and books sent to different peoples in different epochs of history. Not only does it accept them, but it also regards belief in them as an essential principle of being Muslim. In this way, it acknowledges the basic unity of all religions. A Muslim is at the same time a true follower of Abraham, Moses, David, all the other Hebrew prophets and Jesus. This belief explains why both Christians and Jews enjoyed their religious rights under the rule of Islamic governments throughout history.

The Islamic social system seeks to form a virtuous society and thereby gain God’s approval. It recognizes right, not force, as the foundation of social life. Hostility is unacceptable. Relationships must be based on belief, love, mutual respect, assistance, and understanding instead of conflict and the pursuit of personal interests. Social education encourages people to pursue lofty ideals and to strive for perfection, not just to run after their own desires. Justified calls for unity and virtues create mutual support and solidarity, and belief secures brotherhood and sisterhood. Encouraging the soul to attain perfection brings happiness in both worlds.

Democracy has developed over time. Just as it has gone through many different stages in the past, it will continue to evolve and improve in the future. Along the way, it will be shaped into a more humane and just system, one based on righteousness and reality. If human beings are considered as a whole, without disregarding the spiritual dimension of their existence and their spiritual needs, and without forgetting that human life is not limited to this mortal life and that all people have a great craving for eternity, democracy could reach the peak of perfection and bring even more happiness to humanity. Islamic principles of equality, tolerance, and justice can help it do just this.

* This article originally appeared in SAIS Review, 21:2 (Summer-Fall 2001):133-38.
[1] Abu Shuja’ Shirawayh ibn Shahrdar al-Daylami, Al-Firdaws bi-Ma’thur al-Khitab [The Heavenly Garden Made Up of the Selections from the Prophet's Addresses], Beirut, 1986, Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiya, 4:300.
[2] For the second part of the hadith see the sections “Nikah” (marriage Contract) in Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Isma’il al-Bukhari, ed., al-Jami’ al-Sahih [A Collection of the Prophet's Authentic Traditions], Istanbul: al-Maktabat al-Islamiya, n.d., ch. 45; “Birr wa Sila” (Goodness and Visiting the Relatives) in Imam Abu Husayn Muslim ibn Hajjaj, ed., al-Jami’ al-Sahih, op. cit., ch. 23; and for the first part see “Tafsir” (The Qur’anic Commentary) and “Manaqib” (The Virtues of the Prophet and His Companions) in Abu ‘Isa Muhammad ibn ‘Isa al-Tirmidhi, al-Jami’ al-Sahih, Beirut, Dar al Ihya al-Turath al-’Arabi, n.d., chs. 49 and 74, respectively. The original text in Arabic does not include the word “sisters” in the command. However, the masculine form used refers to both men and women, as is the rule in many languages. An equivalent in English would be “humankind,” which refers to both men and women. By saying “O servants of God,” the Prophet also means women, because both men and women are equally servants of God.
[3] See Karl R. Popper, The Poverty of Historicism, trans. Sabri Orman, Istanbul, Insan Yayınları, 1985.
[4] ‘Ala al-Din ‘Ali al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, Kanz al-’Ummal fi Sunan al-Aqwal wa al-Af’al [A Treasure of the Laborers for the Sake of the Prophet's Sayings and Deeds], Beirut, Mu’assasat al-Risala, 1985, 6:89.

source: fgulen.org

Continue reading »]]> West must understand that Islamophobia is as dangerous as anti-Semitism
by
JOHN L. ESPOSITO
Enlightened Switzerland has now become part of an “enlightened liberal Europe” that is increasingly not all that liberal.

Some months ago, at a European meeting of intelligence officials from the US and Europe, a Swiss participant commented on this referendum on minarets. He was sure it would go nowhere since, as he said, Switzerland is a very pluralistic society, its Muslim population is relatively small and there were few mosques with minarets.

However, this stunning Swiss vote (57 percent) approving a referendum to ban minarets, was really not all that surprising, considering the growing power of Islamophobia. In both Europe and America right-wing politicians, political commentators, media personalities and religious leaders continue to feed a growing suspicion of mainstream Muslims by fueling a fear that Islam, not just Muslim extremism, is a threat.

In the aftermath of the attacks in America and in Europe, the relevance and viability of multiculturalism as a policy in the US and Great Britain were challenged by those who charged that such an approach contributed to domestic terrorism: retarding Muslim assimilation and civic engagement, perpetuating foreign loyalties and providing a space for militant radicals. The process of integration, in which immigrant citizens and residents could retain their religious and ethnic differences, was rejected by many, in particular the far right in Europe, who demand total assimilation.

Modern-day prophets of doom have predicted that Europe will be overrun by Islam, transformed by the end of the century into “Eurabia.” The media, political leaders and commentators on the right warn of a “soft terrorism” plot to take over America and Europe. Bernard Lewis, a Middle East historian and an adviser to the Bush administration on its failed Iraq policy, received widespread coverage when he chided Europeans for losing their loyalties, self-confidence and respect for their own culture, charging that they have “surrendered” to Islam in a mood of “self-abasement,” “political correctness” and “multiculturalism.” Daniel Pipes, a columnist, political commentator and relentless Muslim critic who wrote the article “The Muslims are coming. The Muslims are coming,” also declared: “Western European societies are unprepared for the massive immigration of brown-skinned peoples cooking strange foods and maintaining different standards of hygiene… All immigrants bring exotic customs and attitudes, but Muslim customs are more troublesome than most.”

