Of course, that’s not the kind of sexual seismology Hojatoleslam Kazem Sedighi had in mind when he told worshipers in Tehran last week that women who dress immodestly corrupt young men and lead them to adultery, thereby increasing earthquakes. "What can we do to avoid being buried under the rubble?" he asked. "There is no other solution but to take refuge in religion and to adapt our lives to Islam’s moral codes."

And we spent all that money on retrofitting.

One problem with Sedighi’s logic is that Iran, with one of the world’s highest percentages of modestly dressed women, is also among the most earthquake-prone countries in the world. But wait, this isn’t about logic, and Sedighi isn’t alone in attributing natural horrors to human behavior. The Bible blames epic disasters on idol worship, homosexuality and whatnot. The evangelical Christian Pat Robertson suggested that Hurricane Katrina was God’s punishment for abortions in America, and that this year’s earthquake in Haiti was part of a curse on that island stemming from an 18th century pact with the devil that Haitians allegedly made in exchange for liberty from French slave owners. Along these lines, one wonders what crimes the people of Iceland might have committed to move the earth and bring the sky "tumbling down, tumbling down."

One of the important reasons behind the analysis of this show is that Muslims who saw this panel discussion are either confused because they are not sure whose opinion counts while the blogs and opinions posted on the websites simply chose to accuse the panelists who they don’t like and blamed the media for not giving much time to the panelists who they like very much.

We agree that the idea of this panel discussion is not to please everyone and one does not have to agree with all of what is said but it is quite important that this type of discourse is not only essential but very much needed since it provides opportunity for both Muslims and people of other faith to know and learn more about of Islam and Muslims.

Prayer in Islam

Shahrukh Khan was honest about himself that he does not pray five times a day although he loves to. Shahrukh said if someone does not want to pray in public as the couple chose to in the movie "My Name is Khan" because they were concerned that the people around them who may not understand what they are doing or may look down upon them as opposed to the character of Rizwan Khan who chose to pray in public; both these actions are perfectly alright as long as they do not pick on each other that the other was wrong.

Analysis

We agree that five times prayer is an essential and integral part of Islam and Muslims and at the same time we also agree that as Muslims we need to respect each other’s way of practicing the faith without criticizing each other and leave the decision to Almighty God since he is the best judge of our intentions. God knows the best.

People vs. Scripture

Dr. Zakir Naik said that Muslim is the person who submits his/her will to the Almighty God and said that to understand Islam do not look at the Muslims; to understand Hinduism do not look at the Hindus but go to the original scriptures.

Karan Johar explained the reason behind his making of the ground breaking post- 9/11 film "My name is Khan". Three years ago he was in New York with six people who are all from Indo-Asian orientation; three of them were Western bankers and the other three were graduates from Oxford. He was completely disgusted about their thoughts and ideologies about Islam and Muslims. They were educated, affluent and well travelled people yet they knew nothing about Islam and Muslims.

Karan said that he is not a Muslim but a human who have been taught certain values by his parents. If those people who have lined up their nice certificates in their cabinets, portray themselves as liberals in front of the world but can go against a particular community just based on certain information they read in the New York Times or heard the news, then he felt the need to address this issue since he as a filmmaker had a platform to offer. That’s the reason, he made the movie.

Analysis

We partly agree with Dr. Zakir Naik that it is not always possible for a common citizen to go and look at the scriptures but to realize how a person deals or interacts with the other person at home, at school and at work. One of the reasons Karan Johar felt the need to making a movie and to portray the Muslim characters in a humanizing way is not necessarily because he has read and understood the scripture although he said he worked with Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) and American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) but mainly because of the Muslims he dealt with in his day to day life. God knows the best.

Head covering and beard issue in Islam

Najeeb Jung said that Hijab or the covering of the head is a mark of respect and in nowhere in Islam it is required that you need to be covering your head all the time.

Dr. Zakir Naik said he feels proud when he sees a Muslim man wearing a cap or sporting a beard and a Muslim woman covering her head. He said according to the Quran and Sahih Hadith (Prophetic Traditions), there are various traditions that have been reported that Prophet (PBUH) covered his head. Hence he argued that to say that covering the head by wearing a cap or hijab is not part of Muslim identity is totally wrong.

A Muslim woman in the audience said she does not find any difference between her wearing hijab and with those who chose not to wearing hijab. When asked what would be her response if someone asks about her hijab, she said that she will have a discussion about it with the other person of why she chose to wear the hijab.

Maulana Madani said if a woman chooses to wear hijab out of her own will like he chose to sporting a beard out of his own will, it is a person’s right and made a point with humor that the media will still not consider that person as a "reasonable" Muslim and that was his point of concern.

A woman in the audience made a comment that if a Muslim woman who never used to wear the hijab suddenly chooses to don one, the people around her will start worrying. Later, another woman rebutted her if a woman suddenly started wearing western clothes will someone be worried about that person’s psychological effect? Though the person who made the initial comment agreed that she used the wrong word, "worry," it was indeed an enriching debate.

Analysis

"And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and to be mindful of their chastity, and not to display their charms [in public] beyond what may [decently] be apparent thereof; hence, let them draw their head-coverings over their bosoms. And let them not display [more of] their charms to any but their husbands, or their fathers, or their husbands’ fathers, or their sons, or their husbands’ Sons, or their brothers, or their brothers’ sons, or their sisters’ sons, or their womenfolk, or those whom they rightfully possess, or such male attendants as are beyond all sexual desire, or children that are as yet unaware of women’s nakedness; and let them not swing their legs [in walking] so as to draw attention to their hidden charms And [always], O you believers – all of you – turn unto God in repentance, so that you might attain to a happy state!" (Quran 24:31)

The following footnote from Muhammad Asad’s translation will clarify the fact that God Almighty instructed to cover a woman’s bosom using the head-covering that was worn customarily by Arabian women and NOT the head-covering itself.

The noun khimar (of which khumur is the plural) denotes the head-covering customarily used by Arabian women before and after the advent of Islam. According to most of the classical commentators, it was worn in pre-Islamic times more or less as all ornament and was let down loosely over the wearer’s back; and since, in accordance with the fashion prevalent at the time, the upper part of a woman’s tunic had a wide opening in the front, her breasts cleavage were left bare. Hence, the injunction to cover the bosom by means of a khimar, (a term so familiar to the contemporaries of the Prophet) does not necessarily relate to the use of a khimar as such but is, rather, meant to make it clear that a woman’s breasts are not included in the concept of "what may decently be apparent" of her body and should not, therefore, be displayed.

It is perfectly alright to wear the hijab or choose not to wear the hijab but what is more important in Islam is to wear dress in modesty, which applies to both men and women. Likewise Prophet Muhammad did not mandate Muslim men to cover their head and sport beard. Hence it should not be an argument about right vs. wrong over the issue of hijab for women and wearing a cap or sporting a beard for men.

Hence wearing hijab should be a matter of personal choice as said by the other Muslim woman in the audience. If a discussion were to happen then that should revolve around modesty of the dress in an easy and respectful way. In either case, it shouldn’t be a matter of intimidation. God knows the best.

Definitions of a Muslim

Alyque Padamsee said, "You do not have to be liberal or anything to be accepted in the society, the idea of God should be a God of love & peace and not God of violence."

Dr. Zakir Naik said, "You cannot say someone is liberal or moderate Muslim but practicing Muslim, partially practicing Muslim or non-practicing Muslim."

Maulana Madani humorously said that the people whom you are thinking extremists are the ones who are standing right in front of you and fighting against you.

Burkha Dutt said that all of us no matter what faith we come from, interpret our faith differently; do something we like, don’t do something that we don’t like and asked the panelists if that does make us any less Muslim, Hindu or Christian for which the responses from the panelists varied.

Analysis

Though we agree that we do not want to be called by any other term besides Muslim, we heard various other definitions both from the panelists and from those who were present in the show such as conservative, orthodox, mainstream, reasonable, regular and easier going Muslim. In order to escape from these definitions, we also heard an alternative set of definitions proposed such as practicing Muslim, partially practicing Muslim or non-practicing Muslim. This attests to the fact that we are just trying to portray different versions of being a Muslim.

At this time, it is quite important for us to understand the Creed (Aqeeda in Arabic), which is the common ground for all Muslims.

The Creed consists of two important sources and six articles of faith.

The two sources are:
- "Muhkam" Qur’an; those verses in the Qur’an that are 100% clear in the meaning and that cannot be interpreted in more than one way. e.g. "Say: He is Allah, the One and Only; Allah, the Eternal, Absolute; He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; And there is none like unto Him." (Qur’an 112: 1-4)
- "Mutawatir" (consecutive) hadith; i.e. narrated by so many people in each generation that it is not possible to have any doubt of their authenticity. e.g. The form of prayer i.e. components like standing, bowing and prostrating is mutawatir whereas the actual details on the style of prayer like hand position while standing is not mutawatir.

The six articles of faith are:
- Belief in the oneness of God
- Belief in all the Angels
- Belief in all the scriptures (Suhuf of Abraham, Psalms revealed to David, Torah revealed to Moses, Gospel revealed to Jesus and Qur’an revealed to Muhammad)
- Belief in all the Messengers (from Adam to Muhammad (Peace be upon them)
- Belief in Al-ghaib, an Arabic word what is known as something that is beyond human perception
- Belief in the day of judgment

There are certain verses in the Qur’an, which are speculative (mutashabih or texts that could be interpreted in more than one way without violating basic rules of interpretation) and that can be debated. Likewise, a person can believe or choose not to believe in a prophetic tradition that is categorized as hadith al-ahad (Single chain; isolated) even though it is sahih (authentic).

Hence we argue that it is perfectly alright for someone to be called as a conservative, moderate or liberal Muslim as long as the person does not violate the creed of Islam. However, we need to strive for moderation since it is inherent in our religion. But we don’t agree that a person is a moderate Muslim because he consumes alcohol. We also don’t agree that a person is a practicing Muslim because she prays five times a day and at the same time endorses killing of innocent civilians just because they are of different faith.

In Islam, on those areas where we are allowed to have disagreements, one can interpret the religion differently; follow certain things they believe in or leave certain things aside and is perfectly acceptable as long as those things are not part of the creed and the discourse must go on in those issues, which will enrich Islam and Muslim community at large. This will in no way make a person a less Muslim or a non-Muslim. God knows the best.

The Issue of Terrorism

Dr. Zakir Naik said he does not believe that Osama bin Laden is responsible for the 9/11 attacks since he does not believe in CNN and BBC news. When Barkha Dutt asked about Al Jazeera channel that showed the same visuals, he said that he does not believe in that too. But at the same time, he does not consider Osama bin Laden as sane either.

Maulana Madani said with firmness that all those people whoever carried out this heinous crime no matter what name they carry they are indeed the enemies of humanity and the enemies of Islam. It is important to note that he was the one who was instrumental in getting the Deoband Clergy to pass a fatwa against terrorism in 2007.

Analysis

We need to understand that two things really did happen — firstly, the 9/11 attack did happen and secondly, the innocent people lost their lives to this senseless terror attack. The conspiracy theory whether it is an insider’s job may or may not become a reality unless until the investigations are completed. If Muslims start playing right into the conspiracy theories by ignoring the facts then it is not going to help them in anyway. In these situations, Muslims should condemn the terrorists whether or not those who committed such heinous crime claim to act in their name. God knows the best.

Muslim Identity

Soha Ali Khan said she happens to be a Muslim but wants to keep her faith a private matter between her and her maker.

Shahrukh Khan argued that it is more important for him to feel Muslim as opposed to look Muslim or see Muslim.

Dr. Zakir Naik also seconded Shahrukh Khan that practicing the religion is more important than the appearance of a Muslim.

Shahrukh Khan’s statement about Muslim identity knocked the socks off the audience. He said, "If you don’t know about your religion, well enough, if you are not able to practice it, well enough, if your knowledge is less, God will forgive you. But being a Muslim, if you are not able to explain your religion to the other people who do not understand it then this world will never forgive you."

Food for thought

Kabir Khan said people should be given an option to choose their religion at the age of 21 instead of being born into a religion.

Analysis

We agree that this is an interesting thought that puts onus on parents, teachers and especially scholars of all faiths. In that case we recommend that the kids should be taught about their religion not just in the ritualistic way but the value behind it that will help a person to make a decision to choosing a religion of his/her own choice when they reach their age of maturity or at least will learn to respect other’s faith and stand up for one another. This is something that Karan Johar also claimed that it has been passed on to him by his parents.

Blogs posted on various websites claim that Dr. Zakir Naik was given very little time to speak.

Analysis

There are two possible options — the mainstream media can give more time for a person who has more knowledge about Islam or on the other hand the Muslims with the religious knowledge should equip themselves to answer to the impromptu questions where they can organize their thoughts quickly and inform the audience through clear, comprehensive and knowledgeable expression in 1-2 minutes. In our opinion, a Muslim scholar getting invitation from the mainstream media itself is an opportunity and on top of that placing a request to give more time for answering the questions will only deter the scholar from getting future invitations. Hence we would consider the latter one would be the best option since Maulana Madani spoke very little in this discussion but made his point stand out very well. He used humor a lot, which was a big plus and he did not hurt anyone’s feelings either.

Muslim perspective on those people who are liberal almost only if they are non-religious.

Analysis

Prof. Dr. Khaled Abou El Fadl, Professor of Islamic Law at UCLA said in a recent lecture in Los Angeles that it is important not to discount a person who says his/her parents are Muslims or he/she is from Muslim origin — though we lost an asset but we might still have that person as our ally because at a minimum that person might help us to make our voice reach out loud and clear especially when we are trying to make a point. This is so true that Alyque Padamsee was very much supportive of Islam and Muslims throughout the discussion in spite of the fact that he said that he gave up on his parent’s religion when he was 21 years old.

Conclusion

The word "Jihad" means exerting effort to achieve a desired thing or prevent an undesired one. In other words, it is an effort that aims at bringing about benefit or preventing harm.

One hadith indicates that "the best form of jihad is to tell a word of truth to a tyrannical ruler." (Abu Dawood)

Jihad can take different forms such as struggle against one’s desires, poverty, illiteracy, disease, and Jihad is not a war always although it can take the form of war.

Allah says very clearly: "Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not do aggression, for Allah loves not the aggressors." (Quran 2: 190)

The war is permissible in Islam, but only when other peaceful means such as dialogue, negotiations and treaties fail. It is a last resort and should be avoided as much as possible. Its purpose is not to convert people by force, or to colonize people or to acquire land or wealth or for self-glory. Its purpose is basically: defense of life, property, land, honor and freedom for oneself as well as defense of others from injustice and oppression.

Terrorism is not Jihad, it is Fasad (mischief). It is against the teachings of Islam. There are some people who use their twisted arguments to justify terrorism for their causes, but it has no justification in Islam.

