بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

LIVE news updates
Jun 24 Transforming Your Reality Jun 17 A History of Muslim Americans’ Political Engagement Jun 17 My Brother is Gay: Navigating the Intersection of Religion and Family An interview with Imam Wesley Lebron Jun 10 Islam and the Romans: Early Muslim-Byzantine Interaction May 20 Reclaiming the Sunnah of Adoption and Foster Care: An Interview with Basmah Salam Apr 29 National Poetry Month: An Ode to Faith, Visibility, and the Conversations We Don’t Forget Apr 15 Beyond Ramadan: Taking Its Lessons Farther  Apr 15 The Power of Saying No: A Reflection on Boundaries

Tag: sharia

  • Why Have We Normalized Islamophobia?

    Why Have We Normalized Islamophobia?

    The horrific attacks in Paris and San Bernardino have captured headlines and triggered responses from journalists, politicians, and religious leaders. Some Western heads of government have once again threatened a global war against terrorism, while some political commentators have even invoked World War III.

    A cottage industry of ideological, agenda-driven, anti-Muslim polemicists has sprung up, consisting of pundits, bloggers, authors, lobbyists, elected officials, and their resourceful and wealthy funders.

    In the United States, Republican presidential candidates and some thirty governors have called for a freeze on accepting refugees fleeing the civil war in Syria. Donald Trump, the leading Republican candidate for president of the United States, has pushed the envelope to its extreme, advocating a temporary freeze on all foreign Muslim immigration, as well as the monitoring or even the forced closure of American mosques. The result? Trump soared in the polls, as did fellow presidential candidate Ben Carson, who stated that “for a Muslim to become president of the United States…you have to reject the tenets of Islam.” In Europe, far-right political candidates continue to make political headway. The far-right Front National party of Marine Le Pen won nearly 30% of the vote in the recent French regional elections; although the party did not win any of the regions outright, the strong showing positions Le Pen as a future presidential candidate.

    Fear of Islam and Muslims in general—not just Muslim extremist and terrorist movements specifically—have become normalized in popular culture in both America and Europe. The anti-Islamic and anti-Muslim hate speech, bias, discrimination, and hate crimes—commonly referred to as Islamophobia—are on the rise. Islam Muslims and the vast majority of Muslims have been brush-stroked by and often equated with the kind of militant extremism and terrorism practiced by a mere fraction of Muslims, obscuring the fact that the vast majority of terrorist victims are themselves Muslim. This, in turn, has had a significant impact on the growth of Islamophobia as well as the domestic policies that have threatened Muslim civil liberties. But what are its causes?

    Is Islam the primary cause and catalyst for terrorism?

    Major polls have consistently reported that Islam is a significant component of religious and cultural identity in Muslim countries and communities globally, and thus an attractive tool for violent extremists as an instrument for legitimation and mobilization. However, the primary catalysts for extremism and terrorism are political grievances often intertwined with the use or misuse of religion. Osama Bin Laden and others like him appealed to long-standing political grievances among many in the Muslim world, the mainstream non-violent majority and extremists alike: Western influence, invasion, occupation; Western support for authoritarian regimes that claim to speak for all Muslims; uncritical bias and support for Israel from the American government in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Add to this the Iraqi and Syrian (Shiah-dominated) governments’ repression and killing of tens of thousands of civilians and other crimes.

    “Trump is ISIS’s greatest triumph: the perfect Manchurian Candidate who, instead of offering specific and realistic policies, preys on the fears of the public, doing ISIS’s job for them.”

    ISIS has shown a particular talent for coopting and exploiting all of these issues. Their execution videos, released when ISIS called itself the Islamic State of Iraq (October 2006–April 2013, Al-Furqan Media Foundation), underscored the importance of political grievances for legitimation of their actions and as a tool for recruitment.

    In addition to this, public displays of Islamophobia in the West, from political speeches and demonstrations to negative portrayals of Muslims in the media and hate crimes, are also effective tools for recruitment. Major studies have also found that Islamophobia increases significantly not only with incidents of domestic terrorism but also at election time, as seen in the 2008 and 2012 presidential and the 2010 Congressional elections. During those races, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain and others sought to gain attention by making reckless statements about Muslims. In 2010 in particular, the public debate over the so-called “Ground Zero” mosque in New York became fodder for candidates looking for media coverage. Today, that trend continues with candidates such as Trump, Carson, Cruz, and others.

    Most Americans—who live in a country with a relatively small Muslim population—say they know little or nothing about Islam. Thus, it is not surprising that when terrorists commit their acts of violence in the name of Islam in Paris and San Bernardino, they are drawn to demagogues in America like Donald Trump and in Europe who bring Muslims and the Islamic faith to the forefront of the political debate.

    As Kareem Abdul-Jabbar recently wrote in the New York Times: “Trump is ISIS’s greatest triumph: the perfect Manchurian Candidate who, instead of offering specific and realistic policies, preys on the fears of the public, doing ISIS’s job for them.”

    To what extent has media contributed to the problem?

    Media Tenor, in its 2011 report “A New Era for Arab-Western Relations,” found that out of nearly 975,000 news stories from US and European media outlets, networks significantly reduced coverage on events in MENA to actions of Muslim militants. A comparison of media coverage in 2001 versus 2011 demonstrates the shocking disparity of coverage. In 2001, 2% of all news stories in Western media presented images of Muslim militants, while just over 0.5% presented stories of ordinary Muslims. In 2011, 25% of the stories presented militant image, while the images of ordinary Muslims remained stuck at 0.5%.

    The net result is an astonishing imbalance of coverage: an exponential increase in coverage of militants but no increase at all over the 10 year period in the coverage of ordinary Muslims—and that despite census figures confirming a rapidly growing Muslim population. The situation got worse, for example—between 2007 and 2013, 80% of all American news coverage about Muslims/Islam was negative.

    Over the past decade, there has been an explosion of social media websites targeting the Muslim community, with serious international and domestic consequences. A cottage industry of ideological, agenda-driven, anti-Muslim polemicists has sprung up, consisting of pundits, bloggers, authors, lobbyists, elected officials, and their resourceful and wealthy funders.

    An August 2011 Center Report, Fear, Inc., documented, based on IRS information, that $42.6 million flowed from seven foundations over ten years to support Islamophobic authors and websites. A CAIR Report in 2013, “Legislating Fear: Islamophobia and its Impact in the United States,” reported that the inner core of the US-based Islamophobia network enjoyed access to at least $119,662,719 in total revenue between 2008 and 2011.

    Totally lost or obscured in the fear and fog of war are the facts on the ground regarding American Muslims. Data from major polls (Gallup, Pew and others) and studies have reported that the vast majority of Muslims in America, for example, are educationally, economically, socially, and religiously an integral part of our American mosaic: members of Congress, the military, corporate, education and religious leaders, physicians, lawyers, engineers, scientists and small business owners. American Muslims were among the victims and first-responders on 9/11. In contrast, Muslim terrorists are a fraction of a fraction of 1%. No wonder that the US Attorney General, Senior Pentagon and Department of Homeland Security, as well as leaders in the Democratic and Republican parties, have rejected Donald Trump’s outrageous and inflammatory rhetoric and its threat to American principles and values and to the civil liberties of American Muslims.

    House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) offered the simplest and most direct rebuttal Tuesday, the day after Trump called for a ban on Muslims entering the United States: “Freedom of religion’s a fundamental constitutional principle,” Ryan said.

    “It’s a founding principle of this country….This is not conservatism. What was proposed yesterday is not what this party stands for, and more importantly, it’s not what this country stands for. Not only are there many Muslims serving in our armed forces dying for this country, there are Muslims serving right here in the House, working every day to uphold and to defend the Constitution…. Some of our best and biggest allies in this struggle and fight against radical Islamic terror are Muslims—the vast, vast, vast majority of whom are peaceful, who believe in pluralism, freedom, democracy, individual rights. I told our members this morning to always strive to live up to our highest ideals, those principles in the Constitution on which we swear every two years that we will defend.”

    As President Barack Obama recently observed: “[I]t is the responsibility of all Americans—of every faith—to reject discrimination. It is our job to reject religious tests on who we admit into this country. It is our responsibility to reject proposals that Muslim Americans should somehow be treated differently. Because when we travel down that road, we lose…We were founded upon a belief in human dignity—that no matter who you are, or where you come from, or what you look like, or what religion you practice, you are equal in the eyes of God and equal in the eyes of the law.”

    A lot of things went wrong this past year, but there may be a silver lining. As Islamophobia intensified and gained more media attention, many Americans and the international community took notice. Google searches of the term “Islamophobia” spiked dramatically after Paris and San Bernardino. Prominent journalists, government and religious leaders, politicians, scholars, and members of the general public started calling out Islamophobia with more force, and leaders on both the right and left stood in solidarity with Muslims. Dozens of interfaith efforts also popped up around the country. So, despite the fact that Islamophobia was at its worst in 2015, there are reasons to hope that we are turning a corner.