The rise of anti-immigrant far right political parties in recent European elections has emboldened many of its leaders to applaud the Swiss vote and encourage similar prohibitions. Geert Wilders, a leader of the anti-Muslim Party for Freedom in the Netherlands who has supported the mass deportation of Muslims, called for a vote to “stem the tide of Islamization” in the Netherlands.

The far right persistently refuses to face a 21st century reality: to acknowledge and accept the fact that many Muslims are integrated citizens and that Islam is now a European religion and, in fact, the second-largest religion in many European countries.

Fortunately, many Muslim and Christian leaders across the world, major European politicians and human rights experts have condemned the ban, and the Vatican has denounced it as an infringement on religious freedom.

However, the Swiss ban, like some other European countries’ policies, highlights a failure of Western liberalism and raises fundamental questions about religious discrimination and freedom of religion. While there are only four minarets in Switzerland, a country that is home to approximately 400,000 Muslims, supporters of the referendum mindlessly charge that the minaret is a political symbol of militant Islam. This makes about as much sense as saying that church steeples symbolize militant Christianity.

Where do we go from here? Western political and religious opinion-makers and the media will need to resolutely address the dangers of Islamophobia as aggressively as they do other forms of hate speech and hate crimes, ranging from racial discrimination to anti-Semitism. European Muslims will need to continue to speak out publicly, demanding their rights as European citizens and residents and also denouncing religious discrimination and violence as well as limits placed on constructing churches in the Muslim world.

Globalization and an increasingly multicultural and multi-religious West test the mettle of cherished democratic principles and values. Islamophobia, which is becoming a social cancer, must be recognized and be as unacceptable as anti-Semitism, a threat to the very fabric of our democratic pluralistic way of life. The continued threat and response to global terrorism coupled with the resurgence of xenophobia and cultural racism have contributed to threatening the fabric of liberal democracies in the West and their Muslim citizens in particular. The fine line between distinguishing between the faith of Islam and those who commit violence and terror in the name of Islam, between the majority of mainstream Muslims and the acts of a minority of Muslim extremists and terrorists must be maintained. Blurring these distinctions risks the adoption of foreign and domestic policies that promote a clash rather than a coexistence of cultures. They play into the hands of preachers of hate (Muslim and non-Muslim), religious and political leaders, and political commentators whose rhetoric incites and demonizes, alienates and marginalizes.

source: http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-194888-109-centerwest-must-understand-that-islamophobia-is-as-dangerous-as-anti-semitismbr-i-by-i-brjohn-l-espositocenter.html

Continue reading »]]> History is silent as to whether there was any distinction in status between the male and the female sexes during the beginnings of human civilization. In later days no doubt the female sex was regarded as inferior to the male and the idea of inferiority developed to such an extent that the male sex not only claimed a complete superiority over the female sex, but further arrogated to itself the right to utilise and employ the female sex as it liked.

Surveying the history of the world on this point we find that in pre-Christian Europe and Greece, which was the centre of light and learning for a long time and which provided philosophical and scientific inspiration to the Europe of later days, regarded woman as something definitely inferior to man. She was a subservient creature who had come into existence solely for the purpose of breeding citizens for the state and soldiers for the army. Their great dramatist Euripedes puts into the mouth of Medea the remark. “Women are impotent for good, but clever contrivers of all evils,” Such degrading conceptions led to a moral.degeneration which ultimately ruined the Greek society. The names of virtuous women says Professor Lecky, scarcely appear in Greek history.” (History of European Morals, Vol:ll p. 307).

Conditions in Europe did not irnprove with the advent of Christianity. “Of the woman came the beginning of sin and the wickedness of man and through her we all die. ” Consequently, Paul, the premier saint of Christendom, proclaimed: “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence, for Adam was first formed than Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in transgression.” Other early Fathers were even more uncharitable and denounced women as “the lance of the demon,” “the gate of the Devil,” “the road of iniquity.” “the sting of the scorpion,” a daughter of falsehood, the sentinel of Hell,” “the enemy of peace” and “of the wild beast, the most dangerous.” Nay, they went still further. The Greek Orthodox Church denied that woman had a soul and at the Council of Macon, a Bishop vehemently asserted that a woman did not belong to the human species. (Westermarck, p.663) A council held at Auxierre prohibited women [from receiving] the Eucharist [with their bare] hands [or] to [go] near the altar during the celebration of the Mass on the ground that she was an “unclean thing”. “I may define man,” says Principal Donaldson (Woman, pp. 181, 182), “to be a male human being and woman to be a female human being . . . Now what the early Christains did was to strike the ‘male’ out of the definition of man and ‘human being’ out of the definition of woman. Man was [a] human being made for the highest and noblest purpose; woman was a female made to serve only. She was on earth to influence the heart of man with every evil passion. She was a fire[storm] continually striving to get alongside the male man-of-war to blow him up into pieces.”