Terrorism intends to create fear and it deliberately targets the civilians. Nowadays, the act of terrorism is used as a tool by certain groups just to gain media attention to show who is in charge especially in the recent Lahore attacks in Pakistan where the gunmen targeted the Sri Lankan cricket players. It is worth mentioning here that there is nothing in the history that suggests Pakistan and Sri Lanka were ever engaged in war but still this untoward incident did happen.

Before searching for this quote in the New Testament, you might first ask your Muslim co-worker, friend or neighbor for a copy of the Quran, Islam’s revealed text. The quote is from verse 45 of chapter 3 in the Quran.

It is well known, particularly in this holiday season, that Christians follow the teachings of Jesus. What is less well understood is that Muslims also love and revere Jesus as one of God’s greatest messengers to mankind.

Other verses in the Quran, regarded by Muslims as the direct word of God, state that Jesus was strengthened with the "Holy Spirit" (2:87) and is a "sign for the whole world." (21:91) His virgin birth was confirmed when Mary is quoted as asking: "How can I have a son when no man has ever touched me?" (3:47)

The Quran shows Jesus speaking from the cradle and, with God’s permission, curing lepers and the blind. (5:110) God also states in the Quran: "We gave (Jesus) the Gospel (Injeel) and put compassion and mercy into the hearts of his followers." (57:27)

As forces of hate in this country and worldwide try to pull Muslims and Christians apart, we are in desperate need of a unifying force that can bridge the widening gap of interfaith misunderstanding and mistrust. That force could be the message of love, peace and forgiveness taught by Jesus and accepted by followers of both faiths.

Christians and Muslims would do well to consider another verse in the Quran reaffirming God’s eternal message of spiritual unity: "Say ye: ‘We believe in God and the revelation given to us and to Abraham, Ismail, Isaac, Jacob, and the Tribes, and that given to Moses and Jesus, and that given to (all) Prophets from their Lord. We make no distinction between any of them, and it is unto Him that we surrender ourselves.’" (2:136)

The Prophet Muhammad himself sought to erase any distinctions between the message he taught and that taught by Jesus, who he called God’s "spirit and word." Prophet Muhammad said: "Both in this world and in the Hereafter, I am the nearest of all people to Jesus, the son of Mary. The prophets are paternal brothers; their mothers are different, but their religion is one."

When Muslims mention the Prophet Muhammad, they always add the phrase "peace be upon him." Christians may be surprised to learn that the same phrase always follows a Muslim’s mention of Jesus or that we believe Jesus will return to earth in the last days before the final judgment. Disrespect toward Jesus, as we have seen all too often in our society, is very offensive to Muslims.

Unfortunately, violent events and hate-filled rhetoric around the world provide ample opportunity for promoting religious hostility. And yes, Muslims and Christians do have some differing perspectives on Jesus’ life and teachings. But his spiritual legacy offers an alternative opportunity for people of faith to recognize their shared religious heritage.

America’s Muslim community stands ready to honor that legacy by building bridges of interfaith understanding and challenging those who would divide our nation along religious or ethnic lines.

We have more in common than we think.

One very laudable and pertinent aspect is Obama’s brilliant ability to coalesce different groups with different ideologies from all walks of American life and bind them together with a desire for a better America that lives up to its ideals. The creation of a common ground upon which every one of these groups can find a space is the glory of a free people, who possess in themselves the potential for change.

This idea of building coalitions is the strength of a democracy. We Muslims need to ponder this reality and appreciate it. One of the early recorded activities of Prophet Mohammad (PBUH), long before he received the Message, was his participation in the coalition of "al-Fudool," which brought together several different leaders of Meccan society to agree to protect visitors and passersby who had no tribal support system from being exploited or abused. In fact, to emphasize the importance of coalition building, the Prophet stated, after he had become established as the Messenger of God, that if he were to be invited again for such a coalition, he would join.

The Quran states that the interaction between groups and masses is the guarantee against corruption and the protector of the most important of all freedoms – the freedom of religious diversity. This is illustrated in two glorious verses of the Quran (all verses from The Message of the Quran by Mohammad Asad):

Surah 2: 251 – "…and if God has not enabled people to [push in groups] against each other, corruption would surely overwhelm the earth…"

Surah 22: 40 – "…for, if God had not enabled people to [push in groups] against each, [all monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques] in all of which God’s name is abundantly extolled, would surely have been destroyed…"

Furthermore, the Quran teaches us to depart from the illusion of conformity, to acknowledge that diverse groups should vie and race for goodness at all levels, and leave the final judgment to God.

Surah 5: 48 – "…unto every one of your have We appointed a different law and way of life. And if God had so willed, He surely would have made you all one single community: [but He willed it otherwise] in order to test you by means of what He has vouchsafed unto you. Vie then with one another in doing good works…"

The Quran has also directed us to cooperate with others for whatever is good and righteous.

Surah 5: 2 – "…cooperate with one another in furthering virtue and God consciousness…"

We should cherish this moment in history when we see common people cooperating and creating alliances to shape their own destiny.

Now, a collective body of Muslim clerics has taken another commendable step by denouncing televangelist Zakir Naik’s speeches and demanding a ban on them. Popular Muslim resentment against Naik became evident last December when he used the phrase, "May God be pleased with him", for Yezid, the debauch ruler and murderer of Imam Hussain; the Prophet Mohammed’s grandson who was martyred at the battle of Kerbala. Throughout Islamic history, these particular words have been used only for the Prophet’s trusted companions. Anger has now peaked with Naik declaring that praying to Prophet Mohammed and seeking his intercession with God is heresy.

I have been particularly disturbed by the growing popularity of Naik, founder of Peace TV and president of the Islamic Research Foundation. Naik is not an Islamic scholar or a cleric and can best be described as a preacher famous for his computer-like memory of almost all religious scriptures like the Bible, the Vedas and the Quran.

A doctor by training and inspired by the late India-born South African evangelist Sheikh Ahmed Deedat, Naik loves to debate with Hindus on the Vedas, with Jains about vegetarianism and atheists on religion and science. In the garb of inter-faith dialogues, he not only runs down all major religions, but also rubbishes as haraam (sinful) all Muslim devotional aspects that differ from his viewpoint.

In the subcontinent, Islam is the legacy of the Sufis who gave us traditions of syncretism and communal harmony. By condemning Sufi followers as "grave worshippers", Salafi and Wahabi ideology-inspired speakers such as Naik reject an entire historical body of Islamic scholarship, jurisprudence and almost 80 per cent of Islamic literature. Naik is on record saying, "If Osama bin Laden is terrorising America or the enemies of Islam, every Muslim should become a terrorist." Excerpts of this video are circulating on the internet, damaging the already wounded perception of Islam and its followers.

Let it be said that the initial step must begin with thorough condemnation of terrorism, vow to jettison all the perpetrators of violence and an undertaking to stick to the rule of the law. And this law should be one that is recognized by the Constitution, not the one that is handed down by the religion for centuries. It has to be recognized that the visionary fathers of this nation had vested this country with democracy, secularism and justice for all. So parameters have already been drawn.

Secondly, the community has to shun extremists and fundamentalists who are of course, not found only among Muslims. Currently, the mood among the Muslims is one of denial of existence of extremism and its practitioners within the community and pointing of fingers at others. It is unhelpful in diagnosis, to say the least. It is not for nothing that terrorists are born among people. SIMI represented a lunatic fringe that could intoxicate youth with hysteria and notions of absolutism. Impracticality of those ideals often leads the youth to subvert and undermine the existing institutions. Of course, the establishment could be accused of being harsh against one kind of extremism while treating a rival kind with kid gloves. But let us not forget that it were MIM goons in Hyderabad who attacked Taslima Nasreen and were uninhibited in proclamation of their intent to murder her. Terrorist Kafeel emerged from a middle class Muslim family of IT capital of India. Suicide bombers in Pakistan are rising from Taliban aficionados. There are separatist forces in the Valley who make their intention plain against allowing the Kashmiri Pundits’s return. Losing sight of extremism within only provides legitimacy to extremists on the other side of the fence. Such negative symbiosis has permeated deep into our polity.

Thirdly, ethos of pluralism must be inculcated among the Muslim youth whereby they could appreciate the divergent opinion on social issues. Unfortunately, certain dawah groups (including TV channels and evangelists) have spoilt the atmosphere with their fundamentalist posturing and rhetoric of rejection and repulsion of all concepts modern. Using the state-of-the-art technology these groups peddle all kinds of intolerance, injustice and regressive ideas. Their puritanical worldview is antithetical to the respect for diversity the time and society requires. They feel no qualms in shouting from the rooftops that women must be barred from social space, Islamic criminal law is most effective in curbing crime, economy must be rid of every iota of interest, blasting of Bamiyan Buddhas was justifiable because the Buddhism does not preach idolatry, and khilafah is the ultimate solution to all human woes. Such absolutist ideas from TV channels may project a fantastic mirage to a community starkly shorn of role models, but cannot be substitute for practical wisdom.

Fourthly, the community must realize that in a democracy like ours all doors are not slammed shut on a group. Institutional infirmity at one level gets remedied at another level. If executive is found acting harshly, courts come to the rescue. Miscarriage of justice in one instance often gets redressed by the legislature. If all else fails, civil society or media may provide the correctives. Did not the media highlight the unjust role of the Australian Federal Police in Dr. Hanif’s case? Groups within the community could take their plea for justice to the media and civil liberties group for investigation into several instance of perceived atrocities and injustice. Tomtomming victimhood is no solution.

Finally, Muslims need to work with civil society groups on issues of popular woe and weal. They stir into action on emotional issues of Danish cartoons but remain conspicuous by absence on issue of implementing Justice Srikrishna Commission report, or helping the Bihar’s flood victims or attack on Christians in Kandhamal . Hardly any voices are heard against separatist movement in the Kashmir Valley. How then are they justified in seeking others ears while being deaf to their woes.

Similarly, words, texts and scriptures could timelessly exist on paper, could be stored in archives, preserved in tomes. But not the people. Times change and urge people to change. Those who resist, find themselves on the waste heap of history. Science and technology shape habits and forces of urbanization, industrialization and modernization alter the mode of social organization. As time advances, societies fuse together, skills consolidate, cultural fault lines become indistinguishable. All these place demands on people to live down differences except those that are integral to their faith.

There are two opinions among the scholars:

1. Jewish/Biblical scriptures were replaced with Quran.
2. Quran abrogated itself.

1. Jewish/Biblical scriptures were replaced with Quran

Sabbath Day

Jews observe Sabbath Day whereas Muslims do not.

Diet

Jews follow a stringent diet law and for Muslims, some of the restrictions have been relaxed.

"’(I have come to you), to attest the Law which was before me. And to make lawful to you part of what was (Before) forbidden to you; I have come to you with a Sign from your Lord. So fear Allah, and obey me. Quran (3:50)

Why would God replace His earlier revelations?

All food was lawful to the Children of Israel, except what Israel Made unlawful for itself, before the Law (of Moses) was revealed. Say: "Bring ye the Law and study it, if ye be men of truth." Quran (3:93)

Why did Israelites make some of the food unlawful that God made lawful to them?

And remember Moses said to his people: "(Allah) commands that ye sacrifice a heifer." They said: "Makest thou a laughing-stock of us?" He said: "(Allah) save me from being an ignorant (fool)!" They said: "Beseech on our behalf Thy Lord to make plain to us what (heifer) it is!" He said; "He says: The heifer should be neither too old nor too young, but of middling age. Now do what ye are commanded!" They said: "Beseech on our behalf Thy Lord to make plain to us Her colour." He said: "He says: A fawn-coloured heifer, pure and rich in tone, the admiration of beholders!" They said: "Beseech on our behalf Thy Lord to make plain to us what she is: To us are all heifers alike: We wish indeed for guidance, if Allah wills." He said: "He says: A heifer not trained to till the soil or water the fields; sound and without blemish." They said: "Now hast thou brought the truth." Then they offered her in sacrifice, but not with good-will. (Quran 2:67-71)

In this particular instance, when God ordered them to sacrifice a cow, the Jews went into the specifics of the food, making their diet law too stringent. Some of the scholars in their tafsirs state that it in some occasions it took nearly 60 years to find such an animal for sacrifice.

Muslims are expected to exercise moderation

Would ye question your Messenger as Moses was questioned of old? but whoever changeth from Faith to Unbelief, Hath strayed without doubt from the even way. (Quran 2:108)

The Prophet (PBUH) made it clear that we need not investigate things that are not readily known to us with regard to worship and religion. We take the case of Umar who was walking with another companion of the Prophet when some water dropped over them from a building nearby. Umar’s companion started to inquire whether the water was clean or contaminated with impurity. Umar stopped him, saying to the man in the building that he should not answer the questions put to him. He also told his companion that the Prophet ordered that we do not go to such lengths in trying to establish details. This ties up with the rule that everything is permissible unless pronounced otherwise. Similarly, everything is pure unless we are certain that it has been contaminated with impurity. This gave rise to the principle of Islamic law, buniya alal yakeen, a position that can be taken based on what we know.

2. Quran abrogated itself

a. Prohibition of Alcohol

They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit." They ask thee how much they are to spend; Say: "What is beyond your needs." Thus doth Allah Make clear to you His Signs: In order that ye may consider- (Quran 2:219)
Bad outweighs good in alcohol and gambling.

O ye who believe! Approach not prayers with a mind befogged, until ye can understand all that ye say,- nor in a state of ceremonial impurity (Except when travelling on the road), until after washing your whole body. If ye are ill, or on a journey, or one of you cometh from offices of nature, or ye have been in contact with women, and ye find no water, then take for yourselves clean sand or earth, and rub therewith your faces and hands. For Allah doth blot out sins and forgive again and again. (Quran 4:43)

Do not approach prayer while intoxicated.

O ye who believe! Intoxicants and gambling, (dedication of) stones, and (divination by) arrows, are an abomination,- of Satan’s handwork: eschew such (abomination), that ye may prosper.(Quran 5: 90)

Alcohol was completely banned.

Scholars use incremental argument that alcohol was stopped gradually but what about us Muslims who never consumed alcohol? All the three verses are still valid for the reasons cited above.

b. Individual Will vs. Laws of inheritance

It is prescribed, when death approaches any of you, if he leave any goods that he make a bequest to parents and next of kin, according to reasonable usage; this is due from the Allah.fearing. (Quran 2:180)

The inheritance laws were later revealed in Quran 4:11, 12 and 176.

Some scholars argue that the verses related to inheritance law abrogated the verses in regards to leaving individual will.

Some scholars say that one can specify 1/3rd of their property in their wills to be given to charity, friends and extra members of the family who are in need while the Islamic state will distribute the remainder 2/3rd property amount as per the Islamic inheritance law to other members of the family.