  • The Universal Ethos of Moderation: Dismantling Extremism

    The Universal Ethos of Moderation: Dismantling Extremism

    Discussion continues among Americans about terrorism, extremism, jihad, and Islam. The discourse has three basic viewpoints. Put in simplistic frames, the anti-Islam perspective sees Islam as the “mother lode of bad ideas” and Muslims as an irredeemable enemy who evokes the specter of extremism and barbarity convulsing out of religious affiliation. The anti-Islam group voice alarm at the danger lurking at unsecured borders and in unsurveilled living rooms. The liberals, representing the second perspective, recoil at blanket condemnations of Islam and Muslims. Appreciators of pluralist society and multi-culturalism, they eagerly call for respect of Islamic and all other cultural traditions. This voice defends Muslims as a vast majority of peace-loving individuals who have had their religion taken hostage by extremists. The liberals are alarmed at the spreading bigotry that resonates with a wide swath of the American population, as fear and aversion cut through minds and hearts, ratcheted up by bellicose ultra-nationalists and ideologues. The third voice in this discourse, the Muslim one, is largely unceasing recitals of Islamic first principles — “Islam is peace” or the like — and dissimilitude to so-called “jihadists.” The response, both by choice and public demand, is an effort to answer for the political radicalization and terroristic behavior of individuals who commit incomprehensible violence and destruction — all in the name of Islam.

    Trying to Change the Narrative

    When Muslims say “Islam is peace” or “terrorism is un-Islamic” or “Muslim Americans are loyal to America” or “the extremists have hijacked the religion,” it makes no dent in the mindset of the antagonist of Islam. He seems determined to ignore any facts or any pronouncements that are contrary to his preconceived notion of who Muslims are and what Islam teaches. Yet, Muslims have been condemning terrorism ever since 9/11, with sincerity, without fail, loudly and clearly, as reflected in the public record. But the pronouncements are never enough to satisfy minds intent on ostracizing. And so demands for Muslim denunciation of terrorism continue unabated, and like a carnivorous plant, the antagonist sets his traps and gobbles up the condemnations like a feast of delectable insects. But his appetite is insatiable.

    When Muslims say “Islam is peace” or “terrorism is un-Islamic” or “Muslim Americans are loyal to America” or “the extremists have hijacked the religion,” it makes no dent in the mindset of the antagonist of Islam.

    With abhorrence deep-seated and habitual, he declares over and over that Islam and the Quran teach hatred and violence. Yet, going directly to the Quran, one is hard-pressed to find a scintilla of evidence of the purported malevolence. That does not stop the maligning of Islam, the faith of nearly one-fourth of the world’s population, even in academic circles. In the past 15 years, the dominant literature on “Islamic terrorism” has characterized the phenomenon as expression of religious fanaticism, intrinsic to Islam. An influential expositor on religious terrorism, Bruce Hoffman, in his book “Inside Terrorism,” writes, “For the religious terrorist, violence is first and foremost a sacramental act or divine duty executed in direct response to some theological demand or imperative. Terrorism thus assumes a transcendental dimension, and its perpetrators are consequently unconstrained by the political, moral or practical constraints that may affect other [secular] terrorists.”

    Liaquat Ali Khan, professor of law at Washburn University School of Law, writing in the Washburn Law Journal in 2005, describes the mindset of Hoffman and his ilk in his article, “The Essentialist Terrorist”: “There is a coordinated effort on part of academics, scholars, think-tankers, journalists and others to create a profile of Muslim militants as essentialist terrorists who commit heartless violence because they are spiritually addicted to violence. These authors argue that no concrete grievances or violations of rights cause Muslim militancy.” Khan notes that these writers obscure, knowingly or ignorantly, the core beliefs of Islam, thus making the case, quite successfully for those not familiar with authentic sources of the religion, that Islam and terrorism pivot from the same violence-prone provenance.

    Modern-Day Universal Civil and Political Rights

    Before taking a look at primary sources of Islamic doctrine appertaining to violence, warfare, taking of life, and related issues, it is useful to note that modern-day international law codifies rules for military action. In brief, these prescribe that wars be fought to achieve stated lawful aims; that military engagement should be brought to an end as quickly as possible; that unnecessary destruction should be avoided; that prisoners of war should be treated humanely and justly; that all civil and political rights must be respected; and that non-combatants should be protected from harm and hardship, among other rights of people and constraints upon warring parties.

    A Muslim cannot control how other people live their lives, can take responsibility only for his or her own words and actions, and regardless of the ignorance of any other person(s), the duty is to spread peace (28:55).

    International law also codifies the right to defend against aggression and to resist colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation. In accordance with international human rights law, there are real and legitimate grievances — political, social, and economic — suffered by Muslims. Countries in the Middle East are targeted again and again by exploitative external actors, often colluding with internal authoritarians, resulting in egregious and contemptible violations of human rights. A birthright of individuals, the claim to self-determination, is encoded in Article 1 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This treaty asserts the right of all peoples to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development,” among many other stipulated rights. The majority of nations in the world, including the United States, have ratified and signed on to this international treaty. The ICCPR, along with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and provisions in the U.N. Charter, comprise the body of international human rights law. Accordingly, human beings and states have the right to resist an aggressor and defend sovereign territory, including the right to use force. These legal forms of violence are also accorded legitimacy in any struggle for “liberation from colonial and foreign domination.”

    A great number of U.N. General Assembly resolutions have affirmed this legal right of resistance. United Nations General Assembly Resolution A/RES/33/24 of 29 November 1978 states, in part, that it “Reaffirms the legitimacy of the struggle of peoples for independence, territorial integrity, national unity and liberation from colonial and foreign domination and foreign occupation by all available means, particularly armed struggle” (emphasis added). Accordingly, the Iraqis who rose up to fight the military invasion in 2003 were not insurgents or terrorists. They were engaged in a lawful armed struggle to resist a foreign invasion.

    Universal Ethical Principles and Rights Codified in Islam

    The ethical principles codified in contemporary international law (albeit, too often ignored by modern states) with regard to warfare, prisoners of war, protection of civilians, and so on, were heralded centuries ago in Islamic law and tradition. Islam makes clear that there are uncompromising political, moral, and practical constraints in place. There are some general principles expressed in Quran and hadeeth that apply to any conflict or response to being wronged. For example, verse 41:34 instructs believers to repel the evil deed with something better; and there are Prophetic sayings such as “There should be neither harming nor reciprocating harm” (Ibn Majah and others); and “Do not be people without minds of your own, saying that if others treat you well, you will treat them well; and that if they do wrong, you will do wrong to them. Instead, accustom yourselves to do good if people do good, and not to do wrong [even] if they do evil” (Al-Tirmidhi). Getting more specific, there are many Quranic verses that speak to the constraints placed upon Muslims who engage in armed conflict. Some of these are as follows:

    Muslims are not to aggress or begin hostilities (see Quran 2:190)

    If the enemy inclines to peace, Muslims must do the same (Quran 8:61); if the enemy desists from fighting, then hostility must cease (see Quran 2:193)

    Those who are wronged or oppressed have every right to defend themselves, but they must guard against requiting that grievance with actions that may, in turn, slide into evil; so that making peace is preferable, if possible, and rewarded by God (Quran 42:40-42). Muhammad Asad writes in his commentary, “Hence, most of the classical commentators (e.g., Baghawi, Zamakhshari, Razi, Baydawi) stress the absolute prohibition of ‘going beyond what is right’ (i’tida’) when defending oneself against tyranny and oppression”

    Islam is, indeed, a religion of moderation, not one of extremism;.. peace is the objective, not conflict or war.

    While humans are given the right to defend themselves against wrongdoing and oppression, they are nonetheless advised to be patient in adversity and ultimately to forgive (Quran 42:43)

    Captives of war are to be set free or ransomed (Quran 47:4) — perhaps with the exception of war criminals, according to Shaykh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi in “Fiqh of Jihad”).

    Consider the Prophetic saying that there should be neither harm nor reciprocating harm, along with this verse: “…take not life, which God has made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus does He command you, that you may understand” (6:151). These two Islamic teachings — on their own — dismantle the myth that “violence is first and foremost a sacramental act or divine duty” disseminated by the “violence is intrinsic to Islam” propagandists. These two teachings also demolish the justifications made by those who engage in terror in the name of Islam, who target non-combatants and civilians. Add to them the following hadith: “All creation is the family of God, and the person most beloved by God is kind and caring toward His family” (Agreed upon). These are not doctrines that proffer violence as divine duty; these are doctrines, promulgated a millennium and a half ago, that predate and foreshow the loftiest of contemporary humanitarian law.

    As to why fighting is sometimes necessary, the Quran cogently states: “And if God had not enabled people to defend themselves against one another, corruption would surely overwhelm the earth: but God is limitless in His bounty unto all the worlds” (2:251). And another verse: “And how could you refuse to fight in the cause of God and of the utterly helpless men and women and children who are crying, ‘O our Sustainer! Rescue us from this town whose people are oppressors, and raise for us, out of Thy grace, a protector, and raise for us, out of Thy grace, one who will bring us succor!” (4:75).

    In addition, the Prophet (pbuh) put in place many guidelines including the prohibition on killing children, women, the elderly, the sick or wounded, individuals in places of worship, or animals except for food; the forbidding of destruction of towns or villages or any places of human habitation; the prohibition of spoiling cultivated fields and gardens or uprooting or destroying trees. The many Quranic and Prophetic guidelines and instructions provide ethical principles of warfare, clearly and compellingly forwarded by Islam, very similar in detail and substance to modern-day laws of warfare.