In the Asian cradles of civilization [women were] no better off. Hinduism, which is the oldest among the present day religions of the world, laid it down: ‘In childhood a female must be subjected to her father, in youth to her husband, when her husband is dead, to her sons; a woman must never be independent’. (Manu, V 140). “The legislator Man”, says the celebrated Hindu scholar, Sir R. G. Bhandarkar,”is equally hard on women. It must be acknowledged that the estimate of the old Aryan of womanly nature is not flattering to them generally. They are debarred from reading the Vedas; any religious rite in which they alone are concerned is directed to be performed without Vedic Mantras. Even the Bhagavad Gita gives expression to the general belief that it is only a sinful soul that is born as woman, Vaisya or Sudra”. (Collected Works, p. 46 1).

In Buddhism, says the Buddhist scholar, May Oung, “the idea of wedlock and its attendant worldly life, is opposed to the ultimate and the annihilation of Desire, the striving for which must necessarily involve celibacy.” (Buddhist Law, Par. 1, p. 2). In Buddhist ideology, therefore, according to the historian Westermarck,”Woman are, of all the snares which the temper has spread for men, the most dangerous; in women are embodied all the powers of infatuation which blind the mind of the world.”

In pre-lslamic Arabia, the general conception of womanhood was of such a degraded type that her very existence was considered ignominious for the family. Female infanticide was consequently practiced on a wide scale. Those women, however, who escaped early death were allowed to live only on sufferance. For, an Arab woman “had no rights; she could not inherit property; her person formed part of the inheritance which came to the heir of her husband, and he was entitled to marry her against her will. Hence sprung up the impious marriages of their sons with their stepmothers and others of an even worse character. . .” “Polygamy was universal and quite unrestricted; equally so was divorce at least as far as man was concerned; (Mohammed and Mohammedanism; Bosworth Smith; p 82)

Such was the condition of the female sex in the world when Mohammed (may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) the Saviour of womanhood, stood up in Arabia and, through the Divine Revelation of the Lord of the Universe Who created both the male and the female and Who loves them equally, preached to the world that :
# females were just like males
# have equal rights
# have equal honour
# equal status in life
They were on no account to be treated as the property of the males. They have the right of ownership of property in the same way that males have, though, no doubt under the principle of the division, the female sex has some specialised duties to perform in life, just as the male sex has its own duties.

There are three stages through which womenfolk will pass in life: (a) daughter (b) wife, and (c) mother.

(a) DAUGHTER

Islam denounces in unequivocal terms the pre-Islamic inhumane custom of female infanticide and commands people to love and cherish their daughters even more than their sons.

The Holy Qur’an says that on the Day of Judgment, the female infant who was buried alive will be questioned: “For what crime wast thou murdered?” [Qur'an 81:8,9] Thus before the Almighty, the victim herself will be able to give evidence against those who killed an innocent creature of Allah simply for the sake of satisfying their vanity.

Allah again commands humanity:

“Kill not your children for fear of want. We shall provide sustenance for them as well as for you. Verily, to kill them is a great sin. [Qur'an 17:31]

Fatimah was the youngest daughter of the Holy Prophet Mohammed (peace be upon him). In dealing with her, he set an example of fatherly love which is a model for mankind. “Fatimah,” he would say, “is a part of my being; whosoever annoys her annoys me” (Mishkat-ul-Masabih, XLIV:S)

He also emphasized preferential treatment towards the female sex and said “When you bring anything for your children for distribution, begin with the girls first because the girls love their parents more than the boys.”

(b) WIFE

Marriage in Islamic law is really a contract just like other civil contracts between two parties. As far as the conditions of the contract are concerned, both the parties, the man and the woman, stand upon the same level. Each party has certain rights and duties. Islam commands justice to be observed in every contract, and so in the contract of marriage too justice should be observed.

The Holy Quran says:

“The women have rights similar to the rights against them, according to what is equitable.” [Qur'an 2:228]

No doubt, under the principle of the distribution of labour, work should be divided between the pair. The womenfolk have naturally to take care of their offspring until they grow up. They have to engage themselves in bringing them up and so are not in a position to pay attention to securing their means of livelihood. The men, therefore, have been made responsible for maintaining the family, including the wife, and have been given the duty of securing all the requirments of the home. Thus we might say that in a Muslim home, the husband is supposed to work as the Minister for Foreign Affairs and the wife as the Minister of the Interior.

The Holy Prophet is reported to have said : “A woman is the queen of her house.” The Holy Quran describes the position of the wife in a beautiful verse, “He created for you mates from among yourselves that you might find solace in them and he ordained between you love and mercy,” [Qur'an 30:21]

The Prophet said: “The most perfect of believers in faith is the best of them in morals and the best of you are those who are kindest to your wives.” In his famous Address at the Farewell Pilgrimage, the Prophet again laid stress on the good treatment on womenfolk. He said: “O my people, you have certain rights over your wives and so have your wives over you …. they are Allah’s trust in your hand. See that you treat them with all kindness.”

Before this saviour of the female sex preached his Message, there was no limit for the males in respect of the number of their wives. Islam really imposed a limit and allowed plurality of marriage with the idea of abolishing adultery. Polygamy is permitted in place of illegal intercourse in cases where it becomes difficult or rather impossible ill the interest of social health to restrict marriage to strict monogamy. There are two definite occasions in the lives of human beings when polygamy becomes necessary. For example, if the marriage proves fruitless, the husband can, in most cases, be kept on the path of virtue and uprightness only by allowing a second marriage. Again, when there is a surplus of women, as happens after men have died in wars, human society can be saved from corruption and also extinction by the permission of marrying more than one wife.

