Continue reading »]]> by Zaid Shakir
As the crisis that has emerged in the aftermath of the publication of the infamous cartoons that claim to depict the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of God upon him, escalates, we would do well by stepping back and attempting to analyze the situation as dispassionately as possible. By doing so, as Muslims, we can hopefully formulate a more productive and meaningful response, and avoid being exploited by either side in the ongoing conflict. Saying this, I do not mean to imply that Muslims are not justifiably angry over the caricatures. However, I would agree with those who argue that responses that involve wild outbreaks of frenzied violence are inappropriate, and they only affirm what the cartoonist is trying to imply. Namely, that Islam is a religion that encourages obscurantist violence and terrorism.

The current crisis shows the extent we Muslims are vulnerable to media manipulation, superficial shows of piety, and counterproductive one-upmanship militancy. If we start with the issue of media manipulation, it is clear that Western and Eastern media outlets played a large role in stirring up Muslim, and now Western sentiments. When the crisis initially broke in September, it was barely a blip on the media radar. Few outside of Denmark even knew of the cartoons. The Danish Muslim community, appropriately, by and large ignored the story. [1] It was only after a campaign undertaken by a delegation of Danish Muslim community activists to stimulate greater interest in the issue that the crisis reached the proportions we are currently witnessing. These activists traveled throughout the Muslim East trying to draw attention to the issue. When the issue was popularized by Iqra and other Arab satellite channels, and the cartoons were reprinted by several European papers, the crisis deepened. In light of that reality, it would be hard to deny the role the media has played in sparking and now perpetuating the crisis.

A question we must ask is if these cartoons, which are an example of hundreds of other anti-Islamic slights occurring daily in Europe and America, were not brought to the attention of Muslims by the media, would we be undergoing the current brouhaha? – Clearly not. That being the case, what does this say about our strategic vision? What does this say about our level of political maturity? And what does it say about our ability to engage in meaningful proactive work? The answers to these questions are obvious. We get angry about Israeli troops breaking the bones of Palestinian children, as long as it is in the media. When it disappears from our television screens, our interest vanishes with it. We raise millions of dollars for those affected by the Tsunami, as long as the images of death and destruction are beamed into our homes by the media. However, when the coverage shifts to other issues, the donations dry up. As for those crises that do not make the news in a big way, such as the ongoing famines in Mali, Niger, and the Horn of Africa, we are hardly stirred to action.

Furthermore, we go on living our lives oblivious to the ongoing abuse of Islam and our Prophet, peace and blessing of God upon him, until it becomes a major media event. At that point based on urgings issued by parties, the origins of their dubious agendas unknown to us, we are expected to drop everything and hastily rush into the fray. In many instances, our ill-conceived actions only make the situation worse.

Sometimes, those actions may constitute superficial shows of piety emanating from the mob hysteria underlying them. In the mob we are empowered, and find it easy to confront our opponents, defy the rule of law, behave with wanton abandon, or engage in other acts which under the proper circumstances we may view as supporting Islam. In terms of more constructive mass actions, such as emerging into the streets by the tens of thousands to protest the brutal, authoritarian regimes that make a mockery of the prophetic ideals of justice, mutual consultation, and service to the oppressed and downtrodden of society, we come up terribly short. Similarly, there are no credible grassroots efforts towards forming effective anti-defamation organizations to bring constructive legal action against transgressing organizations and individuals, on a fulltime, proactive basis. As individuals, we find it difficult to support the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, by adorning ourselves with his lofty character traits, or reviving His Sunnah in our daily lives.

On the other hand, as mentioned above, it is all too easy to get swept up into the mob hysteria generated by the crowd, and then engage in outrageous actions that only affirm the offensive claims of the transgressing cartoonist. It is as if we are saying, “We’ll show the Kafirs our Prophet, peace upon him was no terrorist! We’ll defame the symbols of their religion [2] burn their embassies, murder their unsuspecting innocents, and behead the bloody cartoonist if we get our hands on him.” [3]

This brings us to my third point, that of counterproductive, one-upmanship militancy. It is during these crises that all Muslims are supposed to drop everything and join the latest “Jihad” fad. Those of us who urge restraint are mocked as not being militant enough, or ridiculed as cowards who are afraid to “stand up to the real enemies of Islam.” No differences in understanding, interpretation, or strategy are allowed, because there is only one correct approach, the one stumbled upon with the aid of modern, sensationalizing media.