    Skewing the Definition of Terrorism

    One important point should be made here. When it comes to Muslims, the following are all lumped together: acts of self-defense against an invading force, acts of resistance against colonialist domination, desperate acts of rage against tyranny and oppression, or deranged acts of murder by the criminally-minded, by one individual or a group. All these acts get labelled as terrorism, even if the targets are military rather than civilian. But the untold millions of men, women, and children killed by bombs, drone attacks, political sanctions, and all the other “counter-terror” or “counter-insurgency” campaigns, are whitewashed as unfortunate collateral damage in the “War on Terror.”

    Section 2656f(d) of Title 22 of the United States Code defines the term “terrorism” as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents.” It is not unintentional that “subnational” groups only fit the definition. What about “national” groups, i.e., countries, which engage in “politically motivated violence perpetrated against non-combatant targets”? To cut to the chase, we can quote Noam Chomsky as he poses the obvious question: “I don’t know what name you give to the attack that’s killed maybe a million civilians in Iraq and maybe a half a million children, which is the price the Secretary of State [Madeline Albright] says we’re willing to pay. Is there a name for that?”

    Skewing the Meaning of Jihad

    The Arabic word jihad means “struggle,” or exerting oneself to the utmost in any good or beneficial endeavor. Yet, mention of the word causes immediate paroxysms of fear and disdain in the minds of many Americans. Sheikh Rashid Al-Ghannoushi, points out in “What is New about Al-Qaradawi’s Fiqh of Jihad?” (available online) that Shaykh Al-Qaradawi makes clear distinction between jihad and qital (fighting), noting that the Quranic command to undertake jihad is a Makkan verse, at a time when there was no fighting. Jihad in that verse referred to the jihad of dawah. Al-Qaradawi quotes Shaykh Ibn Taymiyya, that jihad “can be with the heart, by calling to Islam, by countering invalid arguments, by advising or facilitating what is beneficial to Muslims, or by one’s body — that is, fighting.” Shaykh Al-Ghannoushi stresses, though, that “The natural state of affairs in relations between Muslim and others is peace and cooperation in goodness. Islam abhors war and only engages in it unwillingly and as a necessity.”

    Professor T.J. Winter (Shaykh Abdal Hakim Murad), the Shaykh Zayed Lecturer of Islamic Studies in the Faculty of Divinity at Cambridge University and Director of Studies in Theology at Wolfson College, has aptly noted, “Terrorism is to jihad what adultery is to marriage.” Al-Ghannoushi, along these lines, observes that irhab, terrorism, as carried out by groups in the name of Islam, is illegitimate, that declaring “war on the whole world is an illegitimate use of jihad in an inappropriate setting, terrorizing innocent people – Muslims and non-Muslims – in order to achieve alleged political ends inside or outside Muslim lands, flagrantly contravening the principles and ethics of jihad in Islam. Hence Al-Qaradawi [in Fiqh of Jihad] condemned violent acts committed by extremist groups in Muslim and non-Muslim countries against innocent people, whether tourists or others. He further stripped the indiscriminate killing and shedding of innocent lives committed by these groups of any legitimacy.”

    Bernard Lewis, Professor Emeritus at Princeton University, is considered in Western circles to be a leading scholar and expert on the Middle East. He is an unapologetic critic of modern Muslim societies and cannot, therefore, be accused of being an apologist for Islam. Yet, he writes quite forthrightly in his book, “Islam: The Religion and the People”: “Muslim fighters are commanded not to kill women, children, or the aged, unless they attack first; not to torture or otherwise ill-treat prisoners; to give fair warning of the opening of hostilities or their resumption after a truce; and to honor agreements… At no time did the classical jurists offer any approval or legitimacy to what we nowadays call terrorism. Nor indeed is there any evidence of the use of terrorism as it is practiced nowadays” (p. 151). Writing in the Wall Street Journal on September 27, 2001, following the 9/11 attacks, Lewis states: “What the classical jurists of Islam never remotely considered is the kind of unprovoked, unannounced mass slaughter of uninvolved civil populations that we saw in New York…For this there is no precedent and no authority in Islam.”

    Dismantling Extremist Ideology

    Shaykh Al-Ghannoushi writes, “Al-Qaradawi is extremely careful to distinguish between extremist groups that declare war on the whole world, killing indiscriminately, tainting the image of Islam and providing its enemies with fatal weapons to use against it, on the one hand, and on the other groups resisting occupation. And as much as he condemns the former and delegitimizes its foundations, he defends the latter, and calls on the Ummah to support them, particularly in Palestine, as long as their operations are against military targets.” Al-Ghannoushi goes on to summarize Shaykh Al-Qaradawi’s dismantling of each and every argument used by those who wage war on the world. The ideology of ISIS is founded on the theory of the entire world being the abode of war if it is not the abode of Islam, with corresponding aberrations including expansion of territory under their control through use of ultraviolent and terroristic means, including suicide bombings against Muslim authority such as in their May 2015 offensive against Ramadi, in Iraq; forcible conversions to Islam; and acts of cruelty, persecution, and murder against local populations, both Muslim and non-Muslim, that shock and appall the staunchest heart.

    In order to achieve their dominationist ambitions, they must disregard the multitude of verses in the Quran, above and beyond the many already cited, that declare that even when fighting becomes inevitable against aggressors, Muslims are not to exceed limits of morality and decency (2:190); that there is no compulsion in religion (2:256); that when an individual rejects Islam, Muslims are to remember that their responsibility is only to deliver the message (3:20).

    This point, that there is no coercion in Islam and that Muslims are only to deliver the Message and leave the decision to embrace or reject as a matter between that individual and God — there are so many verses in the Quran that convey this same principle: the Prophet was not sent as a “keeper over them” (4:80, 6:104, 6:107, 27:92); that nothing is incumbent on the Prophet but to deliver God’s message (5:99); that Muslims must keep in mind that whoever cleaves to the truth does so for his own good and those who stray harm only themselves, and that, again, the Prophet, and by extension, Muslims in general, are not custodians over them (10:108); that Muslims are to exhort others wisely and discuss with them in the best manner, knowing that God sees who is on the right path and who goes astray (16:125); that a Muslim cannot control how other people live their lives, can take responsibility only for his or her own words and actions, and regardless of the ignorance of any other person(s), the duty is to spread peace (28:55).

    Those who founded and direct ISIS, and all those who follow their ideology and participate in their terror campaign, must ignore all the above verses and the many more that are spread throughout the Quran. They have to ignore the divine injunctions, listed above, that warn against aggression, or refusing to accept overtures of peace, about not allowing persecution to ultimately turn the persecuted into a persecutor.

    They spurn the Quranic ordinance that all people have the right to due process, that life may be taken only within the parameters of justice and law, that Islam must not be forced upon any individual in that only by voluntary choice does it have any meaning and value for that person. Extremists also have to ignore all the Prophet’s warnings about not harming non-combatants, restraining from treachery, destruction of vegetation or animals, or places of human habitation. And then there is a clincher: “And if your Lord had pleased, surely all those who are on the earth would have believed — all of them; will you then force men till they become believers?” (10:99).

    Moderation, Not Extremism

    In what universe could the verse just cited conjure up a world in which Muslims are bent on world domination, where non-Muslims are forced to convert, where intolerance rules the day?! Shaykh Al-Qaradawi writes, “[W]e can live, under Islam, in a world that promotes peace and security rather than fear, tolerance rather than fundamentalism, love rather than hatred. We can live with the United Nations, international law, human rights conventions and environmentalist groups.” Al-Ghannoushi underscores that “Al-Qaradawi has developed a principal theory in contemporary Islam, from which all his views and stances emanate, and to which he tirelessly calls, widening its appeal and marginalizing its opponents – that is the principle of Islamic Wasatiyya or moderation. This was inspired by the verse in the second chapter of the Qur’an, ‘And thus we made you into a middle (wasat) nation.’ Thus, he presents Islam as the middle position between opposing and conflicting rigid positions; as the middle ground that brings all together, a middle position between materialism and spiritualism, between individualism and collectivism, between idealism and realism, etc.”

    One cannot read the many verses and hadeeth throughout this article and come away with anything but conviction that Islam is, indeed, a religion of moderation, not one of extremism; that is seeks to bring succor to the world, not terror; that peace is the objective, not conflict or war; that freedom of conscience is to be safeguarded rather than corralled or obliterated. Next time someone asks you about Islam’s position on violence, terrorism, or jihad, have ready on your tongue some of the salient points, some of the eloquent verses, some of the revealing hadith. It may be your coming-of-age child who asks, so learn the points, verses, and hadith by memory, so that you can speak from the heart. Make that a spiritual jihad against terrorism.

    Will the antagonists listen to an authentic reading of Islam? Some yes, some no. “And say: ‘The truth is from your Lord.’ Then whosoever wills, let him believe, and whosoever wills, let him disbelieve” (Quran 18:29).