The Holy Quran restricts the number of wives to four and also orders complete equality and justice between them:

“And if you fear that you will not deal fairly towards the orphans, marry of the women who seem good to you, two or three or four, and if you fear that you cannot do justice between them , then (marry) only one.” [Qur'an 4:3]

The conditions of the marriage contract are to be settled by the parties of the marriage. If, on the one hand according to the Islamic teaching, the husbands are entitled to have the right of divorce, the wives are also entitled to the right of fixing their dowry and niaintainence as they like, and they may also take the authority of separating themselves from their husbands when they find it necessary to do so. If agreement at a time of marriage is made with complete consideration, the parties stand practically at the same level and there remains no possibility for the womenfolk to suffer.

Islam enjoins justice, equity and straightforwardness. Therefore if those who claim to be Muslims do not observe Islamic principles, then it is their fault and Islam can on no account be accused for that. If today people misuse the permission for polygamy and try to hide their lustftil actions under the cloak of Islamic legality, it is their fault and they deserve the most severe punishment at the Court of the All-Knowing Allah who knows what is in their hearts.

(c) MOTHER

As mothers, the status of women has been raised by Islam to such an extent that nothing higher is conceivable.

The Holy Quran says:

Your Lord has commanded that you shall worship none but Him and goodness to your parents. If either or both of them reach old age in your life, say not to them a word of contempt, nor repel them, but address them in terms of honour. And make yourself submissively gentle to them with compassion and say: O my Lord bestow on them compassion even as they cherished me in my childhood.[Qur'an 17 23-24]

It is reported that when the Prophet was questioned by a disciple as to who after God and his Prophet should be revered most, the Prophet said “Your mother.” When questioned “Who, after the mother?” The Prophet said “Your mother.” He was again asked “And, then, who after the mother? ” He again replied: “Your mother”. The man put the question for the fourth time and the Prophet then answered: “Your father.” This Tradition shows that the position of the mother in the eyes of her sons and daughters should be three times higher than that of the father.

It is reported that once a disciple came to the Prophet and said “O Prophet Of Allah, on a hot day in the desert of Arabia, in the sunny noon when the stones and sands were burning like fire, my mother and I were travelling by foot without any shoes. I carried my mother on my shoulders so that she may not suffer the pain of walking bare-footed on the hot sands and stones. Could I pay the reward of the pains she had to bear in bringing me up?” The Prophet replied:”No, not even a fraction of the pain she suffered at the time you were born.”

In Islam the best action of worship is the performance of Pilgrimage to Mecca, i.e., the Hajj, and the reward to a person who performs the Hajj properly is that all his past sins are pardoned and he receives a high rank in the estimation of Allah. But in expressing the dignity of the mother, the Holy Prophet said: “One who looks at the face of his mother with sentiments of reverence and love once, is rewarded as if he had performed the Pilgrimage.” The people asked him, what if he looked twice, to which he replied: “It is as if he had performed two Pilgrimages, and thrice, as if he had performed three Pilgrimages and so on.

In this respect, the Prophet himself set a model for the world. Once Halimah, the lady who nursed him in his childhood came to see him. The Prophet was sitting with his disciples. As soon as he saw her, he stood up with reverence and spread his mantle on the floor and requested his foster-mother to take her seat there.

It is quite evident from the above that the respect which a mother receives from her children in Islam is the highest to which no other wordly relationship can aspire.

The doors of spiritual elevation are open to woman in the same way as they are open to men. They are commanded to educate themselves in the same way as the men, and if they attain a high position in learning, then even the men are expected to learn and benefit from their knowledge and wisdom. It is reported that after the Prophet’s death, his disciples used to visit Ayesha, the wife of the Prophet, and seek knowledge from her. Islamic history is resplendent with a long list of the names of the ladies who received the highest honour in society, the highest degree in learning and the highest qualifications in different branches of human activity. It was through the influence of other societies, which were not Muslim, that the idea of the inferiority of the female sex already existing in those societies spread to the uneducated class among the Muslims, who knew very little about the teachings of Islam. If they had known the teachings of lslam, they would have known that in Islam the female sex deserves the same position, the same respect and the same diginity as the members of the male sex who, in their turn, are not allowed to degrade and insult them and make them their tools. To touch them with a bad intent is considered a sin and even to glance at them with a bad motives is counted as adultery in Islam. That is why in the Holy Quran men are commanded :

“Say to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that will make for greater purity for them.” [Qur'an 24:30]

The ladies too have been commanded in similar terms:

And say to the believing women that they should lower their gaze and guard their modesty; that they should not display their beauty and their ornaments except what (must ordinarly) appear thereof, that they should draw their veils over their bosoms and not display their beauty except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands’ fathers, their sons, their husbands’ sons, their brothers or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their women, or those whom their right hands possess, or the male servants not having need (of women), or small children who have not attained knowledge of what is hidden of women; and let them not strike their feet in order to draw attention to their hidden embellishment.” [Qur'an 24:31]