Such a reactive, haphazard approach is counterproductive for a number of reasons. First of all, it destroys the basis for proactive work based on the existence of a strategic vision. As long as the enemies of Islam know that they can mobilize the Muslims to chase after an unimaginable number of distracting issues, divide our ranks by those issues, and diffuse our energies through their debate and the pursuit of their resolution, they will possess a trump card that will affect our ability to unite and work more effectively towards creating and implementing an agenda capable of effecting meaningful change in our circumstance. It also blinds us to the underlying agenda that reckless spontaneous action might be unwittingly serving.

For example, it is interesting that these events have come to a head in the immediate aftermath of the stunning landslide victory of Hamas in the Palestinian elections. That victory has rekindled, both in the East and the West, the debate around the implications of supporting democratization in the Muslim world when the biggest winners will be Islamic parties and movements. There are secularists in both the West and the Muslim world who advocate ending the democratizing experiment on that basis. However, they know that denying the democratic will of the Muslim peoples cannot be done without the support of the masses of people in Europe and America. These masses, especially in Britain and America, are increasingly wary of their governments’ nefarious agenda for the Middle East. However, the frightening images of crazed crowds rampaging, looting, and burning provides a powerful justification for the extreme, repressive policies being advocated by the far right for dealing with Islam and Muslims, both domestically, and internationally. Democracy in the Muslim world, they argue, will bring the advocates of mob rule to power.

If brutal draconian measures, such as those employed to end the democratization process in Algeria in the early 1990s, are employed elsewhere, the Western public will be psychologically prepared to accept those measures, because of the fear that has been created around the “Islamic” alternative. That fear can not only be used to justify denying the democratic will of the Muslim peoples, it can also be used to justify denying their legitimate strategic ambitions. A recent editorial in the Jerusalem Post links the fanaticism of the cartoon protests to the lawful nuclear ambitions of Iran. It states, “If anyone wants to appreciate why the West views with such suspicion the weapons programs of Muslim states such as Iran, they need look no further than the intolerance Muslim regimes exhibit to these cartoons, and what this portends.”

This crisis has also occurred in the immediate aftermath of the appearance of the latest “Bin Laden” tape, intensified warnings of an imminent major terrorist attack in the West, something “on the scale of 9/11,” and it coincides with the escape of the alleged mastermind of the attack on the USS Cole from a Yemeni jail. The fear associated with the latter two events, combined with the images of hysterical protesters, work to create a climate that can support unprecedented measures if another major terrorist attack were to occur in the near future –whoever the perpetrators may be.

In addition to the setbacks on the psychological front, the current crisis indicates just how bad we are losing in the Jihad of ideas. It is not without significance that the ultimate objective of Jihad is linked to ideas. The Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of God upon him, was asked about a man who fought to display his bravery, another who fought out of fealty to his tribe, and a third who fought to show off. Which had fought in the Way of God? He replied, peace and blessings of God upon him, “The one who fought to make the Word of God uppermost has fought in the Way of God.”[4] Is the nature of the current campaign working to make the Word of God uppermost? Every Muslim needs to ask that question.

As Muslims, we are carrying the Word of God in an increasingly secular, militarized, and alienated world. What it means to carry that word is not an unknowable abstraction. We carry it by following the concrete example of our Noble Messenger Muhammad, peace and blessings of God upon him. In carrying the word, he endured unimaginable abuses and he persevered through them because he was inspired by a grand vision. That vision was to see his people saved by the life-giving, life-affirming message of Islam. No greater illustration of this can be given than the story of his expulsion from the city of Ta’if, after the arrogant leaders of that town unleashed the fools, slaves, and children against him.

