The psychopathic leader of the ISIL aka Da'ish

Ibrahim al-Badri, a run-of-the-mill Sunni Iraqi cleric, gained a degree from the University of Baghdad at a time when pedagogy there had collapsed because of the Saddam Hussein dictatorship and international sanctions. After 2003 he took the name Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi and turned to a vicious and psychopathic violence involving blowing up children at ice cream shops and blowing up gerbils and garden snakes at pet shops and blowing up family weddings, then coming back and blowing up the resultant funerals. This man is one of the most infamous serial killers in modern history, with the blood of thousands on his hands, before whom Jeffrey Dahmer and Ted Bundy fade into insignificance.... And, of course, Mulla Omar Uruzgani of Afghanistan was proclaimed “caliph” by the Taliban and al-Qaeda. Hopefully he and al-Baghdadi will end up in the same jail cell so they can drive each other crazy claiming to be the real caliph. In fact, virtually no one in the Muslim world thinks Mulla Omar is a caliph.

- Juan Cole, June 30 2014

It chills my blood

When the hypocrites come unto thee, they say, "We bear witness that thou art indeed God's Apostle!" But God knows that thou art truly His Apostle; and He bears witness that the hypocrites are indeed false [in their declaration of faith]. They have made their oaths a cover [for their falseness], and thus they turn others away from the Path of God. Evil indeed is all that they are wont to do: this, because [they profess that] they have attained to faith, whereas [inwardly] they deny the truth - and so, a seal has been set on their hearts so that they can no longer understand [what is true and what false].~ the Qur'an 63:1-2, The Hypocrites

You shall not take the name of the LORD your God in vain; for the LORD will not hold him guiltless that takes his name in vain.~ Exodus 20:7, the Third Commandment

It chills my blood to hear the blest Supreme rudely appealed to on each trifling theme.~ Cowper

It chilled my blood tonight as I travelled home in a train to find a misguided Muslim employ the name of God and the f-word in one sentence. I, too, once used the f-word unthinkingly, back in school, but there's a difference. How can one use it alongside that of God? This noise did perturb me no less, these gangs who take the name of God in vain. I don't understand this. Why does the establishment continue to cover for male disregard for modesty? Where a woman is appointed a reference of tradition while a man can do as he pleases. Instead of using missionary, poorly argued evangelical-style da'wah, why not just express it through good behaviour? Good behaviour cannot be separated from belief -- the Qur'an enjoins them together. What message are they sending to the non-Muslim travellers? I fear that non-Muslims who cross paths with this sort of behaviour will never look into Islam, Islam held ransom to cultural realisation than a rational, moral and personal commitment to the Undefinable and the Teachings. Again the again the name of God used in vain. God has said they will not be held guiltless. Indeed they do not realise "what is true and what is false". They may proclaim the name of the blest Supreme most loudly as they commit the lewdest acts known to man, but that doesn't make them believers. Not at all. My solidarity as a Muslim is with believers, I cannot make any excuses for hypocrites.

A CelebrateMercy Performance by Yusuf Islam

When Haram Became Halal: Blessed are the Sheep

"Like a giant mass of wool, bloodied and filthy, they lay in trenches — slit open, stabbed or clubbed to death, while many still wriggled with some life left in them, soon to be buried alive." — Reporter for The International News, Pakistan

"I have watched the video and let me tell you that ever since I have seen those gruesome visuals, I haven't eaten or slept. Regardless of whether they were healthy or not, the way they were killed or buried alive is neither humane, nor Islamic." — Managing Director of Wellard (Australian live exporter)

The New Breed

Another riot. Fundamentalism or what is being described as Salafist violence by coarse-bearded hypermasculine thugs in Libya is the new breed. The beard, once the symbol of philosophical and moral male enlightenment, is like something that might cut the world under the chins of criminals who have no knowledge about faith but claim much, rushing through and breaking laws and smirking. Some people wonder whether the beard will look good on them, but the answer is that the beard will look good only on those who are good.

The question is: where have these demons who corral women and prevent education of girls arisen from? The sickening tribalism, the brutishness, the sexism, it all comes together. Lao Tse once said that when there is no goodness there is morality. When there is no morality there is ritual. Ritual is the husk of true faith, and the beginning of chaos. These thugs who do not even know the rituals of Islam much less morality, who blashpheme against the name of God, and sodomise (with a knife) and literally beat to death their enemies spell the end of the beginning of the so-called change, which has empowered the most hypermasculine and violent, it is not surpising that the hegemonies of Saudi Arabia etc. fund and support these infernal elements. What is good for my tribe is good for me, what is good to retain my unmerited power is good for me, they say.