Hence both the verses are still valid.

c. Stoning for adultery

When someone commits adultery, there is no stoning according to the Quran. It is clearly specified in this verse:

The woman and the man guilty of adultery or fornication,- flog each of them with a hundred stripes: Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: and let a party of the Believers witness their punishment. (Quran 24:2)

Some claim the prophet ordered stoning based on the following hadith and consider this hadith as abrogating the Quran.

‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas reported that ‘Umar bin Khattab sat on the pulpit of Allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him) and said: Verily Allah sent Muhammad (may peace be upon him) with truth and he sent down the book upon him, and the verse of stoning was included in what was sent down to him. We recited it, retained it in our memory and understood it. Allah’s messenger (may peace be upon him) awarded the punishment of stoning to death (to the married adulterer and adulteress) and after him, we also awarded the punishment of stoning. I am afraid that with the lapse of time, the people (may forget it) and may say: We do not find the punishment of stoning in the book of Allah, and thus go astray by abandoning this duty prescribed by Allah. Stoning is a duty laid down in Allah’s book for married men and women who commit adultery when proof is established, or if there is pregnancy or a confession. [Muslim, III, No. 4194; Bukhari, VIII, No. 816.]

For all reports concerning the text of the Quran, two independent witnesses are required. Only ‘Umar reported that the ‘verse of stoning’ had been included in the Quranic text. This legal ruling was not included in the Quran precisely because it was not considered reliable, being based on one witness only.

In Torah one can find stoning for committing adultery.

d. Jihad vs. Peace

Some argue that the peaceful verses in the Quran were later abrogated.

Quran talks about leaving the enemy gently (e.g. Quran 9:6) whereas in other place it talks about engaging in military confrontation (e.g. Quran 9:5).

Rituals are a tricky business. They have an outward form and infinite capacity to deceive the onlookers. Politicians deploy them as diversionary tactics to expand their appeal among the naive men and women. Spiritual industrialists and the modern-age gurus practice them for multi-billion transactions. Peddlers of dubious and spurious wares survive and thrive on its strength. They have all the element of business what with these gurus flaunting colour, sound, symbols, and flags.

In contrast, values have to be practiced, are difficult to be observed, demand sacrifice, are intangible and therefore take long to be recognized and respected. Shorn of publicity, bereft of impressive array of followers, and devoid of noise, these have to be perceived only through behaviour, dealings, manners, etiquette and one’s conduct in private and public. They are not superficial. They have a tendency to be latent, an obsession with subtlety, a passion not to be discovered and shy of being evident.

A cursory glance over the Muslims around the world would convince that over the last few decades, the community has come to betray several outer manifestations of Islamic rituals and symbols. There are more millions who gather for Hajj every year. The number of those who seek forgiveness on the 27th night of Ramadan at the Haram Mosque in Makkah has surpassed the number conglomerating for the annual pilgrimage. Beards have lengthened and hemlines of trousers have gone up. Headscarf has emerged as the universal bond of Islamic sisterhood. More people perform Itikaaf while millions of lambs are sacrificed on Eidul Azha. More rosary beads, miswaks and musallas find buyers. The most ungodly of the nations, China, has made the most of this Islamic religious fervour. They now manufacture and supply the Islamic prayer rugs (often compass studded), tasbeeh calculators, takbir clocks and plastic Ganesha idols in millions and rake up billions of dollars. Similarly, rituals like vaastu, homa, havana, yagya, Ganapathy poojas, grihaparvesham, have found popularity among Hindus. It has become a fetish to indulge in exhibitionism when it comes to matters religious. These manifestations of religiosity that characterise the religion or the religious people, are not unique to Islam or Hinduism alone. All across the globe, ritualism is on the rise.

Lament is that even if underlying piety has not changed that much, religion’s role in public life; plainly has. Amid the noisy trumpeting of religious slogans, the lives of people are getting sterile of values. People are eager to make repeat performance of Hajj even by impersonation, beating the rules of legal disability. Just as the acquisition of an American Green Card has become a symbol of the Indian (and, perhaps, elsewhere too) elite, performing Umrah during Ramadan has also emerged as a status symbol. Treatment of an ailing neighbour, marriage of the poor ageing spinster in the back lane, or a child of the housemaid withdrawn from the school owing to lack of resources do not occupy their priority. People do not feel qualms in flaunting Haza min Fazli Rabbi ("I owe it to my Lord’s bounty") on mansions raised through ill-gotten wealth. Individuals who find themselves ill at ease while doling out paltry sums for the poor, do not bat an eyelid on sacrificing a dozen goats on the eve of Eidul Azha. Spirit of sacrifice for the needy around does not even touch them. The very Imams who tirelessly pontificate on virtues of retaining the traditional syllabus for madrassas, somnolently make a beeline for admission of their wards in modern missionary-run schools.

We indeed reside in a world that has made a business of religion and rituals. It is a soulless world, sterile of values of integrity, love, compassion, generousity, forgiveness and transparency. Spirit that characterize these rites has vanished into thin air. It is time we addressed the issue threadbare. Rites without values are like form without content, style without substance and body without a soul. Let us be reminded that religions survive by distinctions and differentiation. But values are one and the same all across the substrata of all faiths. In the final analysis, the religions differentiate, but values unite. It is up to us to choose.

While each nation is entitled to its own arrangements pertaining to time, calendar, measurements within its national boundaries, any plea for religiously oriented standard time is bound to add to the complexity of human activity. Greenwich Mean Time (GMT) has been the standard measure ever since it was fixed in 1884 and all times zones are determined accordingly. No one has ever claimed Greenwich to be the centre of the earth or spiritual centre of a religious community other than Muslims. Of course, an element of United Kingdom’s imperial dominance over a considerable part of the globe must have lent it the necessary confidence in clinching a global consensus. Few now question its origin.

To demand a different standard in as vital an aspect of life as time, merely for the sake of belief, is something that should not go unquestioned. In the same vein, the Muslim scientists’ theory that Makkah lies exactly at the centre of the earth also needs to be probed. Spherical as the earth is, every point on its surface has the equal claim to being its centre. As for the real center of the earth, it must lie in the center of the core of the earth. It is therefore debatable, if Makkah alone has the unique distinction of being the central point. If the proponents of the theory are attempting to determine the center of the land portion of the earth (excluding the watery surface), they need to explain as to how they redraw the land map of the earth. Any such exercise in draughtmanship will be essentially laboured and is susceptible to the accusation of being contrived. Even if it is presumed that designation of Greenwich at zero degree was an arbitrary imperial decision during the British empire’s halcyon days, it remains beyond one’s ken as to how a city like Makkah, lying far away from the Equator could justifiably lay claim to centrality on the planet earth. All these only prove that the very exercise of determining the center of the earth on the surface is an exercise in futility and bears no scientific value or basis.

Maulana Nadwi’s wrote extensively on a vast range of subjects, including on Islam and politics. On this issue, his views underwent a gradual process of change and maturation, beginning with his early association with a leading Indian Islamist formation and later making a forceful critique of some crucial aspects of its understanding of Islam. His views in this regard point to the little-known yet rich internal debate among Indian Muslim scholars about the relationship between Islam and politics, particularly on the question of what Islamists describe as an ‘Islamic state’.

In 1940, Maulana Nadwi came under the influence of Sayyid Maududi, the founder of the principal Indian Islamist outfit, the Jamaat-i Islami. Maududi, along with the Egyptian Syed Qutb, may be said to be among the pioneers of contemporary Islamism. Soon after joining the Jamaat, Maulana Nadwi was put in-charge of its activities in Lucknow. This relationship proved short-lived, however, and he left the Jamaat in 1943. He later wrote that he was disillusioned by the perception that many members of the Jamaat were going to what he called ‘extremes’ in adoring and glorifying Maududi as almost infallible, this bordering on ‘personality worship’. At the same time, he felt that many Jamaat activists believed that they had nothing at all to learn from any other scholars of Islam. He was also concerned with what he saw as a lack of personal piety in Maududi and some leading Jamaat activists and with their criticism of other Muslim groups.

Maulana Nadwi’s opposition to the Jamaat’s understanding about Islam and politics, which it shared with most other Islamist formations, comes out clearly in his Urdu book Asr-i Hazir Mai Din Ki Tahfim-o-Tashrih (‘Understanding and Explaining Religion in the Contemporary Age’) which he penned in 1978, and which won him, so he says in his introduction to its second edition published in 1980, fierce condemnation from leading members of the Jamaat. Here, Maulana Nadwi takes Maududi to task for having allegedly misinterpreted central Islamic beliefs in order to suit his own political agenda, presenting Islam, he says, as little more than a political programme. Thus, he accuses Maududi of wrongly equating the Islamic duty of ‘establishing religion’ with the setting up of an Islamic state with God as Sovereign and Law Maker. At Maududi’s hands, he says, ‘God’, ‘The Sustainer’, ‘Religion’ and ‘Worship’ have all been reduced to political concepts. In this way, Maududi, Maulana Nadwi says, sought to incorrectly suggest that Islam is simply about political power and that the relationship between God and human beings is only that between an All-Powerful King and His subjects. However, Maulana Nadwi says, this relationship is also one of ‘love’ and ‘realisation of the Truth’, which is far more comprehensive than what Maududi envisages.

Linked to Maulana Nadwi’s critique of Maududi for having allegedly reduced Islam to a mere political project was his concern that not only was such an approach a distortion of the actual import of the Quran but also that it was impractical, if not dangerous, in the Indian context. Thus, he argued, Maududi’s insistence that to accept the commands of anyone other than God, including of an elected government, was tantamount to shirk, the crime of associating others with God, as this was allegedly akin to ‘worship’, was not in keeping with the teachings of Islam. God, Maulana Nadwi wrote, had, in His wisdom, left several areas of life free for people to decide how they could govern them, within the broad limits set by the Islamic law or shariah, and guided by a concern for social welfare.

Further, Maulana Nadwi asserted that Maududi’s argument that God had sent prophets to the world charged with the mission of establishing an ‘Islamic state’ was a misreading of the Islamic concept of prophethood. The principal work of the prophets, Maulana Nadwi argued, was to preach the worship of the one God and to exhort others to do good deeds. Not all prophets were rulers. In fact, only a few of them were granted that status. Maulana Nadwi faulted Maududi for what he said was ‘debasing’ the ‘lofty’ Islamic understanding of worship to mean simply ‘training’ people as willing subjects of the Islamic state. In Maududi’s understanding of Islam, he wrote, prayer and remembrance of God are seen as simply the means to an end, the establishment of an Islamic state, whereas, Maulana Nadwi argued, the converse is true. The goal of the Islamic state is to ensure worship of God, and not the other way round. If at all worship can be said to be a means, he added, it is a means for securing the ‘will of God’ and ‘closeness to Him’.

If the ‘Islamic state’ should then simply a means for the ‘establishment of religion’ and not the ‘total religion’ or the ‘primary objective’ of Islam, it opens up the possibility of pursuing the same goals through other means. Maulana Nadwi refers to this when he says that the objective of the ‘establishment of the faith’ needs to be pursued along with ‘wisdom of the faith’, using constructive, as opposed to destructive, means. Eschewing ‘total opposition’, Muslims striving for the ‘establishment of the faith’ should, he wrote, unhesitatingly adopt peaceful means such as ‘understanding and reform’, ‘consultation’ and ‘wisdom’. Critiquing the use of uncalled for violence by some groups calling themselves ‘Islamic’, Maulana Nadwi stressed the need for ‘obedience’, ‘love’ and ‘faith’ and struggle against the ‘base self’ (nafs). Muslims should, he wrote, make use of all available legitimate spaces to pursue the cause of the ‘establishment of religion’, such as propagating their message through literature, public discussions, training volunteers, winning others over with the force of one’s own personality and establishing contacts with governments.

That little known story is precisely what an Urdu book I recently read with avid interest is all about. Penned by a Pakistani alim, Maulana Syeed Ghulam Mustafa Bukhari Aqeel, the book, titled ‘Muslim Khawatin Ki Ilmi Khidmat’ (‘The Intellectual Contributions of Muslim Women’) contains vignettes about scores of early Muslim women scholars, who could serve as major sources of inspiration to Muslims, including Muslim women, today if only they were more widely known, a task that the Maulana takes upon himself.

Many of these early Muslim women scholars were experts in various Islamic sciences, in contrast to today’s case where we have few, if any, such female scholars. The book refers to Ibn Hajar Asqalani as writing that the early centuries of Islam record more than 1500 female scholars of Hadith, traditions attributed to the Prophet Muhammad, including several wives of the Prophet and his companions as well as women in succeeding generations. Many of these were also narrators of Hadith reports. Fatima bint Qais is said to have had long debates with the caliph Umar on an issue related to fiqh, and, so the book says, the majority of the ulema gave preference to her view. Similarly, the noted historian Khateeb Baghdadi mentions 32 famous female scholars of his times, and one of them, Karina Bint Ahmad Maruzia, taught him the collection of Hadith by Imam Bukhari. Likewise, the noted Muhaddith Imam Zahri described Umra Bint Abdur Rahman, a woman brought up by Hazrat Ayesha, as ‘an unending sea of knowledge’.

Several of these women scholars had male students, something quite inconceivable for many Muslims today. Thus, Ayesha Bint Sad bin Al-Waqas, a scholar of Hadith, had a large number of students, including the great Imam Malik. Imam Shafi, so the book tells us, would attend the lectures of Hazrat Nafisa, grand-daughter of Imam Husain. The Abbasid Caliph Malik Marwan would sometimes attend the lectures of a woman scholar Sahima Bint Yahya al-Osabia.

Other women wrote books on religious and other subjects, many of which, unfortunately, have been now lost. Fatima Nishapuri wrote a tafsir or commentary on the Quran; Zainab Bint Usman bin Muhammad authored several books on fiqh; Razia, sister of al-Hakim of Andalusia, wrote extensively on History and Geography; Aisha Khas, a noted calligrapher and musician, translated several books from Sanskrit and Greek and so on. The book also mentions several Indian Muslim families from royal families who were accomplished authors, mainly in the fields of Sufism, history and royal biography.

In this early period of Islamic history, numerous women founded madrasas, including some specifically for Muslim women. Thus, says the book, the first madrasa, as separate from a mosque as a centre for education, was founded by a woman, Fatima Bint Muhammad al-Fahari, in Morocco in the mid-ninth century. The enormous structure of the madrasa could accommodate some thirty thousand worshippers praying together.