In the aftermath of that onslaught, the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, humbly raised his hands towards the sky and prayed:

O, God! Unto you alone do I plead my lack of strength, the paucity of my efforts, and my humiliation before the people. O, the Most Merciful of all! You are the Lord of the oppressed, you are my Lord. Unto who have you dispatched me? To a distant host who receives me repugnantly? Or to an enemy you have authorized over my affair? If you are not angry with me, I care not. It is only your goodness I seek to be covered with. I seek refuge with the Light of your Face, through which the darkness is illuminated and all the affairs of the world and hereafter are rectified, that you do not cast your anger down on me, nor cause your wrath to settle upon me. There is neither strength, nor power but with You. [5]

Two significant events are then related after this prayer was uttered by the Prophet, peace and blessing of God upon him. First of all, when presented with an offer by the Angels that God crush the city of Ta’if, the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, refused saying that perhaps from the offspring of the offending hosts, there would emerge those who would worship God. This incident is well known. A lesser known incident associated with the journey to Ta’if occurred when the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, was preparing to reenter Mecca, in the company of his companion Zaid bin Haritha. Zaid asked, “How can you reenter their presence when they have expelled you?” The Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, replied, “O, Zaid! God is bringing about through these events you have witnessed a great opening. God is most capable of assisting His religion, and manifesting the truth of His prophet.”

One of the most disturbing aspects of the current campaign to “Assist the Prophet,” for many converts, like this writer, is the implicit assumption that there is no da’wah work being undertaken here in the West, and no one is currently, or will in the future enter Islam in these lands. Therefore, it does not matter what transpires in the Muslim East. Muslims can behave in the most barbaric fashion, murder, plunder, pillage, brutalize and kidnap civilians, desecrate the symbols of other religions, trample on their honor, discard their values and mores, and massacre their fellow Muslims. If any of that undermines the works of Muslims in these Western lands, it does not matter. If it places a barrier between the Western people and Islam, when many of those people are in the most desperate need of Islam, it does not matter. If our Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, had responded to those who abused him in Ta’if with similar disregard, none of the generations of Muslims who have come from the descendants of those transgressors would have seen the light of day.

These campaigns of desperation also implicitly display a lack of confidence in God’s ability to protect his religion and defend the honor of His Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him. We should do what we can do within lawful limits, and then we depute the affair to God. When we despair of help from God and find ourselves with limited strategic resources, we sometimes press forward with the most desperate tactics imaginable, taking little time to assess the compatibility of those tactics with Islamic teachings, or their long-term implications for the cause of Islam, especially in the West.

There are certainly more constructive and productive ways to defend the honor of the Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him. Why are we calling for a “Day of Outrage” when our Prophet has instructed us repeatedly not to become angry? There are surely times when we should become angry for the sake of God. However, under the current circumstances, are anger and outrage appropriate responses? Why not a “Day of Familiarization,” where we teach people who the Prophet was and what he really represents, peace and blessings of God upon him? Why not a “Day of Sunnah,” where we all vow to revive a Sunnah we have allowed to slip away from our religious life. Such a day could also include the Sunnah of showing concern for ones neighbors? We could visit them and tell them about Islam and our beloved Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him.

Whatever we do, as Muslims in the West, we may be approaching the day when we will have to “go it alone.” If our coreligionists in the East cannot respect the fact that we are trying to accomplish things here in the West, and that their oftentimes ill-considered actions undermine that work in many instances, then it will be hard for us to consider them allies. How can one be an ally when he fails to consult you concerning actions whose negative consequences you will suffer? No one from the Muslim east consults us before launching these campaigns. No one seeks to find out as to how their actions are going to affect our lives and families. The confused incompetence of the Muslim countries around the issue of moon-sighting, a situation that has painful consequences for Muslims here in America is bad enough, the added pressure generated by these reoccurring crises is becoming unbearable for many.