The Last Prophet, upon whom be peace, condemned such people, He is not of us who proclaims the cause of tribal partisanship (asabiyyah); and he is not of us who fights in the cause of tribal partisanship; and he is not of us who dies in the cause of tribal partisanship. In fact, the job of any believer is to stop a criminal from committing a crime. Too bad that those in a position to spread education for children, particularly disadvantaged girls, instead distribute guns to these morally vacant criminal males. The traditional establishment is weak and splintered, it has been weakened by the very same Puritans who claim to speak for Islam. We are left with mere rituals which, too, are impossible, after all we must eat meat every day and overcrowd animals. Out of these fires march hypermasculine male thugs, the new breed. Muslim men and women who think, who cry, who feel for others are trodden under. And what of children? What will they learn? Muhammad Asad once rightly lamented that we Muslims have made no use of the Great Gift given to us. That is not the fault of the Muslim meek, may they inherit the earth, but we have been convinced by uneducated leaders to not educate ourselves because if we did we would choose someone educated over them. So this facade of "revolution", a concept that has been damaging to our theology, is being used to replace one uneducated tribal leader with another uneducated tribal leader and the customary gang of male hypermasculine thugs.  

I would add that we have been as adept if not more in breaking laws as the ancient Israelites, from our cruel treatment of animals to how we have not contributed invidually or collectively to improving ethics or even how the object of the state has come to supervise over the lives of men and women which are not given by the state but by God (good on Asma Barlas for charging this exploitation of whole populations, particularly religious and ethnic minorities, as blasphemy; this is ironical since the very same forces that charge religious minorities and certain individuals with blasphemy are in fact themselves the blasphemers as they privilege the state over God consciousness and forgiveness), which lie in the dust to be stepped on, for the last hundred years or so. How sad indeed. Yet it is my great hope, and this can be achieved through the hardwork of ethical teachers and those who have actually read the Qur'an, for God has dedicated His book to "to those who think". I fear for the next generation of Muslim children but know one thing: change will be slow but come insha'Allah. So start working right away, from your own family to the family across the road. Spread the Word by being good and seize His grace that falls as gentle as the rain. The harsh do not feel it because it is not for them and I'm glad that their punishment has already begun even though they may feel powerful and push others around.

New Cold War and the Arab Spring

 Peter McKay sums it up and in The Daily Mail at that:

"But the so-called Arab Spring — of which the Syrian civil war is part — is a far more complex event than credulous innocents in the West imagine.

"It’s not simply uprisings by ground-down peasants against tyrants who repress them. It’s about a transfer of power to rival clans and/or religious groups. And about a continuation of the old, U.S.-Russia Cold War stand-off."

Brand Obama

Have we?

Because political debate has become so debased in our media monoculture ... race, gender and class can be used as seductive tools of propaganda and diversion. In Obama's case, what matters, as Fanon pointed out in an earlier era, is not the intermediary's "historic" elevation, but the class he serves. After all, Bush's inner circle was probably the most multiracial in presidential history. There was Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas, all dutifully serving an extreme and dangerous power. - John Pilger

A few years ago in the children's section of a bookshop I came across a familiar figure, Brand Obama, making us all believe in a change that never happened, being marketed to children. Brand Obama appropriated the semiotic language of King and X and delivered nothing. Almost like a storybook character who never existed. Cynthia McKinney powerfully said that Obama signified the loss of "innocence" of African-Americans who were now part of a corrupt system. I think that is partly correct, for there are African-Americans opposed to Obama on moral grounds and have not been seduced by ethnocentrism. The preoccupation with white privilege, from the standpoint of a coloured person, can obscure our own power at times. Obama illustrates that. The excuse-making and defence of Obama has gone on too long. Rather than addressing racist attacks against Obama as racism, people ignore that and react with homage to another kind of power, that of position rather. It is better to argue as a coloured person on the right to position and status as an equal member of humanity rather than climb that false, foolish Renaissance ladder of "the chain of being".