Other notable women founders of madrasas in this period included Maryam Bint Yaqub, who established a girls’ madrasa in Seville, where besides the Islamic sciences, subjects like Philosophy, History, Geography, Mathematics, Astronomy and various crafts were taught; Bint Qazi Shihabuddin al-Tabari, whose madrasa catered to orphans; Tazkira Rabai Khatun’s madrasa in Egypt for poor girls; a school for training women in martial arts set up by Geti Ada Begum, daughter of Murad Khan, ruler of Zabulistan; and the Dar ul-Zubaida, a madrasa built on the spot of the Dar ul-Arqam, the place outside Mecca where the Prophet would himself teach his followers, built by Talib ul-Zaman Habshia, a female slave of the Abbasid Caliph Nasirbillah.

Rise in numbers of the followers of a faith should not necessarily be a compliment these days. It is the quality of followers, their creativity, their contribution to civilization and values, their capacity to innovate, their intellectual weight and assertion through diplomacy is what matters and gets counted. Sheer numbers do not add up to anything. But smaller yet more creative communities with greater say in academia, media, finance, industry, trade, commerce and diplomacy command much respect and attention. In fact, unplanned quantitative growth often scuttles the effort to upgrade quality, as could be seen in overpopulous countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan, Nigeria, Egypt and Indonesia. Similarly, countries endowed with immense natural resources are laggard due to deficient human resources. Sudan, Uganda, Kenya and the CIS states are examples. Such mismatches are galore over the map of the Muslim world. They rob the Muslim world of role models and spawn fatalism. This piece of news from the Vatican should therefore set off alarms rather than spark off jubilation among Muslims. Looking at the mindset of the ummah, this seems a remote possibility. But those who are in the know of the real lot of the community would agree that the Muslim world currently does not emit a ray of hope or provide any scope for optimism. Catchphrases like "Islam is the fastest growing religion" have done enough to reinforce the Muslim (mis)belief in the politics of numbers. It calls for a stupendous effort to effect a shift from sheer size and number to substance and quality. It is in this context that one is overwhelmed by a sense of pity over the naive of those who see the growth in population in terms of growth of religion. Such naive fans of Islam often forget that the Holy Prophet likened the teeming multitudes who would form his followers with gossamer and the flotsam on the surface of the ocean. Not to be ignored are his warnings as to the hazards of inassertiveness such numbers might produce. One wonders if the Prophet’s words are finding an echo in these headlines.

Islam today may indeed boast of vast numbers, but Muslim morale is touching its nadir. The one billion plus people who reside in 50 and odd nation-states are a harried lot with dictators, despots and monarchs ruling them at the dawn of the 21st century. Hardly ever a piece of enthusing news makes it to the headlines from this region of vital natural resources. Political instability, social chaos and economic miseries have sapped them of their creative energies. Fatalism pervades the mindset of the entire ummah. Creative genius of the community constantly gets drained off to the developed and intellectually-free West in the absence of right ambience for rational debate and pragmatic action.

As the West’s machinations constantly fuel conflict in the Islamic world, and refugees pour into Europe, growing numbers are bound to trigger unrest in even the "liberal" West. While birthrate for the native Englishwomen is 1.1 the birthrate for Muslim women is 3.4 or triple that of the average white population. We need to question if there is anything intentional on the part of the Muslims or is it sheer biological multiplication borne out of illiteracy and poverty.

Spreading rumors is a common phenomenon that we find in our community also and after sometimes the rumors become more solid than the reality itself.

Behold, ye received it on your tongues, and said out of your mouths things of which ye had no knowledge; and ye thought it to be a light matter, while it was most serious in the sight of Allah. (Qur’an 24: 15)

We usually receive news with our ear and the ear sends it to the brain and then we talk about them with our tongue but there is short-circuit here. Quran is telling that this rumor (that is received with tongue) is spread with no thinking whatsoever; with no awareness whatsoever; with no role for the human brain whatsoever; the rumor comes and lands on one’s mouth to be expelled again to somebody else. This subtlety in expression is something that we should really ponder and think about. How many a time we received things with our tongues NOT with our ears? How many a times we relayed information to somebody else without doing any due diligence?

Quran says that in the eyes of God, it is a humongous thing to receive and expel information without verifying them.

And why did ye not, when ye heard it, say? – "It is not right of us to speak of this: Glory to Allah. this is a most serious slander!" . (Qur’an 24: 16)

When you heard it (rumor) you should have said, Subhanallah, this must be a lie. We should not talk ever about these things; we heard it, we thought about it and knew that is not befitting to the community and one should kill the rumor in its infancy.

The interesting thing here is that one of the persons who was spreading the rumors was the one who was making his living based on Abu Bakr’s donations. Abu Bakr, of course was very upset and decided to stop the money that he was giving, nonetheless Quran did not accept this logic.

Let not those among you who are endued with grace and amplitude of means resolve by oath against helping their kinsmen, those in want, and those who have left their homes in Allah.s cause: let them forgive and overlook, do you not wish that Allah should forgive you? For Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful. (Qur’an 24:22)

Quran says, “Those who have should give to those who have not, regardless of the behavior even if they have hurt you personally.” Then comes the amazing lesson, “One should forgive and forget.” i.e. “O you Abu Bakr, forgive and forget.” In spite of this great hurt the Quran puts this rhetorical question, “Wouldn’t you love that Allah will forgive you.” And it is said that when this verse was revealed, Abu Bakr cried in tears and said, “Yes, I love that Allah will forgive me,” and of course resumed his donation to that particular person.

When I was working in Kuwait, I came across a Muslim couple who complained that they have a clash with their son. Their son was a religious young man who sported a beard and was well versed with the Quran. When I asked him why he is having a clash with his parents, his reply was, "I owe nothing to my parents". I was quite shocked and asked him if he is a Muslim and as a Muslim, how can one say something like that to his own parents. The young man replied, "My parents always wanted to have only two children. Every time my mother got pregnant after my birth and my sister, they aborted the baby. If I had been their third or fourth child, then they would have definitely killed (aborted) me. Hence I don’t feel much loyalty to them".

This gave a new dimension on the abortion issue.

Children after their school join the university far away from home, and then we learn a lot of crimes committed by children killing their parents. The bond between generations is getting weaker and weaker. Abortion may be one
of the factors.

Islamic view of abortion is that after the pregnancy, the fetus should be protected except in case of necessity if the mother has illness and she will be exposed to danger of death or permanent illness. The sharia considers the mother to be the root and the fetus to be the offshoot; the latter to be sacrificed if this is necessary to save the former.

In Islam, a pregnant woman is exempted from fasting during the month of Ramadan if it is tiresome, she has to look after her own nutrition, so that the baby is not born anemic, retarded etc.

If a woman commits a crime punishable by death and is proven pregnant, then the execution of the punishment shall be postponed until she gives birth and nurses her baby until it is weaned. This applies irrespective of the
duration of the pregnancy, denoting the right of the fetus to life from its beginning. It applies even if the pregnancy was illegitimate, which shows that the fetus conceived out of wedlock also has the right to life. All sects and juridical schools unanimously uphold this ruling.

There is also a money penalty for abortion even if it was inadvertent. If the abortion takes place in less than three months of pregnancy, then one-tenth of the fine should be paid. If the abortion takes place after 120 days of pregnancy, then full ransom should be paid because it is treated as killing of an adult. The 120 day limitation is set by Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) who said that the "Spirit" is blown into the fetus. The spirit, however, is some-thing we human beings cannot grasp or know the meaning of. It is a mystery that God kept the truth about to Himself, and we are told by God not to pursue the attempts to unravel its secret. God says in the Quran
addressing the Prophet (PBUH): "They put questions to you concerning the Spirit. Say the Spirit is at my Lord’s command. ..and of knowledge only a meager part has been imparted to you." (17:85)

The blowing of the spirit is therefore a metaphysical phenomenon beyond human comprehension at all times, and the hadith is taken as a matter of faith.

Motherhood in modern times

Motherhood in our times has been separated from sexual function. Sex is a temptation to attract a man and a woman. It is to marry and get children. Now there is a separation between sexual and motherhood. Sex can be
enjoyed without having a child. This is a new thing of 21st century.

Contraceptives

Contraceptive pills were made. It was made by a grant from a wealthy American woman, Katherine McCormick to have equal status of man. In sex, woman is threatened to become pregnant and hence Katherine donated the money and said, "A woman can be as free and enjoy sex with man without becoming pregnant".

Islam permits contraception as long as it does not entail the radical separation between marriage and its reproductive function.

With the advent of contraceptives, the number of illegitimate pregnancies arose instead of declining. Therefore government set to legalize abortion. This has its effect on the value of motherhood in the eyes of the future
generation. The permissibility of sex has hit the very institution of marriage and the marriage rate is declining.

Different types of Family structure

In schools, they teach about different family structures.

1. Traditional family – Husband and Wife.
2. Man-Woman family without marriage.
3. Man-Man family – The gay couple adopt a child.
4. Woman-Woman family – The lesbian couple adopt a child.

In-Vitro Fertilization

In-Vitro Fertilization (IVF) is a technology to overcome the obstacle of sperm reaching the egg.

This technology, commonly known as the test tube baby technology, is Islamically acceptable as long as it is between husband and wife, i.e. within the boundaries of the marriage contract. The marriage contract should
be valid and live. Since divorce or widowhood bring the marriage contract to a conclusion and they are then no more husband and wife, it follows that a woman may not be impregnated by the sperm of her ex-husband kept in deep freeze in a semen bank. Intervention of a third party other than husband and wife and the bearers of their genetic material (sperm and ovum) is not permissible because this would be an intrusion into the marriage contract binding the pair. "Alien sperm," or an "alien egg", or an "alien womb" (to carry a couple’s embryo) is not allowed.

Unfortunately the limitation is transgressed. Husband, wife and somebody else giving the sperm or wife giving the egg (ovum) or someone carries the pregnancy (surrogacy).

Splitting of Parenthood

A woman delivers a baby and there is a dispute, who is the father; the donor of the sperm or the commissioning father. The result is that the child has two fathers. When woman acts as a surrogate mother carrying commissioning couple’s child, who is the mother of the child; the one who gave the egg (ovum) or who carried the child for nine months. The result again is that the child has two mothers. This has resulted in the splitting of parenthood.

Someone in Netherlands (formerly Holland) suggested having three names, mother, formal father and donor father on the child’s birth certificate. We are entering into the style where the traditional family structure is threatened.

In olden days, a girl will be praised for her chastity but now things are changing. I found a girl rebuking her friend, "You Virgin" as if it was an insult.

Cloning

Mother can produce a baby without the need of semen and that is known as cloning. Take the skin cell chromosomes of the woman and put them in an emptied ovum that can turn into an embryo that she can carry until she gives birth to a baby without interference of a male partner. A day will soon come where woman becomes self-sufficient. The things are moving quickly. The religious thinking is weakening.

Conclusion

If one reviews world budget, more and more money is spent for destroying the life rather than saving the life. This is the new order. Will this be allowed to continue or will someone rise to oppose it? In reality, the opposition is not so strong. Muslims are the people who follow the Quran that is preserved in the original text and Muslims are probably the only hope and should guide the rest of the humanity.

Reform is to be able to interpret text or ideological manifesto in a way that keeps it relevant to the people and time at certain historical context.

Islam is no exception to that. Islam is a creed documented in a text and modeled with a messenger 1400 years ago, which is to be pertinent to the different stages of its history where a process of continuous adaptation
took place.

For example, until twenty years ago no one thought that Muslims will go back to their text to look for organ transplantation, because organ transplantation did not exist before that.

Those who claim that organ transplantation is not allowed in Islam quote Imam Shafii who said, "Deforming human body is haram (unlawful)". But is organ transplantation considered as deforming human body? The answer is, No.

This is what reform is all about. The word "reform" is shocking for some Muslims because they think it is about changing the religion.

Reform is essential and mandatory for Islam because Islam is the last message from God. It should adapt to the changes until the Day of Judgment.

Islam is designed to deliver people from darkness to light.

"A. L. R. A Book which We have revealed unto thee, in order that thou mightest lead mankind out of the depths of darkness into light – by the leave of their Lord – to the Way of (Him) the Exalted in power, worthy of all praise!" (Quran 14:1)

"For the scum disappears like forth cast out; while that which is for the good of mankind remains on the earth. Thus doth Allah set forth parables." (Quran 13:17) Certain things in this world pass, certain things last & stay, these are what is good for humanity.

"You are the best community ever raised among the people." (Quran 3:110)

If there is no reform, we will fall into the black hole of irrelevance and Islam will become a part of ancient religions.

The momentum becomes a monument, it will not be chemically interacting with life to change it.

The question is, how should we reform?

When Islam was revealed by God, He put in it an apparatus or machine to reform without breaking the structure. One does not have to step out of Islam to do that.

Reform is supported by Quran, Hadith and history.

Reform in the Quran

"O ye who believe! Fear Allah, and let every soul look to what (provision) He has sent forth for the morrow. Yea, fear Allah. for Allah is well-acquainted with (all) that ye do.)" (Quran 59:18)

Tomorrow is the future from now until the Day of Judgment. Preparing for the future in this life and the day after is the instruction of the Quran.

Reform in the Hadith

Prophet (PBUH) allowed people to interpret things that are good for them. On one occasion, a man had to take ghusl (purifying bath) but wanted to do taymmum (symbolic cleaning by dust) because the water was too cold. Someone in the group objected that the man can not have taymum when water is available and hence the man took ghusl and died as a consequence. The Prophet (PBUH) reprimanded them after learning this incident. A hadith to the same effect is reported in Abu Dawood and Ibn Majah.

Reform in the Historical context

Umar (Ra) adjusted many things to suit the realities. Punishment for theft was suspended due to poverty. The spoils of war used to be distributed among fighters but when they opened Iraq, they did not divide the land of Iraq
based on this rule because it will create a feudal system and Umar interpreted this verse, "The wealth should not circulate only among the rich." (Quran 59:7)

Imam Shafii had two schools or legal theories during his life time. The Old one and the New one. Imam Shafii advised to discard the old one and learn the new one. He wrote the Old one in Iraq and later when he relocated to Egypt, he wrote the New one and changed the whole theory. He said the Old one was good for those people at that place and not suitable for the people in Egypt. Today, even some of his followers oppose to any kind of reform.

The different current proposals of reform

1. Western Hegemony reform

An effort demanded to make Islam accept certain norms or policies that are exercised by the western hegemony. This is the reform to exploit the masses.

For example, if someone asks us to re-look at Islam to see if Islam is compatible with democracy, then there is no problem in that but it becomes a problem when they say, "We want an Islam that does not oppose the way wealth is distributed in our country". In Unites States, can a poor man win an election? It is a government by the millionaires for the millionaires and NOT a government by the people for the people. It becomes a problem when
they say, "We want an Islam that does not oppose foreign policy that encourages oppression."