We have a generation of Muslim children here who have to go to schools where most of them are small minorities facing severe peer pressure. During these crises they do not have the luxury of losing themselves in a frenzied mob. Their faith is challenged and many decide to simply stop identifying with Islam. Is that what they deserve? If they are largely lost to Islam, what is the future of our religion here? We have obedient, pious Hijab wearing women, who out of necessity must work, usually in places where they are the only Muslims. Should their safety, dignity, and honor be jeopardized by the actions of Muslims halfway around the world?

I reiterate that I am not saying these cartoons, and other denigrations of our religion and our Prophet, peace and blessings of God upon him, should be totally ignored. Imam Shafi’i stated that anyone who is angered and does not respond; he is a jackass. However, our responses should be weighed on the basis of a strategic calculus we construct. Their timing should be determined by that calculus, not by media sensationalizing. They should be undertaken in consultation with those who will be directly affected by the responses they generate. And their long-range implications should be deeply considered.
In conclusion, one should not see the ongoing crisis as a clash of civilizations. Phenomena as deep and complex as civilizations cannot be thrown into conflict overnight by media-driven campaigns. A clash of civilizations would also involve the overwhelming majority of people identified by a particular civilizational nexus. The current crisis is the result of a regrettable incident that has been exploited by an uncivilized minority of provocateurs both in the West and the East to advance their conflicting agendas. As long as that exploitation continues, the crisis could aptly be called the clash of the uncivilized.

[1] We say appropriately because the measured response of the Danish Muslim community killed the story. Certainly part of the defense of the Prophet’s honor is to keep these images out of the media. The initial response of the Danish Muslims did just that.

[2] The Danish flag prominently displays a cross, the symbol of Christianity. Hence, every time a Danish flag is burned or trampled on, the symbol of Christianity is desecrated. A similar transgression against Islam would occur if the Saudi flag, which contains the Name of Allah, and the declaration of Tawhid La ilaha illa Allah were burned or trampled. The question here is has the entirety of Christendom transgressed against the Muslim people in a way to justify an attack on the symbol of their faith?

[3] Protestors in Britain this past Friday threatened suicide bombing attacks in European cities, and the beheading of the offending cartoonists. Insightfully, the British Muslim youth protesting wearing a mock suicide bomber’s vest turned out to be a convicted heroin and crack dealer, out on parole. It is a lot easier to mobilize the Muslim youth for the anti-cartoon Jihad than to deal with the rising rates of incarceration, mental illness, failing schools, dysfunctional homes, and the drug addition and alcoholism that are ravaging the British Muslim community.

[4] Al-Bukhari, no. 7458, and Muslim, no. 1904.

[5] This prayer and the incident precipitating it are related in the various books of Prophetic biography, both ancient and modern. It is quoted here from Dr. Muhammad Sa’id Ramadan al-Buti, Fiqh as-Sirah (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 2001/1422), pp. 150-151.
source: zaytuna.org

Continue reading »]]> by Zaid Shakir

Introduction

“Leave this Europe where they are never done talking of Man, yet they murder men everywhere they find them, at the corner of every one of their streets, in all corners of the globe. For centuries they have stifled almost all of humanity in the name of a so-called spiritual experience. Look at them today swaying between atomic and spiritual disintegration…That same Europe where they are never done talking of Man, and where they never stopped proclaiming that they were only anxious for the welfare of Man: today we know what sufferings humanity has paid for every one of their triumphs of the mind.”

Frantz Fanon, The Wretched of the Earth

The following essay, Islam: Religion or Ideology, was written three weeks ago, before the government of Israel began its brutal, murderous assault on the civilian population of Lebanon, allegedly in response to the capture of two Israeli soldiers by fighters affiliated with the Lebanese Islamic organization, Hizbollah. This latest Israeli campaign only underscores the price the people of the Middle East have paid owing to the triumph of Zionism. That price has been high indeed, and as Lebanon is reduced to bloodstained rubble, the price only escalates.

That said, we should never lose sight of the fact that the Jewish people have also paid heavily for that triumph. The growing number of Jewish victims of the deepening cycles of violence plaguing the region, evidenced most recently in the indiscriminant Hizbollah rocket attacks on northern Israeli cities, is part of that price. However, in my opinion, the greater price lies in how the triumph of Zionism threatens to transform mainstream Judaism from a religion characterized by the loftiest of moral codes, to one that is willing to sacrifice its morality on the altar of political expediency.