Obama, who has become a global celebrity, was molded easily into a brand. He had almost no experience, other than two years in the Senate, lacked any moral core and could be painted as all things to all people....Celebrity culture has leeched into every aspect of our culture, including politics, to bequeath to us what Benjamin DeMott called “junk politics.” Junk politics does not demand justice or the reparation of rights. Junk politics personalizes and moralizes issues rather than clarifying them. “It’s impatient with articulated conflict, enthusiastic about America’s optimism and moral character, and heavily dependent on feel-your-pain language and gesture,” DeMott noted. The result of junk politics is that nothing changes – “meaning zero interruption in the processes and practices that strengthen existing, interlocking systems of socioeconomic advantage.” It redefines traditional values, tilting “courage toward braggadocio, sympathy toward mawkishness, humility toward self-disrespect, identification with ordinary citizens toward distrust of brains.” Junk politics “miniaturizes large, complex problems at home while maximizing threats from abroad. It’s also given to abrupt unexplained reversals of its own public stances, often spectacularly bloating problems previously miniaturized.” And finally, it “seeks at every turn to obliterate voters’ consciousness of socioeconomic and other differences in their midst.” - Chris Hedges

Ziauddin Sardar and Originality

I hold much agreement with Ziauddin Sardar - his largely stimulating, healthy reading of Islam; and also disagreement over other issues, e.g. his promotion of Amina Wadud, poster woman of the "Progressives", whose convoluted activism is best expressed through one of her blog titles: If Music is Haram, then Allah Made a Mistake. Rather than contextually pointing out that music can be both positive and negative in straightforward language, the "Progressives" feel a need to provoke. Although I very rarely listen to music these days, mainly while driving on weekends, I had a similar experience years ago when a fellow Muslim passenger on a bus, on learning of my faith, felt the need to "educate" me while I had my headphones on. When I refused his advice, quite out of adolescent zing and a somewhat stubborn streak which has been a fault many a time, he started to chant prayers next to me. It appears to me that this provocation and coercion is the hallmark of the "Progressives" and the Puritans respectively. The "Progressives" openly ridicule "tradition". The "Progressives" and Puritans are both out of touch and have not made any serious contribution to the regeneration of traditional ethics. The self-righteousness and judgement is astounding. Compare this to Muhammad Abduh's critique of the contemporary practice of polygamy in the language of traditional ethics by arguing that polygamy had been a sound practice among early righteous believers but had degenerated into a corrupt practice of lust devoid of justice and equity toward women. He didn't write an arrogantly worded treatise, but used his critical mind which had been given to him and to all human beings as a result of God's grace. Abduh showed that as a consequence of this social change and lack of moral integrity in men, polygamy was only permissible in certain circumstances. Now compare this to how Puritans and "Progressives" have warred over polygamy, one justifying it on unreasonable grounds, the other ridiculing the former for "backwardness", all in all a failure to humbly and critically engage with the issue. Abduh's critique of the traditional establishment can be vindicated by the high level of sexual harassment against women in Egypt, which the traditional authorities have failed to address and stop. Abduh may have stood outside the traditional establishment but he was wholly traditional in the sense of the ethics of Islam as imparted by the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him.

This brings me to my point of contention with Ziauddin Sardar. In an interview he was asked: "Among the next generation of Diaspora Muslim public intellectuals, Tariq Ramadan's ideas are perhaps closest to yours. Notwithstanding 9/11, why do you think it has taken a quarter of a century for your ideas to resurface in the public sphere?"

Sardar answered: "Well, better late than never. When The Future of Muslim Civilisation was first published, I remember my friend Jerry Ravetz saying, dont expect anyone to understand it; it will take decades for many of the ideas in it to filter down. I think it is the job of reformers to be ahead of their time. Moreover, I am asking Muslims to transcend centuries of historical baggage and overturn deeply entrenched obscurantism. I have always seen this as a multi-generational task. Sometimes you need a crisis for certain reformist ideas to come to the fore. I think the total failure of the notion of Islamic state and the Islamic movement, as well as intellectual movements such as Islamisation of knowledge, has generated a sense of crisis. 9/11 has given this crisis an urgent spin to this crisis. So the time is now ripe for many of my ideas to come to the fore. Indeed, it is gratifying to see how so many of my ideas sometime with acknowledgement, mostly without acknowledgement have now been embraced in places like Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey and in various European Muslim circles. But I do not believe that Tariq Ramadan and others have still caught up with the true import of my ideas."