There is an important point in this connection which might be elucidated here with advantage. Every human being is endowed with a mind, and the more the mental faculty is trained, the more willpower is increased. The training of this faculty is done through the exercise of concentration. The student of hypnotism forms an idea and concentrates upon it to such an extent that for a certain moment, he forgets other things. Through this training he achieves a strong power which sometimes enables him to make other persons his objects and influence them with an idea in his mind. For instance, he forms an idea that X is having a headache. He makes X object, and within a few minutes, X feels that he has a headache. Similarly, if he wants to attract Y towards himself, Y is attracted because the hypnotist’s willpower influences that of Y. This willpower varies in its strength from man to man just as we say, regarding an engine, that it has ten, twenty or a hundred horse power, similarly we say of a hypnotist that he possesses ten, twenty or a hundred men’s willpower.

Now it is clear that a human being can influence other human beings through willpower, and can create in his object, ideas which conform to those existing in his own mind. So, when a male casts a lustful glance at a female, his passions will arise, sexual thoughts will come to his mind, and if he possesses any willpower, the same ideas will be automatically produced in the mind of a female. And if hundreds of such masculine eyes fall upon that lady with the same motives and ideas behind them, she is bound to be affected by the poisonous radiations of the sexual thoughts injected into her brain through the influence of the willpower of the males, though she herself may be absolutely pure in heart and blotless in character. In a society which allows promiscuous intermingling of sexes, the atmosphere must necessarily remain charged with what might be called “sexual thought-waves” of which the consequences for womanhood can be nothing else but disastrous.

The importance of a woman in society cannot be over-estimated. She is the mother of humanity. She brings up the child in her womb for nine months, feeds him at her breast for at least two years and is mainly responsible for his training at least up to the age of six or seven.

It is a well known fact of medical science that mentality of the mother affects the mentality of her children just as, or even more than, her physical qualities influence their physical build. Islam, therefore, commands women to keep themselves away from places where there may be the slightest chance of their being infuenced by an evil force or evil idea so that their chastity and purity may be preserved and the mentality of their offspring may be safe from corruption. This is why Allah says in the Holy Quran,

“O wives of the Prophet, you are not like any other women; if you fear Allah, be not soft in speech lest he in whose heart is a disease should be moved with desire; and speak a speech that is just. And stay quietly in your houses and do not make a dazzling display like that of the former times of ignorance; and establish regular prayer, and give regular charity and obey Allah and His Apostle. Allah only desires to remove all abomination from you, O people of the household, and to purify you a (thorough) purifying.”[Qur'an 33:32,33]

“There is no blame on them (the women) (if they appear unveiled) before their fathers, nor their sons, nor their brothers, nor their brothers’ sons, nor their sisters’ sons, nor their own women, nor of what their right hand’s possess. And fear Allah; surely Allah is a witness of all things,” [Qur'an 33:55] ”

“O Prophet tell your wives and your daughters and the believing women that they cast their outer garments over their persons (when abroad). This will be more proper, that they should be known as such and not molested. And Allah is oft-Forgiving and most-Merciful.” [Qur'an 33:59]

Examples of the way in which the above commandments were interpreted by the Prophet can be seen in the Prophet’s beloved daughter Fatimah, and his beloved wives, Khadijah and Ayesha. Nowhere do we find any evidence that the Prophet’s wives or his daughters were ever seen with an open face and an open head in front of strangers save at the time of performing acts of worship like prayer or pilgrimage. In the requirements of prayer it is laid down that the body of the woman must be entirely covered except her face and hands. There is also an express injuction in the hadith that no woman should put on a veil during the pilgrimage. In the prayer and pilgrimage, men are strictly forbidden from gazing at the faces of the womenfolk and they have been warned to remember that the female servants of Allah are in the presence of their Creator.

Thus with respect to their position in life, their inherent rights as human beings and their relations with Allah men and women are on an equal plane in Islam. This was the teaching of the Holy Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). And this too is the verdict of the Holy Quran for Allah says,

“Never will I waste the work of a worker among you, whether male or female. You are members, one of another.”[Qur'an 3:195]

Continue reading »]]> As in the past, there are some conjectures being made about the future today as well. One of these is the claim regarding the future as an age of information. Those people who are discussing the future in this way are basically futurists.

There are many who see the people who are making these kinds of conjectures as oracles of the second millennium. Yet, rather than being objective evaluations, some of the claims that are made related to the future in terms of historical cycles are efforts to develop ideas around some particular desires and therefore they carry no more value than any other predictions. In other words, I think that as a result of these claims, people form expectations in the same way that they expect an answer to a prayer. Thus, while saying that the expectation produced by these types of claims that “the future will be like this” gives birth to certain efforts in that direction, these expectations eventually become goals and purposes. Once the goal has been determined, different strategies and policies will be produced to reach that goal and efforts will be made to fulfill it. I think this is the crux of the matter.

Along with this, there has been an extension of the prophetic mission of God’s Messenger up until the modern day through the line of representatives, through people like Muhyiddin ibn al-’Arabi,[1] Imam al-Ghazali, Imam Rabbani, Mawlana Khalid, and Bediüzzaman. We hope that the function of this fortunate line of transmission is to prepare a foundation for the rebirth of the prophetic spirit in the years to come, and, in this respect, we hope that this spirit will live again. Of course, the Prophet will not be there, but Islam, in the pure understanding of the Companions, will be ever-ready to greet life once again.