2. Issues of Definitions

Reform is to become moderate, but they define for us what moderate means. A moderate Muslim is the one who drinks alcohol in moderation. A moderate Muslim is the one who supports policies of the government of Israel.

They want the word "jihad" to be deleted from the text. But for Muslims, Jihad is a panorama including spiritual purification, spending money for goodness and if attacked, one has the right to defend himself/herself. This
is not acceptable in the West. The moment one defines jihad, he is deemed extremist.

A non-observant Muslim is considered a Progressive Muslim. A person who prays five times a day and does not have extra-marital relationship is termed as rigid or fundamentalist.

3. False Prophets of reform

Muslims who reject Islam and make their way to fame and wealth by denouncing Muslims, who bash Islam are considered as Muslim reformists. Those are people who have certain grudges but they neither represent Muslims nor do they have the credibility to lead a change.

Reform that we are talking about

Reform that will emanate from the apparatus of Islam itself.

1. The nature of Quran

Quran talks about spirit, attitude and talks proportionately little about rules, where it usually recommends basics of rule.

For example "their affairs should be conducted through consultation among themselves" (Quran 42:38)

It means no dictatorship, people should have a say (democracy) and it should be the form that is suitable for each context. It may take a parliamentary or congress or any other form that fits the time and place. This is a human effort and not divine. This is being flexible without breaking the structure of Islam.

2. The final objectives/goals of Sharia

To realize the five final objectives

- preservation of life
- freedom of religion
- right of family structure
- right of property
- intactness of mind and intellect

For example, if the family law in Pakistan is not suitable to realize justice for women, then change it. It is not sacred. The jurisprudence is to realize the benefits of the people.

There is a reluctance to add Islam to this Judeo-Christian tradition because of two reasons.

1. Western religion vs. Eastern religion

Islam is considered as an Eastern religion whereas Judaism and Christianity are considered as Western even though Jesus (PBUH) was not born in Paris and Moses (PBUH) was not born in New York.

2. The Ten Commandments

There is a notion that only Jews and Christians believe in the Ten Commandments.

In my opinion the above two issues may indicate racism.

Let us discuss the Ten Commandments in the light of the Bible and the Quran. Though the Ten Commandments depicted in both these scriptures are not identical but there is certainly some over lap.

Exodus Chapter 20

1. And God spake all these words, saying,
2. I am the LORD thy God, which have brought thee out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage.
3. Thou shalt have no other gods before me.
4. Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of any thing that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth.
5. Thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them: for I the LORD thy God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;

When God refers to Himself as "jealous" God, it is about oneness of God and not associating partners with Him.

6. And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.
7. Thou shalt not take the name of the LORD thy God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that taketh his name in vain.

8. Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.
9. Six days shalt thou labor, and do all thy work:
10. But the seventh day is the Sabbath of the LORD thy God: in it thou shalt not do any work, thou, nor thy son, nor thy daughter, thy manservant, nor thy maidservant, not thy cattle, not thy stranger that is within thy gates:
11. For in six days the LORD made heaven and earth, the sea, and all that in them is, and rested the seventh day: wherefore the LORD blessed the Sabbath day, and hallowed it

We, Muslims do not subscribe to Sabbath day as we do not believe that God needed a day off.

12. Honor thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.
13. Thou shalt not kill.
14. Thou shalt not commit adultery.
15. Thou shalt not steal.
16. Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbor.
17. Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s house, thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s wife, nor his manservant, nor his maidservant, nor his …. any thing that is thy neighbor’s.

The Ten Commandments mentioned in the Quran are:

Say: "Come, I will rehearse what Allah hath (really) prohibited you from": Join not anything as equal with Him; be good to your parents; kill not your children on a plea of want;- We provide sustenance for you and for them;- come not nigh to shameful deeds. Whether open or secret; take not life, which Allah hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus doth He command you, that ye may learn wisdom. (Quran 6:151)

1. No association of any thing with God.
2. Be kind to your parents. ‘ihsan’ in Arabic means to offer perfection in goodness and kindness. Even if one is in disagreement with their parents, show kindness towards them. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said that be kind to your parents even if the parents are non-believers. We are expected to keep good relationship with our parents during this life. This shows the importance of parents because it is discussed immediately after God.
3. Do not let your poverty kill your children. This mentions about abortion done due to financial hardship. God mentions that He would provide sustenance for you and your children.
4. Do not come close to shameful deeds. In Islam, we are expected to oversee ourselves; it is not like the attitude of jumping the lights on a highway unless there is police officer around.
5. Do not kill any one except in due process in implementing justice.

These are the admonitions from God.

And come not nigh to the orphan’s property, except to improve it, until he attain the age of full strength; give measure and weight with (full) justice;- no burden do We place on any soul, but that which it can bear;- whenever ye speak, speak justly, even if a near relative is concerned; and fulfill the covenant of Allah. thus doth He command you, that ye may remember. (Quran 6:152)

6. Do not come close to the property of the orphan except to improve it until the orphan reaches maturity & is capable of handling his/her own affairs The orphan is the one who is deprived of the support of his/her parents who died when he/she was young.
7. In all types of transactions and not just limited to opinions, judgments, etiquettes and dealings, God expects us to measure in weight or size with full justice.
8. When we speak, be just to the extent that even if it is against oneself.
9. Keep one’s promise to covenant with God.

Verily, this is My way, leading straight: follow it: follow not (other) paths: they will scatter you about from His (great) path: thus doth He command you. that ye may be righteous. (Quran 6:153)

In the beginning of the eighteenth century, when the Europeans colonized Muslim lands, the people experienced shocking material and moral changes and found themselves in a puzzling dilemma. On the one hand, the humiliation of invasion and suppression created strong feelings of anger and resentment. On the other hand, the inhabitants of the Muslim lands were dazzled by modern European civilization with its advanced technology and organization, a sentiment that had not been strongly felt during previous confrontation with the west. There is a great difference, for example, between the impression which the Crusaders left on the Muslim knight Usama ibn Munqidh (d. 1188), as recorded in his memoirs Al-I’tibar, and that which the French invaders of Egypt left on Muslim scholar and historian al-Jabarti (d. 1825) as reported in his Aja’ib al-Athar.

Usama witnessed the European Crusaders who appeared strange to him in their way of life. He might have found them militarily strong and victorious but he did not feel for a second that they were representatives of a civilization superior, or even equal to his, in military or civil life. For al-Jabarti, on the other hand, the impact of the French invaders was tremendous. Not only did they have superior military technology but also better organization and administration.

Colonialism left Muslims with mixed feelings of hatred and admiration. Muslim reaction to colonial occupation varied. Some Muslims believed that they should swallow the bitterness of colonialism and adopt a positive attitude for the sake of progress. This attitude was emphasized by successive generations of Muslim thinkers and writers such as Shaykh Rifa’a al Tahtawi (d.1873), Shaykh Muhammad Abduh (d. 1905), Qasim Amin (d.1908), Lufti al-Sayyid (d. 1963) and Taha Husayn (d. 1974) in Egypt, Medhat Pasha (d. 1883) in the Ottoman Sultanate, Khayr ul-Din Pasha (d.1879) in Tunisia and Sayyid Ahmad Khan (d.1889) in India.

Muslim preachers, thinkers and activists began their efforts by emphasizing that all the merits of European progress could be supported by the teachings of Islam. But later such apologetics were followed by a critical approach towards European civilization, whether in its ancient roots or in its modern products, which aimed to undermine its credibility among Muslims.

In spite of the benefits of the application of Greek logic to Arabic linguistics and Islamic theology and jurisprudence, the classical argument of some Islamic scholars such as Ibn Hazm and Ibn Taymiyya against it, as well as the argument of al-Ghazali against Greek philosophy in general, were revived to prove that any foreign epistemological approach could damage genuine Islamic knowledge. Some supporters of such an attitude went further to restrict the genuine Islamic civilization that truly represented the teachings of Islam to the period of the early four caliphs (al-Rashidin).

As soon as the Second World War came to an end, national frustration fuelled by external Western pressures and internal Westernized leaders increased the hostility of Muslims against the West. This provided a suitable climate for the Islamists to carry on their campaign against Western civilization on cultural and ideological grounds. The intellectual and psychological roots of the West that did not care about religion or were hostile to it were used to support moderate criticism (e.g., views of Muhammad Iqbal, Muhammad Asad, Abul Hasn Ali Nadwi, Malik Ibn Nabi) or absolute rejection (e.g., al-Mawdudi, Sayyid Qutb). Western historians themselves did not conceal such roots.

Robin W. Winks in his book Western Civilization, explains that the Enlightenment, which is said to run from 1687, the date that Newton’s work was published, to the outbreak of the French Revolution in 1789, was seen an age of light, of special wisdom about human nature.

There was no longer any need for a God as the Creator of all things Universal gravitation provided the First Cause. There no longer was either need or justification for miracles, for all so-called miracles should be capable of scientific explanation. The universe was governed by precise mechanical laws that were capable of mathematical proof; this universe could run for eternity without the intervention of God. The world was a machine.

In such a psychological and intellectual climate arose the modern European civilization. Through the development of education and information, the advocates of Islam became aware of the philosophical basis of modern civilization that averts religion and restricts objective knowledge to the sensory. Since religious faith is based on the belief in the existence of that which is beyond the human perception (e.g., Quran 2:3), the modern epistemological approach has been labeled as material, and thus anti-religion or even atheistic.

Many Islamists have come to believe that the evils of modern civilization cannot be described merely by certain emerging ideas or practices, for, they believe, these evils lie deep within the very nucleus and basis of that civilization. According to these Islamists, Muslims should make use of Western technological achievements, but they should reject Western values and ideas. Muslims should stay close to the concrete facts and abide by them within the general Islamic scope of God as the Almighty Sovereign and the Creator of the universe.

The suspicious attitude of Islamists towards modern civilization in the early decades of the twentieth century can be understood and justified. However, continued adherence to such a standpoint should be revised as Western civilization has become global, spreading over the world with its various denominations, cultures, social structures and political systems. The technological revolution in the fields of transportation and mass communication has spread Western civilization everywhere, and thus maintaining cultural isolation has become impossible. The countries of Europe and North America are now no more representative of this civilization than Japan or even Taiwan, China and South Korea.

The assumption that modern civilization must be accepted as a whole, forcing us to take both what we may like and what we may not, is an exaggerated determinism. Islamists have to realize that there is a place for cultural and ideological differences within its global and dynamic civilization itself, and therefore any rigid rejection of it would be against the interests of Muslims in their practical life.

On several occasions, these Western societies have shown their support for international cooperation, and they present from time to time strong voices and movements devoted to universal welfare. Well-known scientists and artists in various fields have in large numbers increasingly emphasized their faith in a Creator. Increasing disasters of unemployment, economic hardships, pollution and environmental deterioration, drought and famine, emerging unknown diseases, in addition to looming nuclear holocaust and self-destruction have shaken the previous certitude about the future according to the doctrine of permanent and continuous progress, which was “the most original aspect of the Enlightenment, since taken for granted,” as John Bowle stated in his book History of Europe. Under such pressures, societies that seemed most steeped in individualism and materialism have shown an increasingly positive attitude toward religion as they became aware of the growing spiritual emptiness in contemporary civilization.

The Islamists should realize that they cannot create a contemporary Islamic civilization in a vacuum. They have no choice but to be a living part of contemporary civilization if they want to suggest another direction. Without a positive approach and active participation, it is impossible to graft Islamic values onto the present civilization.

Our Muslim ancestors were more aware of the succession of civilizations that we are today. They adopted what was useful in the achievements of existing civilizations in science, mathematics, philosophy and humanities, as well as in state organization and administration. The intellectual heritage of Greeks, Persians and Indian was translated and systems of administrative organization (dawawin), land-taxation (kharaj), customs (ushur), police and prisons were introduced.

That description of Islam’s Prophet Muhammad is a summary of how he reacted to personal attacks and abuse.

Islamic traditions include a number of instances of the prophet having the opportunity to strike back at those who attacked him, but refraining from doing so.

These traditions are particularly important as we witness outrage in the Islamic world over cartoons, initially published in a Danish newspaper, that were viewed as intentional attacks on the prophet.

Peaceful and not-so-peaceful protests have occurred from Gaza to Indonesia. Boycotts have targeted companies based in Denmark and in other nations that reprinted the offensive caricatures.

We all, Muslims and people of other faiths, seem to be locked into a downward spiral of mutual mistrust and hostility based on self-perpetuating stereotypes.

As Muslims, we need to take a step back and ask ourselves, "What would the Prophet Muhammad do?"

Muslims are taught the tradition of the woman who would regularly throw trash on the prophet as he walked down a particular path. The prophet never responded in kind to the woman’s abuse. Instead, when she one day failed to attack him, he went to her home to inquire about her condition.

In another tradition, the prophet was offered the opportunity to have God punish the people of a town near Mecca who refused the message of Islam and attacked him with stones. Again, the prophet did not choose to respond in kind to the abuse.

A companion of the prophet noted his forgiving disposition. He said: "I served the prophet for ten years, and he never said ‘uf’ (a word indicating impatience) to me and never blamed me by saying, ‘Why did you do so or why didn’t you do so?’" (Sahih Al-Bukhari)

Even when the prophet was in a position of power, he chose the path of kindness and reconciliation.

When he returned to Mecca after years of exile and personal attacks, he did not take revenge on the people of the city, but instead offered a general amnesty.

In the Quran, Islam’s revealed text, God states: "When (the righteous) hear vain talk, they withdraw from it saying: ‘Our deeds are for us and yours for you; peace be on to you. We do not desire the way of the ignorant’. . .O Prophet (Muhammad), you cannot give guidance to whom you wish, it is God Who gives guidance to whom He pleases, and He is quite aware of those who are guided." (28:55-56)

The Quran also says: "Invite (all) to the way of thy Lord with wisdom and beautiful preaching, and argue with them in ways that are best and most gracious: for thy Lord knows best who have strayed from His Path and who receive guidance." (16:125)

Another verse tells the prophet to "show forgiveness, speak for justice and avoid the ignorant." (7:199)

These are the examples that Muslims should follow as they express justifiable concern at the publication of the cartoons.

This unfortunate episode can be used as a learning opportunity for people of all faiths who sincerely wish to know more about Islam and Muslims. It can also be viewed as a "teaching moment" for Muslims who want to exemplify the prophet’s teachings through the example of their good character and dignified behavior in the face of provocation and abuse.