Evidence of Jewish philanthropy, and goodwill towards the generality of humanity still exists—one has to only look at the charitable and social justice work done both here and globally by Jews—however, the overwhelming support the people of Israel, and Jews in other parts of the world, have given to this most recent campaign of murder and destruction against the defenseless Lebanese people (most of whom are not politically aligned with Hizbollah) points to the sad reality of a great world faith being diminished by the political agenda of the Zionist state.

The following is part of an effort by this writer to warn Muslims against allowing the reduction of our religion by similar political imperatives. We should never hope to see the day when, if possessing the requisite firepower, Muslims would visit upon the civilian population of Israel the sort of savage violence we see decimating the innocent civilians of Gaza and Lebanon. God has imposed limits on our behavior, even in times of war, and we should never transgress those limits. Our failure to observe those limits not only threatens to destroy the moral foundations of our religion, it will also add to the suffering of innocent human beings.

Time does not allow a deeper analysis of the current crisis. In the near future, I plan to write an extensive article on this issue. For now, I will conclude my remarks with the deeply insightful and frighteningly prophetic words of the Zionist philosopher Ahad Ha’am (Asher Ginsberg). He writes over one hundred years ago:

“One thing we certainly should have learned from our past and present history, and that is not to create anger among the local population against us… We have to treat the local population with love and respect, justly and rightly. And what do our brethren in the Land of Israel do? Exactly the opposite! Slaves they were in their country of exile, and suddenly they find themselves in a boundless and anarchic freedom, as is always the case with a slave that has become king; and they behave towards the Arabs with hostility and cruelty, infringe upon their boundaries, hit them shamefully without reason, and even brag about it. Our brethren are right when they say that the Arab honours only those who show valor and fortitude; but this is the case only when he feels that the other side has justice on his side. It is very different in a case when [the Arab] thinks that his opponent’s actions are iniquitous and unlawful; in that case he may keep his anger to himself for a long time, but it will dwell in his heart and in the long run he will prove himself to be vengeful and full of retribution.”

Ahad Haam, Complete Works

Islam: Religion or Ideology?

At a recently concluded convention of the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), I mentioned during one of my presentations that the verse quoted below should be understood as a religious—not a political—statement:

It is He who has sent His Messenger with Guidance and the Religion of Truth in order that He shows its superiority over all other religion, even if the idolaters detest it. [Al-Qur’an 9:33, 61:9]

In doing so, my purpose was to challenge one of the principal texts offered as a proof to support the idea that Islam advances a scheme of global domination, and as such there is no basis in Islamic teaching for peaceful coexistence with other faiths and communities.

After my presentation, I was met by several young Muslims who vehemently expressed their opposition to my referring to the above verse as a religious proclamation. I understood the reason for their objections and responded by explaining the theological basis of my claim. Left unsaid, however, was the greater issue that informs the popular understanding of the verse, which is the growing tendency among Muslims to read many of our foundational texts politically and not theologically. Such a reading shifts the emphasis of our religion away from the Hereafter and creates a distorted focus on the world.

Islam is one of the world’s great religions. As such, it concerns itself with the principal issues that dominate the discourse surrounding any faith. These issues include identifying, believing in, worshipping, and obeying the Divine in anticipation of otherworldly rewards, or the avoidance of otherworldly punishments. At the heart of these issues is a deep concern for the eventual salvation of the human being. Islam shares these religious concerns, God mentions in the Qur’an:

Every soul will experience death, and you will be given your recompense in full on the Day of Resurrection. The one who is saved from Hellfire and admitted into Paradise will be truly victorious. And what is the life of this world except a deceptive enjoyment. [Al-Qur’an 3:185]