But apart from all this, as we live in a world where causality and certain other laws are operative, if we act without taking such laws into consideration we are in danger of falling into determinism. However, Muslims, by using their will, are able to consider the causes carefully enough so that someone looking from the outside would think that they are acting only according to laws of causality. On the other hand, regarding results obtained from actions, Muslims should be so completely submitted to and trusting in God’s will that someone looking from the outside would will think that they have completely rejected causes. Acting in this way shows that, on the one hand, causes are very important and everything humanity does should definitely be planned around them and put into effect accordingly. On the other hand, while so doing, due to their fear of falling into the error of speculating partners to God Almighty, they should also know that they have not personally achieved any success themselves, rather all success is directly from God.

After determining the matter in this way, we can summarize our thoughts regarding the future in the following way. In the future, everything will be within the orbit of knowledge, and the horizons that have been darkened by our neglect for a period will once more be enlightened. To a large extent, we have been particularly neglectful of the scientific knowledge obtained during the fourth and fifth century A.H. (after the Hegira) that is based on the Qur’an and we have turned our backs on the very important dynamics that could keep us on our feet. Personally, I have always been saddened that the madrassas got rid of Sufism, of what can be called Islam’s spiritual life. Later their decrease in interest in the experimental sciences and the eventual expulsion of the same contributed to our falling far behind the newly scientifically developing countries. So the neglect we showed in the past should be made up for, and our tomorrows will be built on knowledge, and everything will take its strength and power from knowledge.

Knowledge will occupy a very important place in a world that is rapidly becoming smaller and in an era when time and space are shrinking. The important point here is whether or not we will be ready for such a world.

Today, there are many scientists in the world, in many different countries, but, in my humble opinion, they are not enough to establish a new, happy world, even if they were to work all together. For this reason, there is a need for a new way of thinking today, a new approach to the sciences, a new life philosophy, and new educational institutions. New generations should be mobilized at every period of their lives, from kindergarten to high school and from there onto university. Since everything will obtain power from knowledge in the future, it will only be possible to build knowledge for the future with this kind of effort.

Huntington’s Assertions

Regarding Huntington’s claim about the clash of civilizations, I think that rather than being realistic evaluations regarding the future, these types of claims seem to me to be determining new goals in an attempt to influence public opinion within the framework of these goals. Until the disintegration of the Soviet Block, there was the idea of a clash between the East and West, or between NATO and the Warsaw Pact countries. This time, by creating new enemy fronts, a clash between civilizations based on religious and cultural differences is being prepared and a new foundation is being laid for the continuation of the rule of the power blocks.

Actually, up until now, conflict is something that is desired by certain power centers. The masses have been put on alarm against a frequently conjectured and feared enemy; this enemy is more imaginary than real. It is in this manner that the masses have been prepared for every kind of war.

In truth, no divine religion has ever been based on conflict, whether it be the religions represented by Moses and Jesus, or the religion represented by Muhammad, upon them be peace. On the contrary, these religions, especially Islam, are strictly against disorder, treachery, conflict, and oppression. Islam means peace, security, and well being. Thus, in a religion based on peace, security, and world harmony, war and conflict are negative aspects. In exceptional cases there is a right to self-defense, just like when the body tries to rid itself of germs that have attacked it, but this can be done only according to certain principles. Islam has always breathed peace and goodness. Islam considers war as an secondary event. Rules have been placed in order to balance and limit it. For example, Islam takes justice and world peace as a basis:

Let not the hatred of others to you make you swerve to wrong and depart from justice. (Al-Ma’ida 5:8)

Islam developed a line of defense based on certain principles in order to protect the freedom of belief, life, property, the mind and one’s descendants, as has the modern legal system. Christianity, as a religion of abstract love, from the very beginning categorically condemned war and did not lay down any rules regarding this human and historical reality. But it was not able to prevent wars like the World Wars or the Hundred Years’ Wars or the Nagasaki and Hiroshima incidents from occurring. The views of Huntington and others like him of the future are unfortunately based on conflict, and reflect plans to continue domination through conflicts.

With the blessings and beneficence of God, we are going to do our best to help this breeze of tolerance and dialogue to continue blowing; it is a breeze that has only recently begun to blow and it shows a tendency toward spreading over the entire world. God willing, we will prove the predictions of such scholars to be false. We believe that these breezes are powerful enough to overwhelm lethal weapons, to subdue mechanized military units and much of any other negativity that may arise. The fact that every segment of society is expressing and enacting this brand new message, the roots of which lie in the past, in the message of the prophets, is a divine favor to today’s devotees of love. In this respect, we state that tolerance and dialogue should be represented in our country in the best possible way and should be an example to the whole world. Such an example will encourage people to come together, to gather round the same basic human values and, God willing, humankind will live one more spring before seeing the end of the world.

from: http://www.mlife.org/content/view/75/71/

Continue reading »]]> A Comparative Approach to Islam and Democracy

Fethullah Gülen

Religion, particularly Islam, has become one of the most difficult subject areas to tackle in recent years. Contemporary culture, whether approached from the perspective of anthropology or theology, psychology or psychoanalysis, evaluates religion with empirical methods. On the one hand, religion is an inwardly experienced and felt phenomenon, one mostly related to life’s permanent aspects. On the other believers can see their religion as a philosophy, a set of rational principles, or mere mysticism. The difficulty increases in the case of Islam, for some Muslims and policymakers consider and present it as a purely political, sociological, and economic ideology, rather than as a religion.