  • Rising to the Next Level: Institution Building and Civic Engagement

    Rising to the Next Level: Institution Building and Civic Engagement

    Mosques and other Islamic organizations and institutions have never been more active and widespread than they are today. The imperative for greater engagement in society, and increased activities to serve the needs of the growing community, have also never been more pronounced. Muslims have launched initiatives like One America and Canadian Muslim Vote to encourage participation in federal elections. Mosques like the Islamic Society of Central Jersey have opened their doors to those of other faiths in events like “Common Ground Connection,” and others like the Ummah Mosque in Halifax and Worcester Islamic Center have held open houses and “Meet a Muslim” days to welcome non-Muslim neighbors, show them hospitality and friendship, and answer their questions about Islam. Individual Muslims, on their own initiative, have held events like “Meet a Muslim Family” or “Talk to a Muslim” in the wake of growing Islamophobia. Mosques, Islamic centers, and organizations have participated in soup kitchens and meal programs for the homeless and needy, as well as running food banks and free medical clinics for the underserved like the Muslim Welfare Center in Scarborough in Toronto and at the Islamic Association of Collin County in Plano, Texas.

    Often, the biggest obstacle in the way of any institution’s ability to properly serve the needs of its community is a lack of knowledge and understanding of what those needs really are.

    Many mosques and Islamic centers have educational programs including daily or weekly classes on various topics, as well as classes catering especially to the youth, in addition to organizing and coordinating programs for Muslims as well as non-Muslims. Conferences like those held by ICNA, ISNA, Reviving the Islamic Spirit, and ILEAD promote education and awareness. Various Muslim media initiatives like The Muslim Link, Message International, Islamic Horizons, Illume, AltMuslim, and others, provide a voice to communities, aim to correctly represent Muslim concerns and interests, and provide an alternative to mainstream media.

    Yet at the same time, Muslims are facing challenges that need to be addressed more than ever before. While many institutions are active in promoting engagement and serving community needs, others are not doing much. “I think the Muslim community is finally waking up,” says Azra Baig, an elected member of the Board of Education in South Brunswick, New Jersey. “9/11 was definitely a wake-up call, but I think people have just gotten more comfortable after that. But I think with what has happened recently at San Bernardino – the terrorist attacks and the Islamophobia and anti-Muslim remarks by candidates for elections, I think people are finally waking up to the need to get more engaged and more involved. I’ve heard it so many times in the polls – when someone knows a Muslim, they are more comfortable regarding Islam and different aspects, but if their only source of information is the media, then I don’t blame them for being scared, how else are they learning about Islam and Muslims?” While many great efforts are being made by organizations and individuals, a lot more needs to be done. Below are a number of suggestions based upon my discussion with various activists, and community leaders and members, and my research into actions our organizations can take to better meet the challenges of today.

    Create Awareness Among the Leadership

    For any effective changes to take place in our institutions, it is vital that our leadership be well-informed and aware of the needs and problems of the community they serve. Many mosque boards are made up of first generation immigrants, those who have not grown up in Western societies and therefore do not fully understand the problems faced by the youth, are not inclined to promoting political participation, and tend to be somewhat conservative and resistant to change. Also, says Asif Hirani, Program Director at WhyIslam, many of them “do not understand the importance of interfaith activities because they may not be as important in their Muslim majority countries.” He adds, “We need to create awareness in the leadership of the masjids and among board and shura members. In terms of keeping our masjids open, we also need to change the culture of our masjids.” For effective civic engagement and educational and counseling activities to properly meet the needs of the community, it is essential that board members and community leaders be those with an awareness and understanding, based on experience, of present-day Western society and culture.

    Conduct a Survey About Community Needs

    Often, the biggest obstacle in the way of any institution’s ability to properly serve the needs of its community is a lack of knowledge and understanding of what those needs really are. Without adequate information, any available funds are just funneled into activities which may or may not be relevant or adequately serve the needs of the community. Each region and each community has different needs based on its demographics. Masjids with a membership primarily of professionals will have different needs from those of a lower income community. Those with more third generation immigrants have different needs than those with many newly arriving immigrants. It is important to know who makes up the community, what the most pressing needs are, and what issues are important to community members.

    Knowing all of this can help an institution or mosque cater to the specific needs of the community in terms of designing classes or lectures, mobilizing support for social services, acting as advocate at city council meetings, or presenting issues to boards of education. As such, a survey should include questions about marital status, household composition including gender and age of each family member, ethnicity, country of origin, length of residence in the U.S., education, professional or employment status, and income range. The survey can also solicit information about what social, economic, and political issues the respondents consider important, what they expect their institutions to advocate for them, and on what issues and/or topics they want educational opportunities by way of lectures, workshops, or classes.

    Surveys can be in paper form or provided on an Islamic center’s website. Additional methods can be used in tandem, such as assigning individuals or teams to solicit the information from community members; events and meetings can also be held to solicit information, discuss issues, and brainstorm activities and services to meet community needs.

    Designate Teams or Individuals for Specific Tasks

    Once a community’s needs are identified, tasks must be prioritized and funds and resources channeled accordingly. Depending on the size of the community, the amount of work needed for a particular task, and the resources available, the institution must designate either an individual or a team for each task or project. For example, an individual or team should be made responsible for social justice issues, and for representing the mosque or the community at city council meetings or in meetings with regional representatives. Another team could be assigned to deal with media outreach, and so forth. “I go to meetings and sometimes I’m the only Muslim over there,” says Rameez Abid, Communications Director for the ICNA Council for Social Justice. Regarding Muslim advocacy for social justice issues like homelessness, hunger, and civil rights, he says, “I think one person dedicated to this cause can do it as a volunteer. If they can’t find someone to do it, I suggest hiring someone part time to do it. It is very important.”

    It is important that an organization assign specific individuals or teams for the various tasks so that no one person or team is overwhelmed with too many responsibilities. In that way, also, the interests, skills, and expertise of available individuals are utilized in an effective way. “Religious leaders have their own roles to play and they are already overworked,” says Amira Elghawaby, Communications Director at the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM). “The roles within mosques and institutions have to be broadened to bring in more people who are keen in different areas of work and so associations and mosques can foster greater involvement because they often do have some funding available to support this kind of work.”

    Elghawaby says this could include the mosque hiring and training their own people to help represent the community and provide a Muslim perspective at municipal and other local events. They can also hire or train individuals to focus on the local media, foster relationships, and thus represent the community in that way. There can be positions open to interns and volunteers to assist the person(s) assigned to the job. This is a good way to get students to fulfill their volunteer hours and internship requirements by benefiting the community.

    Government and the Media Relationships

    Muslims need to build good relationships with their government representatives at the local and regional level in order to communicate the Muslim perspective and concerns. This requires inviting local and state officials to the mosque or other Islamic events, meeting with them about specific concerns or priorities, and attending important events organized by them. Azra Baig says, “It’s important because they want to hear from us and they do represent us. If they are going to support us, we need to support them on the various issues. We need to be there when they have their press conferences, their petitions, we have to vote and a vote helps – especially this coming election the Muslim vote is going to matter.”

    Baig says building a good relationship with the media is also vital because “the media is also our voice.” This includes issuing press releases and sending out invitations for events. An effective media strategy also means following mainstream media reporting about Muslims and responding when relevant or necessary. Nazim Bakshn, a researcher and journalist, says that engagement with the media includes making spokespersons, analysts, and scholars available to provide commentary and analysis when events involving or relevant to Muslims take place.

    Represent Community in the Mainstream

    Our institutions and mosques must step out of the traditional roles they are used to and be ready to rise to the next level. They of courses need to serve as a place of worship and spiritual guidance for the Muslim community, but also as a platform for activism and advocacy. As part of a society where Muslims are a minority, it is easy for our institutions to stay in their comfort zones, insular and disconnected to the larger community. But it is increasingly important for our institutions to step out of their own circle and be a part of the mainstream. This includes advocating causes that benefit the wider society, transcending boundaries of race, ethnicity, and religion. It also means representing the concerns and interests of the Muslim community at city council meetings or presenting issues to the board of education. Rameez Abid notes, “We cannot be isolationist,” adding, “In order to secure our rights, we have to secure others’ rights as well and that is part of our deen.”

    Build a Stronger Social Media Presence

    In this digital age of pervasive social media, it is important to utilize the tools of the time to spread our message and benefit our communities more widely. “Many a time, many members of the community are not aware of the activities at the masjid,” says Muhammad Ibrahim Ali, an Arabic instructor at Taqwa seminary and Bayyinah. “So for example the event is over and they get to know [too] late – so it’s very important for them [organizations] to improve their social media presence and not only to improve, they have to compete with the other organizations – even utilizing modern methods of media marketing.” Our Prophet (pbuh) also used the technique of his time to get his message across to a wider audience. For instance, he went to Mount Safa to call out to people to deliver his message when he wished to invite the Quraish openly to Islam. The custom was to go to Mount Safa when one had an important message to announce to the people at large.

    Come Together and Unite with Others

    Although each institution works independently, it is vital that links be maintained with other institutions and that the institutions stand united on a variety of causes, cooperating by sharing resources, expertise, information, ideas, and personnel. “Unity is something that strengthens all communities,” says Elghawaby. “I think that we need to come together at the local level for sure to find out what’s going on in our communities and who is doing what… how can we either replicate or complement or contribute to these efforts on a professional national scale and in a way that the work that is done is not lost in someone’s mind, it becomes part of our institutional memories.”

    Professionalism and Concerted Effort

    Organizations today base their operations on goal-setting, efficiency, productivity, and streamlining of systems. “I think the really most important thing is to approach these issues with a very high degree of professionalism,” says Elghawaby. She says one of the challenges is that there will always be well-meaning individuals who work as activists on one cause or another, and that this is valuable work. But the drawback is “when an individual undertakes this work, not with an institution, then there is going to be the loss of the memory of what they have done, so there is no institutional memory to the type of work or relationships they fostered. Once they lose interest or once they don’t have time to continue their work, it sort of disappears so that is one reason why it is so critical to engage institutions.”