As the Quran states: "It may well be that God will bring about love (and friendship) between you and those with whom you are now at odds." (60:7)

The verse is saying:
And whoever kills a believer intentionally, his punishment is hell; he shall abide in it, and God will send His wrath on him and curse him and prepare for him a painful chastisement. (Quran 4:93)

So for someone who kills a believer intentionally, God mentions four consequences:

1. Hell forever,
2. God will have His wrath on him,
3. God curses him and,
4. God prepares for him a severe punishment.

If we internalize this verse, one will wonder about some of the events we see happening around us, a person kills another person, puts a bomb in the mosque, leaves explosive packed car in the market place, goes to a crowded school, blows up a bomb and kills children, one will wonder where did this verse go? It is so frightening to the point that one will not be willing to take such a chance. Again this is not a simple warning where God won’t like that or will be upset with that person, but this is a very concentrated expression of grievance, punishment, fear, wrath and hell to be the abode forever.

Who would like to take such a risk? Only those people who are completely cut off from the Quran will be willing to do that. The claims of those who kill Muslims are “we are not killing Muslims”, “those” are not believers because they are Shias, Sunnis, infidels, co-operating with the enemies etc. When the car explodes we do not know actually who gets killed, probably the most pious person or the most outrageous person, we do not know but they callously are taking a chance. Besides, who said that a non-believer is to be killed, when he or she are not actively attacking Muslims?

The very next verse escapes the attention of the ideologues of violence:
O you who believe! when you go to war in God’s way, make investigation, and do not say to any one who offers you peace: You are not a believer. (Quran 4:94)

God teaches, not to judge a person who is not fighting against you as a non-believer .God took that right away from us.

The moment someone is not fighting against me and invokes peace, he is entitled to peace. He might be the most wicked person, but only God knows that for sure. God will take care of that, not me. I am not supposed to take a chance of killing a single person, needless to say a dozen of them, needless to say in a mosque, needless to say in the month of Ramadan!

Those who indulge in killing Muslims are the ones whose is to be questioned.

The person who has a direct connection with the Quran (not getting the Quran from the pulpit, khutbah, article, teaching, jamaah , party, hizb, but getting the Quran from the Quran), will automatically develop a taste that will resent such acts and will be so frightened that there is a chance of going to hell by indulging in such an outrage.
If we reacquire the habit of getting our guidance, directly from the Quran without the transformers (scholars, mediators) who cut down the current, our thinking and our culture will be different and will automatically exclude certain behavior, which cannot be done by a group of Muslims, anyway.

At the core of the American Muslim experience is a desire to create and promote a real-life model synthesizing Islam and democracy, despite the fact that Islamophobes in America and their anti-American counterparts in the Muslim world may view this task as unachievable or even undesirable.

Islam favors public structures based on shura, or popular participation and consultation. In the Quran, Islam’s revealed text, God promises a spiritual reward for those who "conduct their affairs by mutual consultation." (Quran, 4:38)

The Quran acknowledges differences between people and values diversity. All those who strive to lead a moral, productive life are given special honor in the Quran when it states: "Those who believe (in the Quran), those who follow the Jewish (scriptures), the Sabians, and the Christians – any who believe in God and the Last Day and work righteousness – on them shall be no fear, nor shall they grieve." (Quran, 5:69)

Furthermore, freedom of religion is enshrined in the Quranic verse that states, "Let there be no compulsion in religion." (Quran, 2:256) Establishing justice and opposing oppression are also pillars of good governance in Islam. The Prophet Muhammad said: "The best (jihad) in the path of God is (to speak) a word of justice to an oppressive ruler.

In the understanding of mainstream Islam today, these values are universal and apply to Muslims and people of other faiths alike.

Islamic scholars in North America have ruled that it is a religious duty to support equal citizenship rights for all people and all segments of society.

Muslim scholars consider the principles of freedom and justice outlined in America’s foundational documents as compatible with Islam.

A prevalent misconception in the West is that Islam prohibits its adherents from following man-made laws. However, much of the Islamic legal tradition flowing from Islamic scripture is man-made and resulted from an intellectual effort called "ijtihad," or reaching an opinion through an examination of religious texts, precedents and the facts of a given situation.

Long ago, Muslim scholars observed that continuous study is necessary to find better ways in which Muslims can live in conformity with their faith, while at the same time meeting the demands of an ever-changing world.

In America’s interconnected civil society, Muslims can be part of any universal reform agenda that benefits all segments of our nation. In America’s diverse Muslim community, democratic practices are making their way into the establishment of Islamic institutions, as evident in the formalization of membership and election procedures.

American Muslim community institutions can build on these important gains by: (1) devoting more resources to the delivery of tangible community services; (2) formalizing democratic leadership selection processes based on mutual consultation; (3) developing transparent management practices; and (4) including women in leadership positions.

This final point is important because no community can reach its maximum potential without the enthusiastic participation of 50 percent of it members.

These steps could give rise to an American Muslim form of institutional governance, which would demonstrate clearly and in practical terms that (1) Islam and democracy are compatible; and (2) Muslims are accepted as part of the fabric of American society.

Independence Day once meant nothing more to me than an excuse to party. Prior to my acceptance of Islam, my personal behavior demonstrated all too well why July 4th ranks as the holiday most associated with alcohol-related deaths.

When I first read the Quran, Islam’s revealed text, and the traditions (hadith) of the Prophet Muhammad I expected to find something totally alien to American ideals. Instead, I found many of the same democratic principles that emerged from the Continental Congress in that summer of 1776.

Democracy – The Quran promises rewards for those "who (conduct) their affairs by mutual consultation." (Quran, 42:38)

Political Activism – The Prophet Muhammad said, "The best jihad in the path of God is (to speak) a word of justice to an oppressive ruler." (Sunan of Abu-Dawood)

Justice – "O believers! Stand firm for justice and bear true witness for the sake of God, even though it be against yourselves, your parents or your relatives. It does not matter whether the party is rich or poor – God is well wisher of both. So let not your selfish desires swerve you from justice. If you distort your testimony or decline to give it, then you should remember that God is fully aware of your actions." (Quran, 4:135)

The Burden of Political Authority – The Prophet Muhammad said, "He who has been ruler over (even) ten people will be brought shackled on the Day of Resurrection until justice loosens his chains or tyranny brings him to destruction." (Sahih Muslim)

Islam’s lifestyle of self-restraint, abstinence from drugs and alcohol, respect for the institution of marriage, concern for neighbors regardless of their faith, duty to parents, and respect for the rule of law resulted in my becoming a better person and a better American.

Thomas Jefferson once said, "Dissent is the greatest form of patriotism."

On July 4th, we celebrate one of history’s great acts of dissent: the signing of the Declaration of Independence. The men who put their signature on that document literally put their lives and property on the line to voice their disagreement with British government policies that they believed to by tyrannical.

This July 4th offers an opportunity to renew our commitment to the patriotic nature of political dissent.

I and many other Americans are deeply disturbed by events in Iraq, by reports of torture and desecration of the Quran in Guantanamo Bay, by Patriot Act abuses, by the rising tide of anti-Muslim rhetoric in our society, and by domestic and international policies that seem to create more problems than they solve.

But my love for America is not diminished because it is sometimes flawed. I love my nation because, despite its flaws, the majority of its people remain committed to tolerance and respect for one another, whatever their faith or viewpoint.

After the 9/11 attacks, my neighbors could have turned their anger on me as a Muslim. They did not. They came to me and offered both support and their horror that someone would twist my faith in such an evil manner.

But of greatest inspiration to me are the words written in 1998 by a Muslim 10th grader living in California. Following the attack on the USS Cole, he wrote a letter to Osama bin Laden. In that letter he wrote: "If you are keen to murder Americans, kill us before you kill non-Muslim Americans. Bomb our mosques and Islamic Centers. We are Americans as much as others."

This July 4th, let us all remember that we love this nation and will heed Jefferson’s advice by offering a word of justice to any of our representatives who stray from the ideals set forth in that revolutionary document signed 229 years ago in Philadelphia.

In the Quran, Islam’s revealed text, men and women are viewed as God’s vicegerents on Earth. (2:30) God created nature in a balance ("al-mizan") and mankind’s responsibility is to maintain this fragile equilibrium through wise governance and sound personal conduct.

The Quran also describes the believing men and women as those who "walk on the Earth in humility." (25:63) Scholars have interpreted this verse, and others like it, to mean that Muslims are to protect nature’s many bounties given to them by the Almighty. Preservation is therefore more than a good policy recommendation – it is a commandment from God.

There are more than 700 verses in the Quran that exhort believers to reflect on nature.

For example, the Quran states: "And it is He who spread out the earth, and set thereon mountains standing firm and (flowing) rivers; and fruit of every kind He made in pairs, two and two; He draweth the night as a veil over the Day. Behold, verily in these things there are signs for those who consider." (13:3)

According to Islamic beliefs, the Earth is a sanctuary in which mankind was made to dwell in comfort. The vast oceans, forests and mountains that make up this bountiful planet have been subdued by God for our enjoyment and productive use.

Further, God compels Muslims in the Quran to respect and revere the environment when He says, "Greater indeed than the creation of man is the creation of the heavens and the earth." (40:57)

The Prophet Muhammad told his followers they would be rewarded by God for taking care of the Earth. He said: "If any Muslim plants any plant and a human being or an animal eats of it, he will be rewarded as if he had given that much in charity." (Sahih Al-Bukhari, 8:41) He also compared Muslims to a "fresh tender plant" that bends, but does not break, when afflicted with life’s inevitable calamities. (Sahih Al-Bukhari, 7:547)

Another tradition of the Prophet Muhammad, or hadith, quotes him as saying: "If the Hour (Judgment Day) is about to be established and one of you is holding a palm shoot, let him take advantage of even one second before the Hour is established to plant it."

An example of Muslims taking ownership of their divine obligation to protect the environment was seen recently when the people of Tanzania reversed a growing trend toward ecological destruction through a policy of sustainable fishing and environmental preservation based on the principles of the Quran.

Prior to implementation of the educational program, over-harvesting by fishermen on the Muslim-majority island of Misali had threatened the area’s aquatic ecosystem. But thanks to an indigenous campaign to remind local inhabitants of Islam’s respect for nature, those who earn their living from the sea learned the benefits of protecting the region’s biodiversity.

In Islamic history, Ottoman civilization provides us with another example of the seriousness with which Muslims have traditionally taken their environmental obligations. Ottoman viziers, or ministers, advising the sultan on matters of administration and policy regularly encouraged moratoria on matters deemed potentially damaging to future generations.

Innovations in technology, for example, were hotly debated among scholars, all of whom recognized the importance of considering the long-term impact on both society and the environment.

In Islam, even the Earth has inalienable rights endowed by its Creator.

Sound ecological principles are not limited to Islam, and should be acted upon by practitioners of other faiths. Together we can tackle the environmental problems that besiege our planet.

The MWL Board has been discussing the issue of this Friday’s congregational prayer, and we believe that this event brings forth key issues that must be addressed.

Leadership of Women In General: The absence of women in positions of religious authority in the Muslim world is one contributing factor to the degree of oppression experienced by Muslim women. Unfortunately, religion is too often used to justify cultural practices such as spousal abuse, honor killings, female genital cutting and forced illiteracy. Moreover, the very individuals who perpetuate such abuse are loath to consider women in positions of authority in any context. The major challenge facing Muslims who seek to alleviate the injustices perpetrated by Muslims and perpetuated in the name of Islam is finding the proper way for creating positive change for large numbers of women and their families.

The Muslim Women’s League, in 1995, in preparation for its participation in the UN 4th World Conference on Women, issued several position papers on matters of concern to Muslim women (all are available on the website at www.mwlusa.org/topics/rights). In the papers we detail how the Qur’an gives several examples of women as leaders in matters of state and in matters of religion. Most notable are the stories of Bilqis, the Queen of Sheba and Mary, mother of Jesus (see Qur’an, 27:33-44). In fact, Mary, as an example of true devotion to God, is cited as an example that all believers, not only women, should emulate. Furthermore, the authentic, undisputed traditions of the Prophet Muhammed do not include any hadith or sayings that prohibit the role of women in leadership generally.

Muslims are indebted to the role of women as sources of religious authority and knowledge from the earliest days of Islam. For Sunni Muslims in particular, a huge body of hadith literature is based on the testimony of the Prophet’s wife, Aisha. For Shi’i Muslims, the same high regard attaches to hadith narrated from Fatima, the prophet’s daughter. These women-narrated hadith contribute to numerous aspects of Muslim life, not only those that pertain to women.

Women Leading Prayer: Muslims do not have a clergy. Any knowledgeable, respected Muslim is qualified to perform our important socio-religious tasks such as leading prayer or officiating a wedding. It was, however, not customary for women to lead prayer during the Prophet’s time, but we believe it is important to ask whether this was a reflection of custom or religious edict. In our paper on the participation of women in politics and leadership the MWL reviews the literature on the subject and concludes that, based on the Qur’an and authentic traditions of the Prophet, it is not forbidden (haram) for a woman to lead a mixed congregation in prayer . (see www.mwlusa.org/topics/rights) Some would say in fact that it is allowed (but whether or not it is recommended may be debated.) The Qur’an is completely silent on the matter of women leading prayer, and there is one example, as cited in the Traditions compiled by Abu Dawud, where Prophet Muhammed instructed Umm Waraqa bint Abdullah to lead her household and its environs (which included at least one man) in prayer because she had the best knowledge of the Qur’an in her community.

Change is Needed: We recognize that not only allowing but encouraging women to take a position of leadership in public congregational prayer provokes an emotional response that may interfere with advancing the rights of women in other areas. However, we believe that, specifically in the United States, change is long overdue when it comes to making the mosques and Muslim communities accessible and inviting to women. Many mosques, shura (consultation) councils, and even major Muslim American organizations in this country are still debating and often denying the participation of women on governing boards, as interpreters (mufassirs) of Qur’an, or as speakers in any context. There is no basis for the exclusion of women from these areas, even if we can’t agree about the role of women as Imams (congregational prayer leaders).

The disrespect and disregard for the role of women in the Muslim community in the US and abroad is an important factor that contributes to the disillusionment that many women have about Islam in general. Young women don’t understand why they are treated with more respect for their ideas and contributions by non-Muslims than by fellow Muslims who run the mosques or Muslim student groups on campuses. They also witness a double standard when some Muslim men refuse to allow women leadership positions at the mosque but have no problem respectfully working with and for non-Muslim women as their bosses, CEO’s or professors.

Impact of the March 18 Event: While the MWL position has been that Islam creates the possibility for women to lead mixed-gender prayers, some of us are not convinced that this Friday’s much-publicized event is the best way to advance the cause of Muslim women who are in distress here or around the world. There is a felt concern that the women this event is intended to uplift will become even more cut off from public access and leadership roles than before. It may be that for many, this event may ultimately hinder the work currently in progress on improving accessibility and opportunities for leadership for Muslim women in the US. There is also an argument that other problems that are so severe and pressing (such as violence against women, illiteracy and poverty) should take precedence over insisting on women leading public congregational prayer. Finally, some wonder how Friday’s event will mark the beginning of positive change regarding the role of women as participants and leaders in religious life around the country without a clear follow-up plan that outlines what must be done for change to occur.