If we want to analyze religion, democracy, or any other system or philosophy accurately, we should focus on humanity and human life. From this perspective, religion in general and Islam in particular cannot be compared on the same basis with democracy or any other political, social, or economic system. Religion focuses primarily on the immutable aspects of life and existence, whereas political, social, and economic systems or ideologies concern only certain variable, social aspects of our worldly life.

The aspects of life with which religion is primarily concerned are as valid today as they were at the dawn of humanity and will continue to be so in the future. Worldly systems change according to circumstances and so can be evaluated only according to their times. Belief in God, the hereafter, the prophets, the holy books, angels, and divine destiny have nothing to do with changing times. Likewise, worship and morality’s universal and unchanging standards have little to do with time and worldly life. [End Page 133]

Therefore, when comparing religion or Islam with democracy, we must remember that democracy is a system that is being continually developed and revised. It also varies according to the places and circumstances where it is practiced. On the other hand, religion has established immutable principles related to faith, worship and morality. Thus, only Islam’s worldly aspects should be compared with democracy.

The main aim of Islam and its unchangeable dimensions affect its rules governing the changeable aspects of our lives. Islam does not propose a certain unchangeable form of government or attempt to shape it. Instead, Islam establishes fundamental principles that orient a government’s general character, leaving it to the people to choose the type and form of government according to time and circumstances. If we approach the matter in this light and compare Islam with today’s modern liberal democracy, we will better understand the position of Islam and democracy with respect to each other.

Democratic ideas stem from ancient times. Modern liberal democracy was born in the American (1776) and French Revolutions (1789-99). In democratic societies, people govern themselves as opposed to being ruled by someone above. The individual has priority over the community in this type of political system, being free to determine how to live his or her own life. Individualism is not absolute, though. People achieve a better existence by living within a society and this requires that they adjust and limit their freedom according to the criteria of social life.

The Prophet says that all people are as equal as the teeth of a comb. 1 Islam does not discriminate based on race, color, age, nationality, or physical traits. The Prophet declared: “You are all from Adam, and Adam is from earth. O servants of God, be brothers [and sisters].” 2 Those who are born earlier, have more wealth and power than others, or belong to certain families or ethnic groups have no inherent right to rule others.

Islam also upholds the following fundamental principles:

1. Power lies in truth, a repudiation of the common idea that truth relies upon power.

2. Justice and the rule of law are essential.

3. Freedom of belief and rights to life, personal property, reproduction, and health (both mental and physical) cannot [End Page 134] be violated.

4. The privacy and immunity of individual life must be maintained.

5. No one can be convicted of a crime without evidence, or accused and punished for someone else’s crime.

6. An advisory system of administration is essential.

All rights are equally important, and an individual’s right cannot be sacrificed for society’s sake. Islam considers a society to be composed of conscious individuals equipped with free will and having responsibility toward both themselves and others. Islam goes a step further by adding a cosmic dimension. It sees humanity as the “motor” of history, contrary to fatalistic approaches of some of the nineteenth century Western philosophies of history such as dialectical materialism and historicism. 3 Just as every individual’s will and behavior determine the outcome of his or her life in this world and in the hereafter, a society’s progress or decline is determined by the will, worldview, and lifestyle of its inhabitants. The Quran (13:11) says: “God will not change the state of a people unless they change themselves [with respect to their beliefs, worldview, and lifestyle].” In other words, each society holds the reins of its fate in its own hands. The prophetic tradition emphasizes this idea: “You will be ruled according to how you are.” 4 This is the basic character and spirit of democracy, which does not conflict with any Islamic principle.

As Islam holds individuals and societies responsible for their own fate, people must be responsible for governing themselves. The Quran addresses society with such phrases as: “O people!” and “O believers!” The duties entrusted to modern democratic systems are those that Islam refers to society and classifies, in order of importance, as “absolutely necessary, relatively necessary, and commendable to carry out.” The sacred text includes the following passages: “Establish, all of you, peace” (2:208); “spend in the way of God and to the needy of the pure and good of what you have earned and of what We bring forth for you from earth” (2:267); “if some among your women are accused of indecency, you must have four witnesses [to prove it]” (4:15); “God commands you to give over the public trusts to the charge of those having the required qualities and to judge with justice when you judge between people” (4:58); “observe justice as witnesses respectful for God even if it is against yourselves, your parents and relatives” (4:135); “if they [your enemies] incline to peace [when you [End Page 135] are at war], you also incline to it” (8:61); “if a corrupt, sinful one brings you news [about others], investigate it so that you should not strike a people without knowing” (49:6); “if two parties among the believers fight between themselves, reconcile them” (49:9). To sum up, the Quran addresses the whole community and assigns it almost all the duties entrusted to modern democratic systems.