Do I sense some unhealthy competition with Ramadan? I have not read Ramadan and not extensively read Sardar either. But what is the point in claiming originality? There is very little originality in this world, particularly theology. Ramadan humbly acknowledged the influence of Muhammad Asad in 2010 whose thinking was growing on him, and Asad was inspired by the scholarship of Abduh in his best critiques and by reactionaries like Maududi in his worst (which he fortunately swiftly discarded) and Abduh by those before him. In fact, Abduh, too, walked the misleading path of "Revolution" with Al-Afghani once before turning away toward "the Straight Path". The exact call for Muslims to transcend "centuries of historical baggage and overturn deeply entrenched obscurantism" was originally made by Muhammad Abduh, not Sardar. Muhammad Abduh was himself inspired by Muslim thinkers of the past, that era of learning which came to a tragic end in the tenth century or so. Abduh made this call after surveying what had happened in between. It also was not Abduh who was brilliant in himself but all good was from God, for all scholars have imperfections and the best learned men are open to sincere inquiry of their understandings. The roots of honest understanding come not from us but rather the Qur'an and the example of the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, that propelled Muslim men and women to seek knowledge and be fountains of good behaviour and piety and which indirectly paved way to that era of learning called the Renaissance in Europe. It was there in Europe that Abduh sat in the libraries and read great books and he realised the dearth of knowledge in Muslim lands. He saw his task to inculcate that tradition of learning and of Islam. He correctly saw that God was the Teacher and how it all connected with the world, of what Islam truly meant. It is possible Sardar had a similar experience but he was not the first. Back to Adam!

Taliban: Pak Army Proxies

Farhat Taj at RAWA:

"...Pakistani military ideologues began to implement the agenda of Strategic Depth by importing the Afghan Mujahideen parties they had nurtured on the Pakistani soil to Afghanistan following the withdrawal of the Soviet forces. These outfits were too artificial to deliver. They fragmented very quickly in the rising tide of civil war in Afghanistan. This time round, the military establishment began to support the Taliban.

"Rejecting the various stories about the origins of Taliban, the Pashtun nationalists in Pakistan and Afghanistan believe that they were created in 1994 by the Afghan Cell of the ISI led by Major General Aziz Khan. Although retired general Nasirullah Babar boasted of his share in the creation of the Taliban, Gen Aziz remained the 'focal person' for Taliban in the security establishment of Pakistan almost up till 9/11.

"Nationalists all over the world are recognized by their actions, conduct and attitudes that concur with their national identity. Let's look at the actions, conduct and attitude of the Taliban. What were their first major steps when they entered Kabul in 1996? They banned the Afghan national flag, Afghan national anthem and Nowroz (Afghan New Year) - a five thousand year old festival. Radio Kabul became 'Voice of Sharia'. Jirga, the most important social institution of Pashtun tribes, was declared anti-Sharia and also banned. The statue of Buddha in Bamian, a symbol of Afghan culture that had remained intact and respected among countless past generations of Afghans, was demolished. Everything that represented Afghan (or Pashtun) national identity was brutally suppressed. Is this the way nationalists treat their national identity? Far from being Pashtun nationalists, the Taliban religiously imposed the Strategic Depth agenda during their rule from 1996 to 2001, destroying Afghan identity and state and making the country a de facto fifth province of Pakistan."

Mighty Measly Muslim

He was crouching, knotting his shoestrings after Jummah. The prayer-room disgorged the Ummah who went zipping to the labours of the day. A strange shoe plopped right in front. Alhamdulillah it missed his head. Passers passed by, and he realised it needed a perch. He scolded himself for not being good, for thinking too long and inconveniencing those on the move. What the Prophet said:

A man who passed by a branch of a tree leaning over a road and decided to remove it, saying to himself, ‘By Allah! I will remove from the way of Muslims so that it would not harm them.’ On account of this he was admitted to Jannah.

The branch of a tree is mighty next to a shoe or splashes of water on wudu benches. Shall we not even remove those?

Britain leads dash to explore for oil

My notes: to may dismay, oil is found in Somalia and the British are the first to steal it. As many concerned Somalis suspected, the recent one day conference in London ''for Somalia'' led by David CAMeRAMAN( as he is a camera fo oils) has had its roots on oil.
The last time UK interested in Somali geopolitical affairs it divided the country into 5 different enclaves and laballed Mohamed Abdalla Hassan "The Mad Mullah" just because he said we don't want to be colonized.