Like all other religions in their respective milieus, Islam also has profound and far-reaching political implications. It has shaped law, government, commerce, social relations, and virtually every other sphere of life in the Muslim world. However, its political implications are subordinate to its religious teachings. Hence, for example, a Muslim individual or polity may succeed politically, while being damned religiously, because basic injunctions of the religion have been sacrificed to unsanctioned political imperatives, or unacceptable motives. A vivid illustration of this result is given to us in the well-known prophetic tradition that mentions a great Mujahid (warrior) who achieved the epitome of worldly success, but lost his soul because of the corrupt intention motivating his efforts.[1]

Politicized readings of our texts can be seen as part of the growing tendency to reduce Islam to a political ideology. The implications of this reduction are grave. Perhaps the gravest of those implications is turning the primary focus of Islam away from the spirit or soul and orienting it towards the world, thereby reducing the sacred understanding to the level of the mundane.

The reasons we must resist this reorientation become clearer when we reflect upon the nature of ideologies. The noted political philosopher, Roger Scruton, defines an ideology as:

Any systematic and all-embracing political doctrine, which claims to give a complete and universally applicable theory of man and society, and to derive there from a programme of political action.[2]

A Muslim might read this definition and opine that Islam is indeed an ideology as it presents a “complete and universally applicable theory of man and society.” However, the relevant realm of action and thought for an ideology is the political, as Scruton points out. This limitation to the political realm marks where Islam parts with ideology. Islam is not simply concerned with man’s political condition; it is also concerned with his spiritual condition, and at the heart of the Islamic call is a normative program for spiritual salvation. That program accommodates the political, but on its own terms, and it is never limited to it or by it.

Moreover, ideologies are also utilitarian in that the doctrines they espouse are informed as much by their effectiveness as they are by any overarching principles. Few ideologies would deviate far from the Machiavellian maxim that “the ends justify the means.” Scruton continues with his definition:

An ideology in this sense seeks to embrace everything that is relevant to man’s political condition, and to issue doctrine whenever doctrine would be influential in forming or changing that condition. [3]

Hence, doctrine issuing from a particular ideology is marshaled based on its efficacy in advancing the cause, not on the basis of any preexisting moral or ethical standard. Such a formulation is at complete odds with Islam and, thus, largely alien to its classical tradition. However, when Islam is reduced to an ideology, it is inevitably relegated to the realm of political expediency. Whatever appears to advance the political cause is seen as Islamic, such as suicide bombings, massacring civilians, murdering other Muslims, destroying public order, or other tactics that have become associated with the ideology and practice of “Islamic Jihad.” [4]

A strictly political reading of the Qur’an urges such expediency. Such a reading tends to reduce verses of clearly theological or eschatological import to statements of political doctrine. The implications of this for understanding and action, again, are profound. Events whose unfolding is confined to the end of time are assigned an immediacy that begs their applicability here and now. The introductory verse in question provides a stark example of this tendency.

In examining the verse, one has to admit that some latter-day exegetes have mentioned a few prophetic traditions that if taken in isolation would seem to urge a political understanding. For example, Ibn Kathir, in commenting on the verse mentions the prophetic tradition:

God has folded up the ends of the Earth for me [showing me] its easternmost and westernmost reaches. The dominion of my nation will reach the extents He has shown me. [5]

Although the word “dominion,” mentioned in the above tradition may lend itself to a political understanding of the verse, it must be noted that Ibn Kathir mentions other narrations that lend themselves to a strictly theological understanding. Meanwhile, the primary theological and eschatological import of the verse is made clear by Imam Tabari, the dean of Qur’anic exegetes. He mentions in his commentary:

The scholars of [Qur’anic] interpretation differ concerning the meaning of [God’s] saying…in order that He shows its superiority over all other religion. Some of them say that will occur when Jesus returns and all religions will become a single faith. Among those mentioning this [view]:

On the authority of Abu Huraira concerning His [God’s] saying …in order that He shows its superiority over all other religion he said, “At the time Jesus the Son of Mary returns. [6]

Imam Tabari continues:

Others say that this means He [God] will teach him [the Prophet, ] the laws associated with every religion… Among those mentioning this [view]:

On the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas concerning His [God’s] saying …in order that He shows its superiority over all other religion he said, “In order that God shows His prophet the rulings associated with every religion. He subsequently showed him, and [thereafter] nothing [of religious knowledge] was hidden from him. [7]

Imam Suyuti mentions the two narrations quoted above in his exegetical work, ad-Durr al-Manthur. He then relates from Imam al-Bayhaqi and others a narration that further emphasizes both the theological and eschatological nature of the verse being discussed. He says:

Sa’id bin Mansur relates, as does Ibn al-Mundhir, along with Imam al-Bayhaqi in his Sunan on the authority of Jabir, May God be pleased with him, concerning the phrase …in order that He shows its superiority over all other religion that he said, “That will not come to pass until every Jew and Christian has entered into Submission, nor until no harm issues from the wolf towards any sheep, from the lion towards any cow, nor from the viper towards any human being. That will not be until even the mouse will not gnaw on a bag of grain. That will not be until the tribute is suspended, the cross is broken, and the pig is slaughtered. All of this will occur when Jesus descends, Peace upon him. [8]

This theological and eschatological understanding, clear in the exegesis of both Imam Tabari and Imam Suyuti, is shared by Imam al-Qurtubi. [9] They all make it clear that these events will occur at the end of time, after the return of Jesus. Accepting this understanding of the verse, coupled with other widely known religious teachings, helps us to assess our current situation in light of the realities confronting us, and to devise strategies to deal with those realities free from a false political imperative, informed in part by this verse, that will likely lead to questionable, desperate, and ill-advised acts owing to our strategic and political weaknesses.

This argument is not meant to imply that Islam is a pacifist religion. As Muslims we believe in the concept of justified warfare. God mentions in the Qur’an:

Permission [to fight] is given to those who are unjustly fought against, and God is most capable of assisting them. Those who have been wrongfully expelled from their homes [for no reason] except their saying, “Our Lord is Allah (God)…” [Al-Qur’an 22:39-40]

Similarly, Fight in the Way of God those who fight you, but do not transgress. God loves not those who transgress. [Al-Qur’an 2:190]

Hence, Islam has instituted fighting to defend life, honor, property, to restore usurped rights, and to protect the integrity of the religion and the community of the faithful. However, that fighting is governed by well-established laws and principles that articulate rules, regulations, and limitations that outline for Muslims when, where, how, and against whom it is permissible to fight. Those laws and principles have never sanctioned anarchist terrorism, wanton murder, tumult, and mayhem.

Reducing Islam to an ideology threatens to subordinate those laws and principles to political imperatives that have little to do with Islamic teachings. If this happens consistently enough, the social foundation of our religion may be lost. As Muslims we may well continue in our various struggles. However, those struggles would be better informed by the revolutionary teachings of Bakunin, Georges Sorel, Rosa Luxemburg, Lenin, Mao, Che Guevara, and others than by the revelation given to our Prophet Muhammad, . In some circumstances, we could possibly muster a credible defense against any number of threats confronting us. However, at the end of the day, we may find that we have very little left to defend.

Imam Zaid Shakir
7/9/06
————————-

[1] Imam Abu Zakariyya Yahya bin Sharaf an-Nawawi, Riyadh as-Saliheen (Beirut: Dar al-Jil, 1985/1405), 448, no. 1615. This tradition was originally transmitted by Imams Muslim, Tirmidhi, Nasa’i, and others.

[2] Roger Scruton, A Dictionary of Political Thought (New York, NY: Hill and Wang, 1982), 399.

[3] Ibid, 399.

[4] Saying this is not to all imply that all of the murder and mayhem that is occurring in Iraq, or that which has occurred in places like Algeria during much of the 1990s can be attributed solely to Muslims. Certainly, a share of such violence can be traced to elements of relevant intelligence agencies in both Iraq and Algeria, or non-Muslim mercenaries, such as the French commandos in Algeria, or Serbian paramilitary militia members, or former South African death squads, both of which are active in Iraq. However, to deny the role of the ideology of Jihad in that violence is to display an ignorance of the doctrines, proclamations, and history of that the Jihad movement.