    Elghawaby continues, “I think it’s really important that this work is done with professionalism and with real goal-setting in mind. It cannot be done in a way that’s sort of ad hoc. It really has to be a concerted effort.” Her organization has recently launched an initiative called “Stronger Together” which aims to galvanize Canadian Muslims in every major city to be more civically engaged, and to advocate both on local and national issues. The organization has put up a pledge on its website inviting people to commit to greater activism. The organization will then map out all those who took the pledge and cluster them together in teams according to their geographic areas, and then provide support and training on how to get involved in various issues. Their first campaign is about a Canadian anti-terror bill, C-51, and will be encouraging participants to approach their local parliament members and talk to them about the legislation. This is a good example of how institutions can work in an organized and efficient manner to promote more civic engagement. It is important for our institutions to learn from one another and pool resources, ideas, and expertise to better serve the community. Our organizations must rise to the next level, promote civic engagement and meet the various needs of the community.

  • Harmony through Allah’s Divine Guidance

    Harmony through Allah’s Divine Guidance

    All praises are for Allah, The Almighty, and may His peace and blessing be upon His true servant and final messenger, Muhammad, on his companions, and his household. Allah SWT says: “So direct your face toward the religion, inclining to truth, [according to] the natural disposition by which Allah has created people. No change should there be in the creation of Allah. That is the true faith, but most of the people do not know” (Quran 30:30).

    According to the Islamic prescription for a harmonious social life, there is to be no superiority on account of class, color, ancestry, or wealth.

    Allah SWT, the Creator of all that exists, has designed the universe and legislated laws that govern it so that all things function in a harmonious way. We, therefore, realize how the universe moves in perfect harmony by His laws, for if it did not then the entire universe would be in total chaos. There are billions of galaxies in the universe; and in our own Milky Way galaxy, it is estimated that there are 100 billion to ten trillion planets! Each one runs in its own orbit so they do not collide and bring about chaos and destruction; except on the Day of Judgment, then they will all collide. That brings the end of this life and ushers us into the Hereafter. So often Allah SWT, the Creator, draws our attention to the cohesiveness of the universe. In Surah Yaseen, Allah SWT mentions how the sun and the moon each “swim” in their own orbits. These two heavenly bodies, among trillions, are mentioned because we have knowledge about them and because the sun and moon have direct effect upon our lives here on earth.

    Allah SWT informs: “It is not permitted to the sun to catch up to the moon, nor can the night outstrip the day. All of them swim along in their orbits” (Quran 36:40). Allah SWT also tells us how the heavenly bodies move with His command: “Indeed, your Lord is Allah, Who created the heavens and the earth in six days, and then He rose over the Throne. He brings the night as a cover over the day, which is in haste to follow it, and He created the sun, the moon, the stars — subject to His Command. Surely, His is the creation and the command. Blessed be Allah, the Lord of the worlds!” (Quran 7:54). Thus, there is complete obedience to His commands, and when there is complete obedience, there is complete harmony. This is His Divine Wisdom, evident in the creation, and Allah SWT, the Creator, knows best His creation. He says: “Should He not know – He that created? And He is the One that understands the finest mysteries [of His Creation and] is well-acquainted [with them]” (67:14). With His Divine wisdom and knowledge, Allah SWT has created man to be part of this universe. Like the command He has given to the heavens, He has bequeathed to mankind laws and regulations to follow and obey in order to have peace and harmony. He has blessed human beings with the capacity to acquire knowledge, to think and ponder, and with an intellect to distinguish right from wrong. Humanity and jinn are two known creations of Allah SWT that have been given the freedom of will and action.

    Among the good qualities that we ought to inculcate in our lives and invite others to include humbleness, modesty, decency, truthfulness, honesty, politeness, tolerance, compassion, generosity, forgiveness, optimism, fairness, sincerity, self-restraint, etc.

    Unfortunately, with intellect and freedom of choice, many individuals have turned away from Divine Guidance. So many have chosen the evil way, forsaking a moral and upstanding life. Professor Andrew Delbanco, in his insightful book “The Death of Satan: How Americans Have Lost the Sense of Evil,” writes: “…more and more our society, our nation is turning their backs on God and good morals.” Lionel Tiger writes in “The Manufacture of Evil”: “Once upon a time, evil was personified. Evil was Mephistopheles or the Devil. Almost flavorful, altogether identifiable, a clarified being from another world…” And what has happened now? Evil has faded into a sea of moral ambiguity.

    The handiwork of Satan is manifest everywhere. He has his associates and agents among mankind who support the demise of morality and decency, affecting almost every aspect of human life. He incites them with confused and conflicting ideologies and notions of every sort, opening the door to criminal, depraved, and unjust behaviors. Voltaire once said: “Certainly anyone who has the power to make you believe absurdities has the power to make you commit injustices.” He goes on to say: “If you do not use the intelligence with which God endowed your mind to resist believing impossibilities, you will not be able to use the sense of injustice which God planted in your heart to resist a command to do evil.” Thus, Satan has sown the seeds of conflict throughout human affairs, and God’s laws have been violated, with nations at war with each other, corrupt government officials, families plagued by divorce and parent-child problems, high rates of murder and other crimes, gangs terrorizing communities, media promoting and sensationalizing violence, alarming rates of substance abuse, widespread lewdness and promiscuity, and never ending displays of ego gratification through celebrity worship and lust for power and wealth. And the list goes on…

    By and large we have allowed these things to happen. We have not joined together as we should have, to stop our society from losing its moral high ground. There is so much hatred, bigotry, and more recently, Islamophobia, that adds fuel to fire. But with all this burning hatred and intolerance, it is a unique opportunity for Muslims to call people back to the core values of morality and decency. Like the prophets throughout history, and particularly the five Messengers renowned for their strong will and determination – Prophet Nuh, Prophet Ibrahim, Prophet Musa, Prophet ‘Eesa, and Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon all of them). They have all gone through that inferno of hatred and intolerance from their own people. But they never gave up. In fact, they took every opportunity to bring about good in their respective societies. When the Quraish discouraged people from entering Islam, Rasoolullah (pbuh) would use the opportunity to explain to them the beliefs and principles of Islam and how it brings about human salvation. Allah SWT has indeed guided mankind in every aspect of life. By way of example let us examine a few.

    Spiritual Life

    Allah SWT has informed us of the true purpose of life. It is to be His true servant through worship and obedience to Him alone. The Quran says: “And I [Allah] created not the jinns and humans except that they should worship Me [alone]” (Quran 51:56). In order to genuinely worship God, one must have unshakable belief in His existence. Coupled with strong beliefs, acts of worship bring about decent moral behavior. Take prayer for example. If done with sincerity, it protects us from committing sins or engaging in wrongful deeds. ”…And perform the prayer. Verily, the prayer prevents immorality and wrongdoing…” (Quran 29:45). As to other aspects of worship, fasting helps a person develop self-restraint and the capacity to delay gratification; charity or zakaah inculcates the values of generosity and compassion and counters greed and miserliness; and the pilgrimage humbles us and helps us to enlarge our perspective and feel a solidarity with the vast human family, as we see the assembly of pilgrims coming from all over the world, each individual hoping for the mercy and forgiveness of Allah SWT.

    Intellectual Life

    The very first revelation given to Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is a command to illuminate our minds with knowledge, for it is knowledge that dispels the darkness of ignorance and evil. Allah SWT commands, “Read! In the Name of your Lord Who has created — created man from a clinging substance. Read! And your Lord is the Most Generous, Who has taught by the pen, taught man that which he knew not” (Quran 96:1-5). Knowledge is the cure for ignorance. In fact, it is only through knowledge of the religion, true knowledge of Allah SWT, and knowledge of self that human beings can be saved from misery, in this life and in the Hereafter. We are told in the Quran, “Say: Are those who know equal to those who know not? It is only men of understanding who will take heed” (Quran 39:9).

    Personal Life

    Regarding our personal lives, Islam provides guidance as to cleanliness of the body, our clothes, our surroundings, and places of worship. Cleanliness, as Rasoolullah (pbuh) puts it, is half of faith. Islam also guides human beings as to what to consume, with most food available from earth’s bounty being permissible and good, and a few things being prohibited, such as pork. We are further prohibited from wasting food as that indicates ungratefulness for the sustenance provided by Allah SWT. The Quran says, “…do not squander senselessly. Verily, the squanderers are, indeed, of the ilk of the devils, as Satan is ever ungrateful to his Lord” (17:26-27). Sadly, surveys shows that every year, from the more than 350 billion pounds of edible food available for human consumption in the United States, nearly 100 billion pounds – including fresh vegetables, fruits, milk, and grain products – are thrown away by retailers, restaurants, and consumers. This waste alone adds up to $48 billion.

    Social and Political Life

    Allah’s prescription for a harmonious social life includes equality, justice, helping those in need, and each individual developing a benevolent character. Imam Al-Ghazaali named some of the qualities that the Prophet (pbuh) called for, such as doing good deeds; submitting to Allah’s will; bestowing favors on others; feeding the needy; extending greetings; visiting the sick; escorting the bier of a Muslim; protecting one’s neighbor whether Muslim or not; honoring the aged; making peace between people; and being easygoing.