People cooperate with one another by sharing these duties and establishing the essential foundations necessary to perform them. The government is composed of all of these foundations. Thus, Islam recommends a government based on a social contract. People elect the administrators and establish a council to debate common issues. Also, the society as a whole participates in auditing the administration.

Especially during the rule of the first four caliphs (632-661), the fundamental principles of government mentioned above-including free election-were fully observed. The political system was transformed into a sultanate after the death of Ali, the fourth caliph, due to internal conflicts and to the global conditions at that time. Unlike under the caliphate, power in the sultanate was passed on through the sultan’s family. However, even though free elections were no longer held, societies maintained other principles that are at the core of today’s liberal democracy.

Islam is an inclusive religion. It is based on the belief in one God as the Creator, Lord, Sustainer, and Administrator of the universe. Islam is the religion of the whole universe. That is, the entire universe obeys the laws laid down by God, so everything in the universe is “Muslim” and obeys God by submitting to his laws. Even a person who refuses to believe in God or follows another religion has perforce to be a Muslim as far as his or her bodily existence is concerned. His or her entire life, from the embryonic stage to the body’s dissolution into dust after death, every tissue of his or her muscles, and every limb of his or her body follows the course prescribed for each by God’s law. Thus, in Islam, God, nature, and humanity are neither remote from each other nor are they alien to each other. It is God who makes himself known to humanity through nature and humanity itself, and nature and humanity are two books (of creation) through each word of which God is known. This leads humankind to look upon everything as belonging to the same Lord, to whom it itself belongs, so that it regards nothing in the universe as alien. His sympathy, love, and service do not remain confined to the people of any particular race, color, or ethnicity. The Prophet summed this up with the [End Page 136] command, “O servants of God, be brothers [and sisters]!”

A separate but equally important point is that Islam recognizes all religions previous to it. It accepts all the prophets and books sent to different peoples in different epochs of history. Not only does it accept them, but also regards belief in them as an essential principle of being Muslim. By doing so, it acknowledges the basic unity of all religions. A Muslim is at the same time a true follower of Abraham, Moses, David, Jesus, and of all other Hebrew prophets. This belief explains why both Christians and Jews enjoyed their religious rights under the rule of Islamic governments throughout history.

The Islamic social system seeks to form a virtuous society and thereby gain God’s approval. It recognizes right, not force, as the foundation of social life. Hostility is unacceptable. Relationships must be based on belief, love, mutual respect, assistance, and understanding instead of conflict and realization of personal interest. Social education encourages people to pursue lofty ideals and to strive for perfection, not just to run after their own desires. Right calls for unity, virtues bring mutual support and solidarity, and belief secures brotherhood and sisterhood. Encouraging the soul to attain perfection brings happiness in both worlds.

Democracy has developed over time. Just as it has gone through many different stages in the past, it will continue to evolve and to improve in the future. Along the way, it will be shaped into a more humane and just system, one based on righteousness and reality. If human beings are considered as a whole, without disregarding the spiritual dimension of their existence and their spiritual needs, and without forgetting that human life is not limited to this mortal life and that all people have a great craving for eternity, democracy could reach its peak of perfection and bring even more happiness to humanity. Islamic principles of equality, tolerance, and justice can help it do just that.

about the author:
Fethullah Gülen has spent much of his life as a religious teacher in Turkey. He is author of more than forty books, most of them best-sellers in Turkey, and his writing appears regularly in Turkish journals. This article was translated from Turkish by Elvan Ceylan .
Notes

1. Abu Shuja’ Shirawayh ibn Shahrdar al-Daylami, Al-Firdaws bi-Ma’thur al-Khitab (The Heavenly Garden Made Up of the Selections From the Prophet’s Addresses) (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-’Ilmiya, 1986), 4:300.

2. For the second part of the hadith see the sections “Nikah” (Marriage Contract) in Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari, ed., al-Jami’ al-Sahih (A Collection of the Prophet’s Authentic Traditions) (Istanbul: al-Maktabat al-Islamiya, n.d.), ch. 45; “Birr wa-Sila” (Goodness and Visiting the Relatives) in Imam Abu Husayn Muslim ibn Hajjaj, ed., al-Jami’ al-Sahih, op. cit., ch. 23; and for the first part see “Tafsir” (The Quranic Commentary) and “Manaqib” (The Virtues of the Prophet and His Companions) in Abu ‘Isa Muhammad ibn ‘Isa al-Tirmidhi, Al-Jami’ al-Sahih (Beirut: Dar al-Ihya al-Turath al-’Arabi, n.d.), chs. 49 and 74, respectively. The original text in Arabic does not include the word “sisters” in the command. However, the masculine form used refers to both men and women, as is the rule in many languages. An equivalent in English would be “mankind,” which refers to both men and women. By saying “O servants of God,” the Prophet also means women, because both men and women are equally servants of God.

3. See Karl R. Popper, The Poverty of Historicism, trans. Sabri Orman (Istanbul: Insan yayinlari, 1985).

4. ‘Ala al-Din ‘Ali al-Muttaqi al-Hindi, Kanz al-’Ummal fi Sunan al-Aqwal wa al-Af’al (A Treasure of the Laborers for the Sake of Prophet’s Sayings and Deeds) (Beirut: Muassasat al-Risala, 1985), 6:89.