-------------------------



Britain leads dash to explore for oil in war-torn Somalia

{…..}

The Observer can reveal that, away from the public focus of last week's summit, talks are going on between British officials and Somali counterparts over exploiting oil reserves that have been explored in the arid north-eastern region of the country. Abdulkadir Abdi Hashi, minister for international cooperation in Puntland, north-east Somalia – where the first oil is expected to be extracted next month – said: "We have spoken to a number of UK officials, some have offered to help us with the future management of oil revenues. They will help us build our capacity to maximise future earnings from the oil industry."
{….}

British involvement in the future Somali oil industry would be a boon for the UK economy and comes at a time when the world is increasingly concerned about the actions of Iran, the second-biggest oil producer in Opec.

http://www.wardheernews.com/News_2012/Feb/26_Britain_leads_dash_to_explore_for_oil.html

Somali on the dinner table

Cambating terrorism. The World is gathering to help...hmmm...eat Somalia. She is on the table while its leader ( the president Sheikh Sharif) is the lead waiter.

Apparently William Hague is in Mogadishu:

UK Development Minister Andrew Mitchell who was in Somalia a few days ago first visited Mogadishu and his next stop was Garowe, the capital of semi-autonomous Somali region which recently started digging patrol. I hope there is no patrol in Somalia.



------------------------------------


Turkey challenges Iran in Somalia

Turkey's relatively newfound interest in engaging with Somalia was triggered by a combination of different events, from the extension of humanitarian assistance during a time of great famine to the desire to establish a foothold in a strategic location so as to benefit from future trade deals.


Not only have a number of Turkish government agencies been actively working on the ground, but also a host of nongovernmental organizations in Somalia are working to bring about positive changes in what many have .....


http://www.sundayszaman.com/sunday/columnistDetail_getNewsById.action?newsId=269753

( sometimes we need to read everything to balance our thoughts). Obviously, the Turkish could not see Somalia's plight in the past 20 years!

Drilling Oil?

Somalia's northern region of Puntland begins drilling for oil


NAIROBI, Kenya, Jan 17, 2012 (AP) - Africa Oil says it has begun drilling for oil in Somalia's semiautonomous northern region of Puntland.


A Tuesday statement says the company is drilling a well in the Dharor Valley and will shortly begin drilling another one in the Nugal Valley, both in south-central Puntland. The statement says the two regions are part of a geological system that has already produced oil in Yemen.
It should take about three months to complete the two wells.


The statement says the two wells are the first wells to be drilled in 20 years in war-ravaged Somalia, which has not had a stable government for 21 years.


Source: AP



----------------------


Not sure whether I should be pleased with the news or saddened. Probably the later. Uganda, and East African country, has gas and patrol where British and US oil company pay the corrupted governemt only to continue fighting the opposition groups. And of course, we all aware that ''every five minutes'' a child dies in Uganda from malenutrition or so says, Save the Children.

I think, Somali needs peace and stabilty not Oil. Not now anyway.

Qaddafi's executioners break the Third Commandment

There is no doubt that Qaddafi was a dictator and a ruthless human being. However, as I watched the video of his death I thought of the Third Commandment, revealed to the Prophet Moses, peace be upon him, at Mount Sinai:

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.

The Ten Commandments also show how Allah guided mankind in small albeit profound steps.

Qaddafi's executioners dropped on him in a blood-thirsty mob chanting Allahu Akbar (God is Great). The cruelty of the scene is beyond words, not simply in the act itself but also in the signal that moral progression of the nation would not come easily as those who aim to stand in Qaddafi's stead have shown themselves to be opposed to tribunal justice, and subscribe to naked violence, much like the dictators they shun. Their racist violence against black members of their continent in the so-called Libyan revolution has been well recorded. They considers themselves Arabs, true Muslims, haughty in their tribal disregard for Allah's family. Thus one dictator follows another, cruelty continues, the strongest, the hyper-masculine victimise and brutalise without pondering Allah, they use His name as a slogan, squeezed tight in their rage.

At Asr I sat down to read the Qur'an to assuage and get an answer for why things were as they were, why were these Muslims behaving contrary to Islam, what were we to do, and then it came -- in fact it says all over the Qur'an -- for indeed the Book endears itself not to Muslims but "believers who do righteous deeds". And in the faces of many Muslims all around the worlds there is light, for it has to be if they help the poor and infirm, take care of their parents, be kind and encourage and be full of love toward their husbands and wives, and struggle for social justice for everyone and be good to Allah's creation. That is proof that they have understood His message.