    Further, according to the Islamic prescription for a harmonious social life, there is to be no superiority on account of class, color, ancestry, or wealth. One of the most shameful of social evils is the feeling of superiority over others. This was Iblees’s downfall when he told Allah SWT that he would not prostrate to Adam because Allah had created him from fire and Adam from clay, and in his thinking, this rendered him better than Adam. How many wars have been fought because one nation felt superior to another? Allah SWT informs us that our differences are only by His command and wisdom. It is for us to learn about one another, not to despise one another. He says, “O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allah is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allah is Knowing and Acquainted” (Quran 49:13).

    We are reminded of the sermon Rasoolullah (pbuh) gave at the Farewell Pilgrimage in which he said: “All mankind is from Adam and Eve; an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black, nor a black any superiority over a white — except by piety and good action. Learn that every Muslim is a brother to every Muslim and that the Muslims constitute one brotherhood. Nothing shall be legitimate to a Muslim, which belongs to a fellow Muslim unless it was given freely and willingly. Do not therefore, do injustice to yourselves.” SubhanAllah! Compare that wisdom to our situation today! There is so much discrimination and discord based on race, ethnicity, family status, and wealth, even among the Muslim ummah. How do we expect success and harmony when we ignore Allah SWT’s Divine Command?

    On a global level, millions have perished in the two world wars, in Mao Tse Tung’s China, in Stalinist Russia, in the Vietnam War, as just a few examples. The carnage continues into this 21st century with regional wars, sectarian conflicts, murders, domestic violence and so on. Man has disregarded God’s laws and has ended up in never-ending conflict and destruction. Rasoolullah (pbuh) predicted that a time would come when there would be large scale killing.

    Moral Life

    Islam provides injunctions and principles, in a broad-based and precise way, for a harmonious life, built on a foundation of enjoining what is right and shunning and preventing what is evil. An individual’s moral development brings growing discernment as to what is right and what is wrong, and dedication to ethical and refined living. Regarding one of the main objects for which the Prophets and Messengers were sent, Prophet Muhammad has said: “I have been sent by God to teach moral virtues and to evolve them to highest perfection.” He also mentions: “On the Day of Recompense, nearest to me will be the one who displays in his daily life the best of manners.”

    Among the things we ought to reject are arrogance, vanity, immodesty, lewdness, lying, cheating, foul language, hatred, envy, backbiting, slandering, stinginess, vindictiveness, pessimism, unfairness, deceptiveness, self-indulgence, and impulsiveness.

    And among the good qualities that we ought to inculcate in our lives and invite others to include humbleness, modesty, decency, truthfulness, honesty, politeness, tolerance, compassion, generosity, forgiveness, optimism, fairness, sincerity, and self-restraint.

    Imam Ibn Al-Qayyim wrote in “Madarij Al-Salikeen”: “Religion is all moral character, and whoever bests you in moral character will best you in religion.” In conclusion, if human beings follow the laws of Allah they will succeed and have peace and harmony. But if they ignore God’s guidance they will face severe consequences. Not only will they spread misery in this world, but each one shall be brought before the Creator on the Day of Judgment to answer for his or her deeds. Islam changed the Arabian society from the depths of darkness to the most accomplished society mankind had ever witnessed. The Muslim ummah is meant to be an example for humanity. In this regard, Imaam Malik (RA) said: “The latter part of this ummah will not be rectified except by that which rectified its earlier part.”

  • Stop Ignoring the Issue of Sexual Abuse

    Stop Ignoring the Issue of Sexual Abuse

    She looked at herself in the mirror with tears streaming down her face. She could no longer keep it inside and felt that she had to tell her mother today. But, would her mother even believe her that her uncle had been touching her in places that no one should be touching? This was her mother’s brother. How would her mother react when she hears that it had been going on for a few weeks, ever since her uncle had moved in with them? He had warned her not to say a word, and that it was all her fault anyway that this was happening. She was 13 and afraid, but knew she had to tell her mother or it would never stop. If it didn’t stop, she didn’t know what she was going to do. The thought of it was unbearable. She wiped her tears and opened the door, ready to talk to her mother, but who did she find waiting for her when she opened the door? Her uncle…

    According to the National Institute of Justice Report, three out of four adolescents who have been sexually assaulted were victimized by someone they knew well

    Sexual abuse is a more common phenomenon in the Muslim community than we would ever care to believe, yet we do not face it head on as we should. It is a topic that people ignore and when it is brought up, heads begin shaking, as if to say “Shh! There’s no need to talk about that…Muslims don’t do that.” Yes, it is considered taboo, but the very fact that we won’t talk about this dire issue allows abuse to persist. Young girls and boys are afraid to tell anyone when it happens to them, and parents are reluctant to teach their children about boundaries, gently yet directly letting their children know that no one has the right to touch their private parts, or touch them in any way that makes them uncomfortable. If a child is not equipped with that knowledge, when an incident occurs, he or she suffers in the agony of silence and shame. And if the abuse is suspected or found out, it is too often ignored or hushed up, particularly if the abuser is considered religious or is a respected family member. This is a terrible betrayal of the child.

    Victimized by Someone They Knew

    According to statistics by the Crimes Against Children Research Center, 1 in 5 girls and 1 in 20 boys are victims of sexual abuse. These numbers are believed to be lower than the actual number of cases since most sexual abuse of children goes unreported. And when we think of sexual abuse, we may automatically think of a stranger as being the perpetrator of these acts, but this is not usually the case. According to the National Institute of Justice Report, three out of four adolescents who have been sexually assaulted were victimized by someone they knew well. The same is the case for younger children.

    It is just not enough to teach children about “stranger danger” since the person more likely to sexually abuse a child is one who has easy access to him or her and earns the child’s trust, like a family member, teacher, religious figure, or family friend. The emotional and psychological consequences of this betrayal, from both the abuser and those who cover it up, are catastrophic. If we don’t do something as a community to tackle this issue, we are responsible for acquiescing to, and enabling, this abuse and betrayal.

    A Campaign to Raise Awareness About Sexual Abuse

    We, as community members, must raise awareness about this shattering issue. Families and communities are broken apart when sexual abuse occurs. But our children are precious, and shame and fear must not win out over doing what is right. The worry about life being disrupted, or the ruinous consequences for the perpetrator, if he or she is within the family or community circle, must not be stronger than the fear of a child being set up for lifelong pain and misery.

    We must clearly convey this message about sexual abuse in workshops, Islamic schools, and masaajid so that people are informed and equipped with the tools on how to appropriately handle such a situation. Community leaders and imams must be at the forefront of this campaign to raise awareness by organizing or supporting workshops and events on this topic. The community can invite Muslim mental health professionals to provide informative lectures on sexual abuse. The future of the ummah depends on our willingness to face all issues, however challenging or ugly. We must show ourselves to be among those who stand up for justice, even if against ourselves or our inner circle, and especially for the protection and defense of our children. We must be silent no more.

  • Muslim Contributions to America: Taking It to the Next Level

    Muslim Contributions to America: Taking It to the Next Level

    “Have you ever been to a Muslim hospital? … Have you witnessed a Muslim charity? Can you show me one Muslim signature on the Constitution, Declaration of Independence, or Bill of Rights? Have you ever seen a Muslim do anything that contributes positively to the American way of life?” These were the exact words of a public statement made by a Michigan Republican National Committeeman not too long ago. This perspective is not unique, for we have heard a similar statement or narrative from other people as well. One may wonder if this is sheer ignorance or deliberate propaganda.

    Today Muslims are on the front lines of campaigns to support social justice and end civil rights abuses

    Recently, in the wake of the anti-Muslim statements made by Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, the UK’s daily Guardian published an article providing a brief but compelling survey of contributions made by Muslims in shaping, developing, and serving America (google: the guardian, Muslims who shaped America). The article observes, “What Trump doesn’t seem to grasp is his own country’s history, and how many American achievements worth celebrating are the work of the kind of people – Muslims – he wants to keep out.” The article also commented that even a partial list of “some of the things Muslims have done for the US…is still more impressive than what Trump has done for his homeland.”

    Did the author, Stuart Jeffries, overstate the case? Actually, no. He acknowledges that his list is far from exhaustive but it nonetheless shows that Muslims have been part of American society right from its inception. That story is not well-known, however, as Muslims in America have always been a minority. Nevertheless, Islam has been present and notable all along. Professor Richard Turner, for example, mentions that while researchers disagree over the number of Muslim slaves that were brought to the Americas, they agree that many Muslim slaves were educated and literate in Arabic and they “often occupied leadership roles in the jobs that slaves performed on plantations in the American South…Their names, dress, rituals, and dietary laws were perceived as powerful significations of Islamic identities in the slave community.” To name just a few, Bampett Muhammad was a soldier who fought for the Virginia Line between the years 1775 and 1783 under Commander-in-Chief of the Continental Army, George Washington, in the war against British colonialism. A North African Arab, Yusuf Ben Ali, also fought along with him. A Muslim American soldier, Peter Buckminster, is the man who killed British Major General John Pitcairn at the battle of Bunker Hill. Buckminster later changed his surname to Salem or Salaam.