[5]Abu al-Fida’ Isma’il bin Kathir, Tafsir al-Qur’an al-‘Adhim (Sidon, Beirut: al-Maktaba al-‘Asriyya, 1996/1416), 2:319.

[6]Imam Abu Ja’far bin Jarir at-Tabari, Jami’ al-Bayan fi Ta’wil al-Qur’an (Beirut: Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyya, 1997/1418), 6:356, no. 16,660.

[7] Imam at-Tabari, 6:356-357, no. 16,662.

[8] Imam Jalal ad-Din as-Suyuti, Ad-Durr al-Manthur fi at-Tafsir bi’l-Ma’thur (Beirut: Dar Ihya’ at-Turath al-‘Arabi, 2001/1421), 4:161.

[9] See Imam Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Qurtubi, al-Jami’ li Ahkam al-Qur’an (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1987/1407), 8:121.
source:zeytuna.org

Continue reading »]]> Imam Warith Deen Muhammad: A Muslim for Our Times
By Imam Zaid Shakir

Imam Warith Deen Muhammad, who passed away September 9th, in Chicago, Illinois, was not the best known American Muslim of his generation. Unlike his friend Malcolm X (El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz), he did not become a symbol of black rage with excerpts of his speeches innovatively spliced into the songs of contemporary artists who define the evolving hip hop movement.

Unlike Minister Louis Farrakhan, he was not a charismatic orator capable of mesmerizing crowds for hours on end. His recordings are not circulated widely among Muslim students on college campuses across this country like those of Imam Siraj Wahhaj and Shaykh Hamza Yusuf. Perhaps, fittingly, this is not the case, for Imam Muhammad will always be best remembered for what he did, not for what he said.

His father, Elijah Muhammad (ably assisted by Malcolm X), built the Nation of Islam into a movement that came to epitomize, in the hearts and minds of many urban African Americans, black pride, self-sufficiency, and militancy. However, for white Americans familiar with its teachings, the organization was a mysterious cult-like group that in the name of combating white racism, countered with a menacing brand of black racism, whose signature slogan, “The white man is the devil,” served to place a wedge between the “Black Muslims” and mainstream American society.

Imam Warith Deen Muhammad assumed the leadership of the Nation of Islam in 1975 upon his father’s death, and worked doggedly to remove that wedge. He introduced his followers to Islam as a universal religion whose ranks include adherents from every race and ethnicity around the world. He initiated reforms that led members of the organization to adopt the traditional Islamic rites of prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage and still maintain an emphasis on black pride.

However, for Imam Muhammad, black pride did not mean identifying with cultural relics foreign to an American frame of reference. For the Imam, black pride was manifested in the moral and academic excellence that constitutes the true basis for the greatness of any people. That message resonated in the hearts of his followers. Today his community boasts scholars such as Intisar Rabb, who has completed a JD at Yale and is currently finishing her PhD at Princeton; athletes like Shareef Abdur-Raheem, an NBA All Star; and multitudes of upright men and women who have been inspired by the Imam’s teachings.

Perhaps the greatest of Imam Muhammad’s work was his effort at “indigenizing” Islam in America. At a time when many converts to Islam were led to believe that being Muslim involved dressing like an Arab or a Pakistani and cultivating a bitter anti-Americanism, Imam Muhammad encouraged his followers to wear business suits and make a strong commitment to their families.

His approach in this regard was not in the spirit of an uncritical “Uncle Tomism.” Rather it was a realistic acknowledgement of the fact that whether we like it or not this is our country, and true Islamic teachings urge us to acknowledge this fact and work for the common good.

Today, we find that forces of obscurantist bigotry are working to place an intractable divide between Islam, Muslims, and America. Those of us who are Muslims living in this country must work to keep the mission and message of Imam Warith Deen Muhammad alive. This is indeed our country. We are not Africans, Arabs, or Asians. We are Americans, and we must do everything in our power to advance the common good.

Zaid Shakir is a resident scholar at Zaytuna Institute (www.zaytuna.org), a Muslim educational organization in Berkeley, California.

source:www.zaytuna.org