Titles

An extract from Yahya Emerick's article The Confusion of the Scholars:

So where does the stupidness come in? There are several areas to look at and the first is on the issue of who is a "Scholar" or "Shaykh?" Allah is very harsh against the Jews and the Christians for considering their priests and rabbis as people who could make religious judgments without consulting Allah's revelations. The priests made the eating of pork allowed for Christians, with no authority from Allah or from Prophet Jesus, while the rabbis made laws such as a woman could not be in the house during her period and that milk and meat could not be eaten together. In this respect, the people "worshipped" their leaders besides Allah.

Sadly, this is exactly what Muslims have done for the last thousand years. In the early days of Islam, no one went around with ostentatious titles, as if they were somehow set apart from the rest of the people. Everyone was usually addressed as brother or sister. No one earned overly glorified titles, either, just because they studied with a Sahabi. The only real special term that I have ever come across which was frequently used by the Prophet to describe others is 'Alim (learned person). And this term was never used in the sense of a "priest" or Holy man. It was just that: a person who is learned.

In Madina, everyone was "learned" to one extent or another. The trader knew how to practice Islam, the housewife knew how to practice Islam and the traveler knew it too. If someone needed to ask a question about Islam that they didn't know, they would go to a friend or neighbor. For really detailed questions, they might consult someone who was known to be a teacher. But they wouldn't fawn all over the teacher nor would the teacher dress or act in such a way as to set him or herself apart from the rest of the believers.

Centuries passed and a funny thing happened. The Islamic world spread in so many different directions and millions of people were becoming Muslims. The common knowledge of Islam was not so common anymore. If a Muslim teacher went to any area where Islamic knowledge was scarce, suddenly, everyone was wanting to be around him. The teacher became special. (Think of Sufi-style Shaykh worship for example.) Fast forward many more centuries. There are millions of Muslims, but few know much about Islam. Teachers have become "holy" men and have such titles as "Shaykh" or "Maulana". They are a special class, or caste, of people who are sought after and revered by people who want to see their "god" in the flesh because the concept of an unseen Creator is too intellectual for most. (Hence, Muslim "Saints!")

So what of the world today? Any person who learns a few dozen ahadith and one or two ajza is calling himself a scholar and making pronouncements about Islam to his flock who knows little. I have met people who knew little about Islam calling themselves Imam, or Shaykh or whatever. Who made them Imam? Who promoted them to the role of a guardian of the Deen? Was it their ignorant followers? Was it by virtue of the fact that they attended some madrasa in another culture? Is it because they're rich? Who knows? All I know is that a real scholar doesn't call himself by a title. He doesn't need it. A real knower of Islam realizes he knows so little and is humble. A title makes him feel uncomfortable. That is a real Muslim leader. But what we have mostly is a clergy class. (Think of that hadith about the Day of Judgment where the pretentious scholar is thrown in Hell.)

And what do the self-appointed scholars say? The stupidity is amazing! These are all actual Fatwas One scholar will say that chewing gum does not break the fast. Another says that using a fork is haram. A third says that eating McDonald's meat is okay while a fourth says of it, no way. One scholar says human cloning is halal, while another says it's haram. One local scholar in New York says the Sunnah is not important and that most ahadith are fabricated. One in Egypt says that wife-beating is okay if the wife doesn't make an effort to look pretty while another says that mortgages are allowed under duress. (Have you ever heard the Fatwa that living in America is haram? It's there.) Each one of these scholars backs up their arguments with Qur'an and hadith, in a usually twisted way, and then says anyone who does otherwise is a kafir.

"Beauty" is Irrelevant in Theology

Some Muslims place a great emphasis on what they consider to be "beauty". Beauty, of course, is a subjective marker and there's nothing wrong with it. How we treat others is an entirely different matter. It is with grace that the world began and it is with grace that we must move. The fondness of relaying how physically beautiful the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was is entirely irrelevant. The claim that he was the most handsome man is an unnecessary slogan of cultural realisation than anything touching the message of the Qur'an or the pious, humble way of the prophet.

When the ambassadors of Bani Amir went to Muhammad, they said, "You are our master." He said, "God is your master." Then they said, "You are most excellent of the highest degree." And when he heard this he said, "Say so, or less, and do not exceed reasonable bounds in praise."