    There is evidence that founding fathers John Quincy Adams and Thomas Jefferson were quite familiar with Islam and possessed copies of the Holy Quran in their personal libraries. It is worth noting that Keith Ellison, the first Muslim elected to congress, used Jefferson’s nearly 250¬?year¬?old Quran to be sworn in on as a U.S. congressman. Many Americans don’t know that in 1777, Morocco, a Muslim nation, was the first country to formally recognize the United States as an independent nation. The vast majority of early Muslims present in the U.S. were Africans brought to this country as slaves in the 17th century. The next major wave of Muslims coming to America was in the mid-19th century through to the 1920s, with large numbers emigrating from the Middle East, mostly from Lebanon and Syria, many of whom settled in the American Midwest. Muslim immigrants, like all those who sought opportunity in America, settled in their new home, and established deep and sturdy roots for the generations to come. Achievements by Muslim Americans followed, and as proud citizens they contribute to American society as educators, doctors, engineers, athletes, lawmakers, and soldiers. Statistics provided by the American Medical Association indicate that ten percent of all American physicians are Muslim. Today Muslims are on the front lines of campaigns to support social justice and end civil rights abuses. Muslim charity groups in the United States are too numerous to catalog, though the Bay Area Islamic Networks Group, the UMMA Clinic in Los Angeles, the Chicago-based Inner-City Muslim Action Network, and Dearborn’s ACCESS are examples of groups that provide crucial services for the needy and empower the underprivileged. In 2013, the Muslim charity Helping Hand for Relief and Development (HHRD) was rated among the top ten charities in the United States.

    In this issue we look at ways by which American Muslims are thoroughly engaged in further extending their contribution and service to their local communities and to this richly diverse nation. Striving for harmony in every aspect of life through Allah’s guidance, participating fully in civic life, realizing the essential connection between proper human assumption of trusteeship of this earth and the development of ethical character, and duly disseminating the reality about Islam’s call for moderation rather than extremism in any form – these are some of the areas in which American Muslims are demonstrating their commitment to assimilation. But this is qualified assimilation into the American fabric of daily life, one that does not compromise the Islamic principles and values that make the history and contemporary presence of Muslims in America a profound and inspiring story. We must celebrate this!

  • Negative Connotations Surrounding Shariah Must be Dispelled

    In November 2010, Oklahoma voters approved an amendment to the state constitution expressly prohibiting Oklahoma state judges from considering international law or Sharia in their decisions. Munir Awad filed a complaint against the Oklahoma State Board of Elections challenging this, alleging that the anti-Sharia amendment to the Oklahoma Constitution, if certified, would violate the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses of the First Amendment of the US Constitution. More specifically, Awad alleged that the amendment targets his religion for negative treatment and creates excessive state entanglement with religion. Stigmatizing him and other Muslims, Awad proffered, the amendment would inhibit the practice of his religion and would prevent a court from probating his Sharia-compliant last will and testament. The US District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma agreed with Awad, issuing a preliminary injunction against the certification of the amendment pending the litigant’s claims being adjudicated on the merits.

    Last month, in Awad v. Ziriax, the US Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed the district court’s preliminary injunction but utilized a different constitutional scrutiny standard. The district court had evaluated the plaintiff’s claims under the Lemon v. Kurtzman guidelines. Lemon provides that the scrutinized legislation must have a secular purpose that primarily does not inhibit or advance religion and does not foster excessive government entanglement with religion. The Tenth Circuit reached the same conclusion but evaluated the plaintiff’s claims under the more stringent standard enunciated in Larson v. Valente. Larson held that the three prong test from Lemon was appropriate in cases where religion benefited at the expense of non-religious citizens. However, when one religion is preferred over another, a strict scrutiny evaluation is required (i.e., a legislation that discriminates among religions is valid only if it is “closely fitted to the furtherance of any compelling interest”).

    The Tenth Circuit, in its ruling on Awad v. Ziriax, held that Oklahoma’s “one sentence” stating that “Oklahoma certainly has a compelling interest in determining what law is applied in Oklahoma courts” failed to “identify any actual problem the challenged amendment seeks to solve.” Without “any concrete problem, any harm Appellants seek to remedy with the proposed amendment is speculative at best and cannot support a compelling interest.”  Without a compelling interest, the Tenth Circuit concluded it was not necessary to proceed to the “closely fitted” prong of the strict scrutiny test. The Oklahoma amendment was deemed unconstitutional. Be that as it may, the Tenth Circuit made several interesting observations about the closely fitted prong. “Even if the state could identify and support a reason to single out and restrict Sharia law,” the Tenth Circuit hypothecated, the amendment is not “closely fitted” as its “complete ban of Sharia law is hardly an exercise of narrow tailoring.”

    The anti-Sharia movement seeking to legislate its political agenda is directly at odds with a basic principle laid out by the Supreme Court in Larson v. Valente: “the clearest command of the Establishment Clause” that mandates “governmental neutrality between religion and religion … The State may not adopt programs or practices … which aid or oppose any religion … This prohibition is absolute.”

    So, what is Sharia after all? After briefly describing Sharia, I will use several examples to illustrate the role of Sharia or any religious and/or foreign law for that matter, in a US court.

    Sharia is more than simply “law” in the prescriptive sense; it is also the methodology through which a jurist engages the foundational religious texts (Qur’an and Sunnah) to search for an understanding of, and compliance with, divine will. As a jurist-made law, the outcome of this process of ascertaining divine will is called fiqh (positive law), which is the moral and legal anchor of a Muslim’s total existence. Everything from the way Muslims eat, to how they treat animals and protect the environment, how they conduct commercial trade, solemnize their marriage, or distribute their estate at death — all is governed by Sharia, dictating every aspect of an observant Muslim’s practical and moral life. Therefore, Sharia is extremely personal to the majority of Muslims regardless of their level of religiosity.

    Of course, this type of relationship with religion applies to most devout Christians, Jews, Hindus, and others, for religious principles and laws are very personal to all religious Americans. Whether it is Jews submitting to the jurisdiction of Rabbinic courts, Christians submitting to Christian Conciliation tribunals, or US political activists advocating a religious position on abortion, capital punishment, sex education, same-sex marriage and many other issues, religion and religious law have been alive and thriving in the US since its founding. Of course, the role of religious law or religious principles in the US court system continues to be subject to public policy and constitutional constraints. In the end, however, the US Constitution is the law of the land.

    The modern manifestations of Sharia are either a source of legislation or actual nation-state law in the majority of Muslim countries. Sharia is the supreme law of the land in Saudi Arabia. Islamic law is a primary source of the family law codes of Egypt, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar and many other Muslim countries, and Sharia is the gap filler in almost all of the civil codes of Muslim countries.

    The globalization of domiciles, marriages, divorces, corporations and commercial transactions requires US courts to regularly interpret and apply foreign law — including Islamic law — to everything from the recognition of foreign divorces and custody decrees, the validity of marriages, the enforcement of money judgments or the damage elements in commercial disputes or negligence matters.

    Sharia is relevant in a US court either as a foreign law or as a source of information to understand the expectations of the parties in a dispute. As an attorney, consultant or expert witness I have handled more than 100 matters involving a component of Sharia or the laws of the Middle East. I will use several examples to explain the actual role Sharia or the laws of the Middle East play in litigation in the US.

    Case #1: A, a New York resident, married B, a UK resident, in a European country. Their marriage was solemnized by a Muslim clergy. The parties live in both countries. They have one child together. B files for divorce in England. A counters, alleging that their marriage was not legal. Which jurisdiction governs the validity of the marriage and the place of the marriage, UK law or New York law? If New York law governs, the marriage would be valid as long as the marriage was valid under Sharia.

    Case #2: A, an employee of a US corporation negligently caused the death of B in a country utilizing Sharia. The estate of B institutes an action against A in the US. Based on US conflicts of law, the law where the tort occurred would govern the dispute. The court would require expert testimony regarding the tort law of the country using Sharia, which would include issues relating to Sharia.

    Case #3: A, a Saudi company, enters into a joint venture agreement with B, a US company. Their joint venture agreement provides that Saudi law would govern any disputes. A sues B in state court. State court applies Saudi law to the dispute. Saudi law is based on Sharia law. The primary issue of the dispute is then whether Sharia law provides for consequential damages.

    Case #4: A and B are married. They have lived in New York for the past twenty years. A and B are originally from Jordan. While A and B are visiting Jordan, A divorces B. Upon return, A seeks to enforce the Jordanian divorce. The court must determine whether the Jordanian divorce should be recognized. In this circumstance, the state judge must determine whether the Jordanian divorce violated American public policy. As the wife was not a resident of Jordan, did not participate in the Jordanian proceeding, and since the majority of the marital assets are in New York, the court is more than likely to hold that the Jordanian divorce violates New York public policy.

    The above examples illustrate Sharia as a foreign law. Sharia, then, is extremely relevant for US judges adjudicating matters within the strictures of our law. Of course, the US judge is applying US conflicts of law to determine the applicable law. In other words, even though the judge is applying a foreign law to the dispute, it is US law that dictates that he apply the foreign law.

    Below are two examples of how Sharia is relevant to a US judge, not as a foreign law but as a source of information to understand the surrounding circumstances to an agreement or dispute or to clarify an ambiguity or correct a mistake.