At the same time, there are many in our ranks who congratulate Dr. Wadud for her courage to follow through with her convictions and feel that such an event is long overdue. She has been an admired role model for this organization since the publication of her book, Qur’an and Woman. Several members are persuaded by her arguments promoting the role of women as Imams if they meet the same requirements fulfilled by men. In addition, some members feel that the severity of other problems faced by Muslim women around the world does not negate the importance of Friday’s event which they feel represents the aspirations of many Muslim women, especially in the United States. All of us hope that Dr. Wadud’s actions will be a catalyst that generates greater access and opportunity for women throughout the Muslim community in America and abroad.

Tolerance is Paramount: As always, the MWL supports discourse and debate according to the highest standards set by Islamic ethics. With that in mind, we unequivocally condemn any and all attempts to silence Dr. Wadud and her supporters through intimidation and threats of violence. This has no basis in Islam and will work against the interests of the Muslim community. To think that we cannot handle difficult and complicated subjects that require in-depth analysis and discussion is an insult to intelligent Muslim women and men alike. Forceful imposition of certain views coupled with the suppression of dissent is a hallmark of weakness, ignorance and despotism that violate the principle of “la ikraha fil deen” (“There is no compulsion in religion.” 2:256)

Final Thoughts: Those involved with the woman-led Friday prayer are a group of individuals dedicated to enhancing the lives of Muslim women here in the US by attempting to change attitudes and break through a long historic cultural norm that has excluded Muslim women; we must respect them and each other as we are part of the same Ummah (family of Muslims). Our organization is committed to the same goal and will work with the local communities and other organizations here and abroad so that we can realize our vision of Muslim brothers and sisters reaching their full potential and working side by side doing righteous deeds and striving to become more God-conscious.

Ours is a faith that promotes the partnership of men and women in working for the cause of God, thereby advancing the human condition: “The believing men and women are protectors, one of another, enjoining what is right and forbidding what is wrong, are constant in prayer, render the purifying dues and pay heed to God and His Apostle. It is they upon whom God will bestow His grace; verily God is almighty, wise.” (9:71)

In the end, the voice of justice will prevail as that is voice of God who has said clearly, “Be Just, this is the closest to being conscious of God.” (5:8)

Brothers and Sisters in Islam, just few days ago we as well as the whole world witnessed the natural disaster that inflicted humanity in Southeast Asia. And we with our own eyes on the silver screens and whatever media, we saw how hundreds of thousands of people just in a moment, completely vanished as living human beings on this planet, and guided to be in the hands of their creator. So many, some of them are old, some are young, some might be good, some might me bad, some must have been believers and some must have not, lots of them should have had dreams, concerns, issues, disputes, arguments, ambitions, greeds, needs like all of us here. And all of a sudden with the tremble of earth and a wall of water dumped on them they disappeared. This is a mind boggling and had and should have a huge impact on those who are not victimized, whether in the area or people like us who are here witnessing a very humbling experience that shows how vulnerable, how weak, how temporary, how insignificant, how trivial we really are when it comes to powers that are larger than us. And this disaster left people like us with two questions.

The answer to the first question would decide our state of faith and the other one will decide the way of behavior.

It is important for us to reflect and think because what happened there and can happen here to anybody in any form, from a car accident to a bite of an insect to a tsunami. So it is important to ponder and reflect those two questions that are very important.

Why did God do that?

The first question came to everybody’s mind and at least to my mind.

Why did God do that to those people? I know we don’t like to talk about these things but I think Muslims should be opened and confident enough to clear their own doubts and questions. How come a merciful and compassionate God cause that to happen and some people would say…there is nobody to answer that question because anybody answering to this question is claiming that he/she is reading the mind of God. If I tell you that He did this because of 1, 2, 3,.. to answer your question, I am claiming something that is horrible that I can read the mind of God. And who am I. We just say how trivial we are.

For us Muslims, not the answer that is a problem, it is the question. In the Quran, God says “He cannot be questioned as to what He does, while they will be questioned.” (al-Anbiya’ 23). You can ask question to your wife, son, peer, your boss or to your father, but you cannot ask God, why did you do that. The moment you do this you become the God and you are reducing Him to something, astagfirullah (May Allah save us) less than what He is. He out of his mercy allowed us to ask this question. But in reality and this is what I say decides the state of faith. We are not to volunteer for such question and instead we need to acknowledge that we don’t have the right to question because you question only those people who are equivalent to you and less than you.

Unfortunately, I saw in the internet and in some statements that it is because there is so much corruption, God is punishing the human beings. Who told you that? How dare you? How dare you rub it into the victims. It is so cruel to say this is punishment of God. Some say on some web page that the God is punishing the Muslims because they don’t believe in Jesus (PBUH) or whatever. It doesn’t matter whether who say is a Muslim or non-Muslim. It is cruel. What kind of sensitivity is this? We come to a huge size of victimization like this and say this is the punishment of God.

Brothers ands sisters, I can tell you based on the Quran that this is NOT a punishment of God. “If Allah were to punish people according to what they deserve, He would not leave on the back of the (earth) a single living creature: but He gives them respite for a stated Term: when their Term expires, verily Allah has in His sight all His servants." (Fatir:45). For each there is an appointed time and when the time is over it is over, it can’t happen earlier and it can not happen later. This is what Quran says.

God said if I’ll punish for what you do, you will not exist. He didn’t say there will be no human being, he said there won’t be any living creature. Because of so many things that we do, Allah decided that this is not the place to settle the accounts. the place to settle the accounts whether to punish or reward happens in what we call as Al-Akhira, i.e. after this is over.

So then how did it happen:? Someone will come and ask, I am sure I expect it, that you want to say that God does not and he did not punish the people of Lut, Noah and others. Yes, but those are specific cases after specific warnings. God says in the Quran "… We never punish until We have sent a messenger." (al-Isra: 15). No people will be punished this way except after messenger comes to them, explains to them and he warns them, he tells them and they disobey him and in some cases appointed by God punishment happens. And this by all means is not the rule. The rule is what Quran said that Allah will not take us to task in this life because of what we do.

We have to understand that Allah (s.w.t). has created us within a physical environment. You know brothers and sisters, we live, just imagine it on a melting metal boiling ball covered with a thin crust, 3/4th is water and it is rotating across another ball of fire called the sun. We live in a physical environment that carries with it the natural disasters, volcanoes, earthquakes, tsunamis etc. because this system is not created to punish or reward and this system is created to test. God says “And certainly, We shall test you with something of fear, hunger, loss of wealth, lives and fruits, but give glad tidings to the patient.” (al-Baqarah: 155). So this is s testing system and NOT a system to achieve or accomplish punishment and reward within this system.

The appropriate question

This will lead us then to the second question. Rather than asking Alla h s.w.t. an inappropriate question, ask the appropriate question. The question should not be directed to Almighty but the question should be directed to us. Based on the answer to this question it would help us to decide the way of behavior.

This happened, we escaped it, we are still delayed for our appointed time, so what is expected from us. And the expectations again are in the Quran.

The first lesson is to learn the lessons from the calamities that happened. We human beings are to be humble, we need to very aware of our place in this universe and don’t become so arrogant because human being becomes so arrogant and aggressor when he/she thinks that they are quite established and quite secure. This is the nature and when something like that happens it is good for us to be humbled and to remember our vulnerability and our weakness and our need for the mercy of Allah s.w.t.

The second lesson is, really it is not worth it. The whole amount of disputes, arguments, and fighting and should really be reduced to necessities because after all we are all together, human beings on a very precarious situation, something can happen that would definitely need each other, And I don’t think that in Sri Lanka they go around to see whether he is a Tamil or not , in Thailand whether he is a Muslim or not, we are all human beings, we all need help and we all need each other and it should bring closer and not separate us apart. We need to learn at least these obvious lessons. The more you think the more lessons you discover to learn especially on the individual level. We hear individual stories and there is a lot to learn and a lot to discover.

Isn’t it amazing that not a single animal is killed because the animals are equipped to expect it and they ran away and the arrogant human being, who thinks he knows everything had sun bath and died. We should really be humbled. We shouldn’t be that arrogant. All animals were saved and about 200,000 people died. A mother had to chose which child should she let go because she couldn’t hold both her children. Can you imagine such a test. And people are arguing what kind of car I should have or the father dies and the children are in arms fighting for whatever is left behind. This is a different level of discovering reality and so on and so forth.

After learning these lessons we need to go out of our ways to extend hand to the needy. Not only to give but to organize sustained giving, because with calamities of that magnitude, just helping the check and walking it in the mail doesn’t finish your duty. It is how to organize the sustained consistent supply of help that human beings need now. And as the Quran says, "The one who denies the religion is the one who is harsh to the orphans and encourages not the feeding or mobilizing of the indigent." (al-Maun:1-3).

Abuse of power by many governments including some Muslim governments and law enforcing agencies pose grave threat to life, honour and dignity of people. The USA, the self-appointed champion of civil liberties has grossly violated human rights in many regions of the world more notably in Vietnam, Afghanistan and Iraq. Its abuse and subhuman treatment of the prisoners in Guantanamo Bay and Iraq has put the most dictatorial regimes to shame.

In such global scenario human rights agencies are raising their voice against the gross violation of human rights. But the Muslim Ummah has failed to prove its existence and play its legitimate role in this very crucial area. The Muslims largely remained silent spectators, while they should have played a very active role with full determination to defend human rights as these rights were in real sense conferred by God and fully protected by His final religion, Islam.

Islam was the first to introduce a code of human rights and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) took every possible measure to protect and implement it particularly in his last sermon of Haj, better known as Khutba-Hajjatulwada, which constitutes and incorporates the principles of non-discrimination in all major human rights instruments. Marcel A. Boisard observes, ‘Here is one of the most remarkable contributions of Islam to the formation of a modern universal conception; tolerance, a religious obligation and a juridical imperative. The Qur’ân indicates inexplicitly: We have revealed to you the Book and the Truth in order to confirm that which existed of the Book and is a guardian over it, thereby, judge between them by what Allah has revealed, and don’t follow their desires away from the Truth which has come to you for each we have appointed a divine law and a determined way. Had Allah willed, He could have made you one community.’

Islam gave an ideal code of human rights to mankind in an era when the humanity was groaning under the unbearable burden of injustice, oppression and ignorance. The oppressed and the downtrodden were denied all human rights. Women were treated like slaves and the treatment meted out to slaves worse than animals.

Mission of the Prophet

Islam emancipated mankind from every form of oppression and subjugation. The Holy Qur’ân introduces the goal and mission of the last prophet as: ‘Those who follow the messenger, the unleterred Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures), in the Taurat and the Gospel, for he commands them what is just and forbids them from what is evil, he allows them what is lawful, what is good, and prohibit them from what is bad, he releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes.’

Dignity of Mankind

Islam greatly elevated the status of humanity and declared its superiority over all the creatures. Almighty Allah has given him special position in the universe. The Holy Qur’ân explains, ‘We have indeed created man in the best of moulds.’

The Holy Qur’ân further elaborates, ‘We have honoured the sons of Adam; provided them with transport on land and sea, given them for sustenance things good and pure and conferred on them special favours above a great part of our creation.’

Unity of Man

Islam gives a powerful impetus to man for unity, equality and brotherhood. Islam asserts that the origin of human beings is one, his Creator is also one, hence all human beings must be considered and treated as one and equal without any discrimination on the basis of caste and colour. The Holy Qur’ân says, ‘O mankind: we created you from a single (pair) of male and female and made you into nations and tribes. That you may know each other (Not that you despise each other) verily the most honoured of you in the sight of Allah is he who is the most righteous of you.’

It is, therefore, a gross violation of the teachings of the Holy Qur’ân to make any kind of distinction between man and man except on the basis of piety.

Equality of Man

According to the teachings of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him): ‘All human beings are as equal as the teeth of a comb.’

The Prophet in his last sermon in the valley of Arafat commanded, ‘No Arab has superiority over a Non-Arab nor is a white any way better than a black. The only criterion for the superiority and respectability is the one having the element of piety. All human beings are the off-springs of Adam and the very existence of Adam was from clay.’

Demolishing the distinctions on the basis of caste colour and region of one’s origin the last Prophet ensured the respect of life, honour and property of all human beings. He commanded: ‘O people; every body’s blood, property and prestige have become sacrosanct for others. All these are now of the same significance and sanctity as the sanctity of this day in this Holy month and in this city.’

Right to Life

The right to life is a basic and fundamental right of man. No one can deprive him from this right. According to the Qur’ânic teachings killing of one innocent person amounts to the killing of the entire mankind. The Holy Qur’ân says: ‘He who killed any person unless it be a person guilty of man-slaughter, or of spreading chaos in the land, should be looked upon as though he had slain all mankind and he who saved one life should be regarded as though he had saved the lives of all mankind.’

According to Islam Muslim is one who does not indulge in killing of an innocent person. The Holy Qur’ân clarifies: ‘A true Muslim is he, who doesn’t kill a soul which Allah has forbidden, unjustly.’

Right to Property

The right of having property is another fundamental right of the mankind and no one can be deprived from having property. The Holy Prophet in the last sermon specially emphasised this aspect. ‘It is not lawful for anybody to have anything from his brother without his consent and pleasure.’ (Abdul Malik Ibn Hisham, Seeratun Nabi, Darul Fikr, Vol..IV, p.286)

Taking away money forcibly from any body is strictly prohibited in the Qur’ân: ‘Do not usurp one another’s property by unjust means nor offer it to the judges so that you may devour knowingly and unjustly a portion of the goods of others.’

Right to Work

Islam protects one’s right to choose any legitimate occupation and pursue it. It lays greatest possible emphasis on the dignity of labour. The Holy Qur’ân says, ‘The men shall have their due share according to what they have earned and the women shall have their share according to what they have earned.’

The Prophet (peace be upon him) is reported to have said no one can earn his livelihood better than the work of his own hand. The Prophet further said, ‘Give the labourer his due wage before his sweat has dried.’

Right to Protection of Honour

Respect for the honour of human beings is also an inalienable and fundamental right. Therefore, it should be treated with all the regard due to it. Islam has given special attention to the protection of the honour of mankind. Humiliation, intimidation and outraging of the basic human dignity is not acceptable in any circumstances. The Holy Qur’ân commands, ‘O you who have believed, neither should men mock other men, it may be that these are better than they, nor should women mock other women, it may be that these are better than they. Don’t taunt one another among yourselves, nor call one another by nicknames. It is an evil thing to be called by a bad name after faith.’