    Example #1: A, a New Jersey resident, married B, also a New Jersey resident. Both are Muslim. They had a Muslim Imam solemnize their marriage, which included execution of a Muslim marriage contract. Their Muslim marriage contract had a provision called Mahr, which directs the husband to pay the wife the sum of $20,000 in the event of divorce. The wife, A, filed for divorce in the New Jersey Superior Court, seeking the enforcement of the $20,000 payment. The court heard testimony about Muslim marriages, marriage contracts, the meaning of Mahr and related information surrounding the execution of the marriage contract. The judge then considers this information to better understand the expectations of the parties at the time of the marriage and applies New Jersey contract law. The judge enforces the Muslim marriage contract finding it satisfied all of the elements of New Jersey contract law.

    Example #2: In a similar case B, the groom, at the wedding ceremony, for the first time, is asked to sign the marriage contract with the $20,000 stipulation. Embarrassed and pressured before 300 guests, the groom signed the document. In addition, the document was in Arabic, and he did not read or write Arabic. Several years later, the wife filed for divorce and asked for the $20,000. The New Jersey judge finds that there was no meeting of the minds because of the circumstances surrounding the execution of the document. In other words, the marriage contract between these parties did not satisfy all of the elements of a valid contract under New Jersey law.

    In sum, most legal experts would agree with the Tenth Circuit’s conclusions in Awad v. Ziriax. Why then is there paranoia around the country? Why are warnings that Sharia threatens the constitutional system still raging and picking up steam? Almost every Republican presidential candidate has affirmed his opposition to the imaginary threat of Sharia. For attorneys and legal experts, the above examples are very simple and first-year law school material. These nuances, unique facts, and legal subtleties are absent from the discussion about Sharia in America. Their absence is not an innocent omission. It is intentional in order to fuel the misinformation and distortion about Islam and Muslims.

    As attorneys, we have an obligation to correct the misunderstanding about the role of any foreign law in our system. It is always subject to the limits of the Constitution. That is the law of the land. The politicization of this issue is undermining the integrity of our judicial system and constitutional protections. US judges are equipped with the necessary legal tools to evaluate the legal and factual issues before them without the requirement of bright line rules, especially those that originate out of misinformation, distortion and outright discrimination.

  • What Shariah Law Really Means to American Muslims

    What Shariah Law Really Means to American Muslims

    “Sharia Law: Coming to a Court House Near You? What Sharia Really Means to American Muslims” is the first empirical study to ask North American Muslims what shari’a means to them in their everyday lives. The study demonstrates that the present “moral panic” over shari’a and its alleged impact on American legal and social culture is wildly overblown. For most American Muslims shari’a represents a private system of morality and identity, primarily focused on marriage and divorce rituals. None of the American Muslims interviewed for this study expected American courts to enforce shari’a. Just like other Americans, they will access the courts for adjudication according to American family law if they cannot make a private agreement (relating to divorce) that meets their needs and values.

    Other than religious observance, the practice of shari’a for the vast majority of American Muslims is focused on family matters, primarily marriage and divorce

    American courts are sometimes asked to adjudicate disputes that have been originally adjudicated in a Muslim country overseas, and/or refer to Islamic law or shari’a derived principles.

    American courts will not recognize either the order of a Muslim court in another country or a private agreement referring to Islamic law or shari’a principles if this violates public policy principles of fairness and due process, does not meet the standard for a legally enforceable agreement (e.g. clarity, consensuality), or involves the court in the interpretation of religious dogma. As a result American courts approve very few cases involving Islamic law (usually marriage contracts, divorce settlements, and occasionally private commercial contracts).

    This status quo is widely accepted by American Muslims who, in common with other religious groups, regard their faith-based practices as a private matter and the courts as a place for adjudication according to the principles of American law. The vast majority of respondents in this study saw no incompatibility between their Islamic obligations and their recourse to the civil courts.

    The public discourse, however, contains great confusion about the relationship among the courts, the state, and shari’a, a reality that is being exploited for political purposes and expressed in increasing anti-Muslim hostility. Inaccurate and sometimes hateful claims about the way American Muslims understand their religious obligations and cultural norms mask the complex relationship between private religious and cultural choices and universal state protections.

    This report considers two potential strategies for ameliorating some of these concerns and enhancing the status quo. Many respondents felt that the courts  presently operate with little or no knowledge of Islam or Islamic law and without regard or respect for their beliefs. Without making structural changes, this problem could be addressed by enhanced education for both judges and Muslim religious leaders that deepens their understanding of each system and promotes co-operation between the facilitators of Islamic processes and the courts. There are already signs of mutual influence between the two systems, with many imams incorporating civil law principles into their advice on marriage and divorce agreements, and the courts increasingly asked to consider the lived-experiences of Islamic marriage and divorce as part of the context of a marital dispute. A stronger base of knowledge among judges of Islamic family law traditions would enable the development of jurisprudence that understands and respects these processes.

    The present “moral panic” over shari’a and its alleged impact on American legal and social culture is wildly over blown

    A second strategy suggested by this research is the promotion – by Muslim leaders and organizations – of Islamic family services that focus on the community’s needs and reflect the values and expertise of its own professionals. A family services marketplace could offer family services both inside and outside the mosques, deploying the skills of a range of professionals, reducing pressure on the imams, and providing broader and more inclusive programs and services. Another far more radical approach often debated in the media is the establishment of a parallel independent Islamic tribunal with jurisdiction over family law. Although widely discussed in scholarly literature and media reporting, this study found virtually no support for such an approach among American Muslims. Assessing and choosing an appropriate policy approach is critical for navigating not only issues related to American Muslims, but all religious groups.

    “Shari’a Law Is Coming”: Public Fear and Political Capital

    Such claims are commonplace on the Internet, among politicians, and even on highway billboards. Signs of preoccupation with the “threat of Islam” are so omnipresent that we barely register them. It is perhaps inevitable that the terror of 9/11 excited our fear of an unknown “Other.” However during the last ten years, public figures and popular culture have increasingly conflated that terror with ordinary Muslims and their way of life.

    Stereotypes of Muslims as violent and opposed to peaceful democracy are increasingly entrenched in American public culture. New conflicts emerge almost every week: the location of a Muslim community center in Manhattan, efforts to amend state law to proscribe the application of shari’a by state courts, Qur’an burning stunts, and general hostility toward women wearing the hijab (a headscarf) or burkah (a full-length gown and head covering). Central to this public fear is the term “shari’a,” (literally “The Way”, or guidelines for appropriate Muslim conduct) which raises deep fears among non-Muslims in the West due to its association with the violent extremist movement that has “stolen” the public understanding of Islam. A recent Center for American Progress report described a systematic campaign by particular organizations and politicians to convince Americans to be afraid of the Muslims who live and work alongside them.  This scapegoating builds on the fear that shari’a threatens the country’s social fabric and that American Muslims wish to impose their code of behavior on non-Muslims. The actual content of shari’a in this discourse remains vague, but constantly hints at brutal criminal penalties, intolerance of contemporary life, and misogyny. Some politicians and religious leaders are promoting this factually incorrect and highly divisive message for political capital.

    The study described in this Report set out to explore the real meaning of shari’a to ordinary American Muslims by talking to them about how they understood the role of shari’a in their everyday lives. It was conceived following the 2003-05 Ontario, Canada “shari’a debate,” which arose out of a highly publicized appeal by the Islamic Institute for Civil Justice for a formal Islamic tribunal in Ontario to arbitrate family matters. This event sparked widespread public alarm and divisions within the Muslim community. As one journalist commented, the public appeared to believe that “Muslim barbarians [were] knocking on the gates of Ontario.”

    The study shows clearly that other than religious observance, the practice of shari’a for the vast majority of American Muslims is focused on family matters, primarily marriage and divorce. For many respondents, following what they understand as the Islamic rules on marriage and divorce represent the most significant aspect of their Muslim obligations aside from formal religious observances such as prayer, fasting, and the celebration of religious festivals. Respondents in this study understood their personal choices of Muslim marriage and divorce processes as separate from the formal legal system, regarding them a private matter relating to religious duty or (equally common) an affirmation of cultural identity. The accounts of hundreds of Muslims and their understanding of the principles of Islamic marriage and divorce demonstrate the mundane normality of their family life, its many similarities to non-Muslim family life, and the groundlessness of the hysteria over “the coming of shari’a law.”

    None of the 212 respondents—including many imams, legal scholars, Muslim lawyers and others working in the legal system—suggested that the courts should directly apply Islamic law to Muslims (or non-Muslims). Just three imams (of 41) proposed the creation of a parallel Islamic family tribunal, with the vast majority rejecting this idea in favor of recourse to the civil courts. Many Muslims see the civil courts as “man’s law,” in contrast with shari’a which is “God’s law,” but are equally clear that they are required to obey the law of the land – this was emphasized over and over again, and see no incompatibility. Moreover, the study data shows clearly that a preference for shari’a based approaches to divorce does not prevent Muslims from using the courts to obtain a formal legal divorce (as each divorcee dissolving a legal marriage did) or from using dispute resolution in cases of conflict.

    Editor’s Note: This article is the summarized version of her latest research, “Shari’a Law: Coming to a Courthouse Near You? What Sharia Really Means to American Muslims,”  which was sponsored by ISPU. The entire report along with its references is available at http://ispu.org.