Islam is particularly sensitive regarding the safeguarding of women’s honour due to her sex. Anybody found guilty of defaming or dishonouring her is liable for harsh punishment. The Holy Qur’ân says, ‘Whoever took any part in it (slander) earned his share of the sin accordingly and the one who had the greatest share of responsibilities in it shall have terrible punishment.’

Right to Privacy

In addition to safeguarding the honour and dignity of the man, Islam firmly believes in the right of people to privacy. Islam strongly disapproves interference in the private life of other people and peeping into the house of any individual. The Holy Prophet forbade to go after the secrets of people and said, ‘If you grope the secrets of people you will spoil them.’

The Holy Prophet specially warned the ruler to look for the secrets of people and said, ‘If any ruler searches for the defects of people and indulges in doubts, he will spoil them.’

The Holy Qur’ân strictly prohibited suspicion and prying into the affairs of others, ‘O you who have believe; avoid suspicion as much as possible, for suspicion in some cases is a sin, and spy not on each other.’

The Holy Qur’ân also prohibited entering anybody’s house without his permission so that his privacy may not be disturbed, ‘O believers! Enter not houses other than your own, until ye have asked permission and saluted those in them; that is best for you in order that he may heed (what is seemly).’

Right to Marriage

According to Islam every person is entitled to marry to establish a family and to bring up children in accordance with his religion and culture. The wife is entitled to live in the house of the husband and to receive the maintenance. The Holy Qur’ân says: ‘Wives have the same rights as the husbands have on them in accordance with the generally known principles.’

Right to Education

From the very first day of its dawn, Islam gave greatest importance to education. Islam not only considers it as a basic right of every body but goes much beyond it and makes it obligatory on every believer to acquire knowledge. The Prophet declares, ‘Seeking knowledge is compulsory on every believer, man and woman.’

The significance of this Hadith lies in the fact that while a man is entitled to forgo his right but he cannot skip from his obligation and if he does so, he will be held answerable. According to Islam it is the responsibility of the parents to impart proper education to their children. The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, ‘No parent gives better gift to their ward than good education.’

Islam also holds the state responsible for the education of its people. Once the Holy Prophet warned the Ashary’s tribe: ‘If you will not educate your neighbours you will deserve punishment.’

Right to Justice

Islam is very sensitive about the dispensation of justice. Every one is entitled to get justice. This is his natural and inalienable right. Nobody in any circumstances can be denied justice. It does not matter at all whether he or she is a friend or a foe. All persons are equal before justice and everybody will be treated strictly in accordance with the law. The Holy Qur’ân commands, ‘O Believers; be steadfast in righteousness and just in giving witnesses for the sake of Allah, the enmity of any people should not so provoke you as to turn away from justice. Do justice for it is akin to piety.’

Islam maintains that the mission of all prophets was to establish justice in the society. The Holy Qur’ân says, ‘We sent aforetime our messengers with clear signs and sent down with them the book and the balance, that men may stand forth in justice.’

According to Islamic teachings the punishment for a crime would be meted out to the guilty alone and in no case it could be extended to the family or the other members of his community. The Holy Qur’ân says, ‘Every soul draws the mead of its acts on none but itself, no bearer of burdens can bear the burden of another.’

Right to Fair Trial

In the light of above mentioned holy verses jurists say that no person shall be adjudged guilty except after a fair trial and only after reasonable opportunity for defence has been provided to him.

Right to Habitation

Islam has recognised the right of residence and habitation for the human beings. No one can be deprived from this right and nobody can be deported from his homeland without due process of law. The Holy Qur’ân criticising Jewish practice of driving people out from their homes said: ‘Remember also what we made another solemn covenant with you. You shall not shed blood among yourselves nor expel one another from your homes. And you confirmed it and you are witness to it. But in spite of this, you are killing your brothers and driving them from their homes whereas their expulsion itself was unlawful for you.’

Right to Protest against Harassment

Moreover, Islam has granted to the mankind the right to protest against the harassment and misuse of power. The Holy Qur’ân says, ‘Allah does not like that a person should utter evil words except when one has been wronged.’

This divine command also confers the right to protest against oppression. If a person is wronged he has the right to raise his voice against the wrong doers.

Right to Asylum

Islam had guaranteed to every human being in respect of race religion and sex the right to seek refuge and asylum. The Holy Qur’ân says, ‘If one amongst the pagans ask thee for asylum, grant to him, so that he may hear the word of Allah, and then escort him to where he can be secure.’

Rights of Prisoners of War

As Islam recognises human rights in peace times, it also recognises rights of the mankind during the war. Islam established the principles of war for the first time. Islam made distinction between combatants and non-combatants. Regarding non-combatants the Holy Prophet instructed the believers. ‘Don’t kill and old person, or any woman or child – Don’t kill the monks in monastery and don’t kill the people who are sitting in places of worship.’

Birth of Nation of Islam

In the early 1930s Wallace D. Fard Mohammed drew on the Quran and the Bible to preach a message of black liberation in the ghettos of Detroit. Wallace D., who was called the Great Mahdi, or messiah, taught withdrawal from white society, saying that blacks were not Americans and owed no loyalty to the state. He rejected Christianity and the domination of white “blue-eyed devils” and emphasized the “religion of the Black Man” and the “Nation of Islam.”

Fard mysteriously disappeared in 1934. Elijah Muhammad (formerly Elijah Poole [1897-1975]) took over and built the “Nation of Islam”, an effective national movement whose members became known as “Black Muslims.” Elijah Muhammad denounced white society’s political and economic oppression of blacks and its results: self-hatred, poverty, and dependency. His apocalyptic message promised the fall of the white racist oppressor America and the restoration of the righteous black community, a “Chosen People.” His religious teachings gave alienated and marginalized poor and unemployed people a sense of identity and community and a program for self-improvement and empowerment. Elijah Muhammad emphasized a “Do for self” philosophy, appealing particularly to black youth, focusing on black pride and identity, strength and self-sufficiency, strong family values, hard work, discipline, thrift, and abstention from gambling, alcohol, drugs, and pork. By the 1970s the Nation of Islam has more than one hundred thousand members.

Nation of Islam vs. Mainstream Islam

A number of basic beliefs in the Black Muslim movement differed significantly from mainstream Islam. Elijah Muhammad announced that Wallace D. Fard was Allah, and thus that God was a black man, and that he, Elijah Muhammad, not the Prophet Muhammad, was the last messenger of God. The Nation taught black supremacy and black separatism, not Islam’s brotherhood of all believers in a community that transcends racial, tribal, and ethic differences. In addition, the Nation did not follow the Five Pillars of Islam or observe major Muslim rituals.

Nation of Islam and Malcolm X

A key individual who rose through the ranks of the Nation of Islam to gain national prominence was Malcolm X, who accepted the teaching of the Nation of Islam while in prison. Drawn by Elijah Muhammad’s black nationalism, denunciation of white racism, and promotion of self-help, Malcolm Little became Malcolm X: ex-smoker, ex-drinker, ex-Christian, and ex-slave. A gifted, charismatic speaker, Malcolm was the most visible and prominent spokesperson for Elijah Muhammad, recruiting new members (including the boxer Cassius Clay, renamed Muhammad Ali), establishing temples, and preaching the message of the Nation of Islam nationally and internationally. However, Malcolm’s exposure to world events and contact with Sunni Muslims resulted in a gradual change in his own religious worldview, away from that of Elijah Muhammad and toward mainstream Islam.

Malcolm X and Mainstream Islam

In 1964, Malcolm X left the Nation of Islam to start his own organization. At this time he also went on pilgrimage to Mecca. On the pilgrimage he was deeply affected by what he experienced-the equality of all believers regardless of race, tribe, or nation. Malcolm explained his realization that “we were truly all the same (brothers) – because their belief in one God removed the ‘white’ from their minds, the ‘white’ from their behavior and the ‘white’ from their attitude.” H also recognized that he did not know how to perform Islam’s daily prayers and had not observed the other prescribed practices in the Five Pillars of Islam. Malcolm returned from the pilgrimage as El Hajj Malik El-Shabazz, a Muslim, rather than a Black Muslim, and he changed his position on black nationalism, moving to pan-Africanism, which aligns African Americans with their cultural and religious ties in Africa.

On February 21, 1965, the former Malcolm X was assassinated as he spoke to an audience in New York City. Two members of the Nation of Islam were convicted of the murder.

Transition of Nation of Islam to Mainstream Islam

The 1960s were a time of transition for the Nation of Islam. Not only Malcolm X but also Wallace D. Muhammad, son of Elijah Muhammad, along with his brother Akbar Muhammad, a distinguished scholar of Islam who had studied in Egypt and Scotland, questioned and challenged some of the teachings and strategies of their father. Both sons were excommunicated by their father. Yet toward the end of his life Elijah Muhammad also made the pilgrimage to Mecca and began to modify some of his teachings. By the time of his death in 1975, Elijah Muhammad and the Nation were publicly acknowledged for their constructive contributions to America’s inner cities and communities.

When Wallace D. Muhammad succeeded his father as Supreme Minister of the Nation, he implemented major reforms in doctrines and organizational structure, so that they conformed to the teachings of orthodox Sunni Islam. Wallace Fard was identified as the founder of the Nation and Elijah Muhammad as the leader who brought black Americans to his interpretation of Islam. Wallace Muhammad made pilgrimage to Mecca and encouraged his followers to study Arabic in order to better understand Islam. Temples were renamed mosques, and their leaders were now called imams rather than ministers. The community observed the Five Pillars of Islam in union with the worldwide Islamic community to which they now belonged. Black separatist doctrines were dropped as the Nation community began to participate within the American political process. Finally, the equality of male and female members were reaffirmed, and women were given more responsible positions in the ministry of the community. While the Nation continued to work for social and economic change, business ventures were cut back and religious identity and mission were given priority.

At the end of the 1970s Wallace transferred organizational leadership to an elected council of six imams and focused on his role as religious and spiritual leader. In the mid-1980s, signaling his and Nation’s new religious identity and mission, Wallace changed his name to Warith Deen Muhammad and renamed the community American Muslim Mission, integrating it within the global mainstream Islamic community and within the American Muslim community.

Present day Nation of Islam

Media coverage of the Black Muslim movement often focuses on Louis Farrakhan, the man who led a minority of Nation members in protest against Warith’s reforms. Farrakhan bitterly rejected the changes instituted by both Malcolm and Warith Deen Muhammad, maintaining that only he and his followers had remained faithful to the original message and mission of Elijah Muhammad. Farrakhan retained the mantle of leadership of the Nation of Islam, along with its black nationalist and separatist doctrines. Farrakhan’s strident, separatist messages as well as the international connections he has established with militant leaders like those of Libya and Iran have given him and his minority of followers a disproportionate visibility.

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the idolaters wherever you find them, an seize them, beleaguer them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful (9:5)

Actually we need to try to understand this verse in its true sense and NOT just from its surface value.

This verse was revealed for the idolaters who were living in Mecca at that time and many of those who were violating the peace treaties that they had entered with the Prophet (PBUH) and is not for the People of the Book.

When any one of you is encountered with this verse by your friends, pls ask them to read from the first verse of the ninth chapter of the Holy Quran i.e. Surah At-Taubah instead of jumping straight into the above quoted fifth verse.

A (declaration) of immunity from God and His messenger, to those of the idolaters with whom you had made treaties:- (9:1)

The Prophet (PBUH) had entered into peace treaties with different tribes of Arabia, but may of them were violating those treaties. For this reason a declaration for terminating these treaties is made.

Go about in the land for four months, but know that you cannot overmaster God (by your falsehood) and that God will humiliate the disbelievers. (9:2)

They were given a time limit of four months so that they might come to a final decision about themselves, either they might give up idolatry and polytheism or might get ready to fight or might leave the city of Mecca.

It may be noted that the time limit of four months was given in case of those polytheists with whom the Muslims had peace treaties and they were dishonoring them.

And an announcement from God and His messenger, to the people (assembled) on the day of the Great Pilgrimage,- that God and His messenger dissolve (treaty) obligations with the idolaters. If then, you repent (even now), it will be better for you; but if you are averse, then know that you cannot escape God. And (O Prophet !) give tidings of painful punishment to disbelievers. (9:3)

The meaning of Allah and His messenger’s being free from the obligation is this that hereafter there is no refuge for them in Allah’s law nor is there any guarantee from the Prophet about the safety of their lives; the period of treaty is over, if they do not give up their polytheistic attitude, force will be used against them.

This declaration was made on the occasion of Hajj. At that time the idolaters performed Hajj according to their own rites and customs, and Muslims followed their own rites. During that year the Hajj was performed under the guidance or leadership of
Abu Bakr (R) and Ali (R) and the declaration was made that no polytheist would perform the Hajj after that.

(But the treaties are) not dissolved with those idolaters with whom you have entered into alliance and who have not subsequently failed you in aught, nor aided any one against you. So fulfill your engagements with them to the end of their term: for God loveth the righteous.(9:4)

The treaties of the polytheists with the Prophet which were for a fixed period (some exceeded the four month period and could be six or eight months etc) and which were not dishonored by them were allowed to stand till the expiry of their periods, as ordained in this verse.

Here comes the fifth verse…..

But when the forbidden months are past, then fight and slay the idolaters wherever you find them, an seize them, beleaguer
them, and lie in wait for them in every stratagem (of war); but if they repent, and establish regular prayers and practice regular charity, then open the way for them: for God is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful (9:5)

The ultimatum was given only to the polytheists of Arabia specifically, to settle accounts with those polytheists with whom you had no treaty.

And finally pls read the sixth verse…..

And if anyone of the polytheists seeks asylum with you, give him protection, till he may hear the word of Allah, then convey him to his place of safety. That is because they are the people who know not. (9:6)

Its is quite clear from this verse that it becomes the duty of the Muslims to provide shelter for those polytheist who asks asylum during the war and he should be presented with the word of Allah and then he should be taken to a place of his safety.

Transplantation of Nervous Tissue

This has recently shown some promise in the treatment of certain diseases. It is lawful if the source is the adrenal gland medulla or an animal fetus, or a human fetus spontaneously miscarried when it dies naturally. It is unlawful to sacrifice a living or viable human fetus for the purpose. In lawful abortion (such as to save the mother’s life) the fetus may be used. Creating fetuses or performing abortion for the purpose of transplantation is unlawful.

The Anencephalic Fetus

This refers to a congenital abnormality where the vault of the skull and the brain hemispheres are absent. It might be borne alive, but will eventually die after a variable period that might extend to several days. As long as it lives, it should not be used as a source of organs for transplantation. Artificial termination of its life is unlawful. It may be maintained by artificial resuscitation to keep its tissues healthy, until its brain (stem) dies and then it is allright to take its organs.

Transplantation of Sex Glands