In many ways it signals the poverty of theological discussions. To follow anyone based on his/her appearance or eloquence bears no weight upon truth. While there could be a genuine historical need to draw up the physical characteristics of individuals from the past to situate them more firmly within the narrative, anything outside it seems to be to be of no use at all.

In all honesty we do not know what prophets and their disciples looked like other than scant written descriptions. Given present-day celebrity obsessed media culture, it is not a bad thing. In a nutshell, it does not matter.

A moral of the story of the Prophet Yusuf (peace be upon him) is not that he was "beautiful", though some prevalent gossip totally obscures the moral with elaborations on his "beauty", but the power of Divine guidance and his will to resist the power of seduction. It was his grace that was beautiful, the preservation of his "beauty" through the strength of his will which drew upon Divine grace.

When people say this or that person is beautiful, it implies something purely physical and in relation to others. Yet true beauty is not referential. It does not deny others equal worth and is not oppressive. This is but one pearl of wisdom from Muslim theology that explores this issue:

Muhammad said, "That person will not enter Paradise who hath one atom of pride in his heart." And a man present said, "Verily, a man is fond of having good clothes, and good shoes." Muhammad said, "God is Beautiful and delighteth in the beautiful; but pride is holding man in contempt."

There are many others that enlighten the seeker, from the Prophet's response to Lady Aisha when she commented on Lady Safiyyah's short stature to the complete absence of aesthetic morality in the Qur'an. To believe is to love all of Allah's creation and to undertake a path of critical self-reflection of the ideas we inherit from forces that we meet and are surrounded by, from bogus eugenics to friendly dialogues. To believe is to respect each human being and to fall in love with good everywhere. It is to compare our own beliefs and values as Muslims with the sublime truths expressed in the Qur'an and to sincerely face the unfortunate fact that we linger far, far away from "beauty".

Other pictures from Somalia:Somali capital wins regional soccer tournament

Fifteen Somali regional teams competed in a football tournament in Punt Land State of Somalia (the North East Province).

According to Somali Football Federation statement, the holding of this tournament marked the reassembling of the once disunited Somali youths and it was the first of its kind held in Somalia since 1987.


I just cannot upload the pictures!

The Covenant of Allah / Times of Confusion

Two days ago I inadvertently chanced upon a discussion concerning one of the most popular Muslim bloggers who had apostatised. Of course, I was not a reader of the site (was directed to it once by someone).

The discussion on how this byword of Muslim blogging turned atheist, as some claim, is very interesting though not in the positive sense. Eventually I did locate the person's new blog, for I thought it was important to have a sense of her arguments and not what people were claiming about her. There were good points and bad points. It made me realise the great problems facing many Muslim converts, especially women, who are rushed off into marrying strangers as soon as they make the declaration of faith.

One of the experiences shared by the person rings true from my own observation. For example, I have never agreed to distribute dawah pamphlets on Islam Open Day at university. This Marxist-inspired tactic, with use of apologetics in its contents is appalling, in my view. We cannot state that women have rights in Islam while being silent on domestic violence and other tragedies in the community. We cannot call for justice for Aafia Siddiqui incarcerated in the United States while saying nothing about the thousands of nameless Indonesian maids abused by their employers in Saudi Arabia. Muslims must critique these facts. In fact, this story appeared in Crescent Times, an Australian Muslim paper, so there are definitely right-minded Muslims, and those anti-Muslim commentators who speak of a nefarious "Muslim mind" are clearly wrong.

It was so disturbing to read that the Indonesian women who go to work in Saudi Arabia feel the trust and are happy that they are working for fellow Muslims. But covenant is never shared between humans. And this is where I politely disagree with the lady who left Islam from what it appears are experiential realities, gauging from a handful of entries on her blog.

Islam teaches us that covenant is made solely between Allah and man. Not between human beings.

I do not think we own the right to judge a person who writes that she married a virtual stranger and was then swallowed up by a conservative establishment that looked straight through her when it came to her needs as a human being, whether it was getting served after all the men had eaten at a food stall or the inability to get a contract that stipulated that the marriage be monogamous. But here I am not speaking so much of this lady who at least has a voice, but for perhaps other women who are not fortunate either. Allah is the Best Judge, and He will take each atom into account, whether good or bad.

But that Muslims may treat each very badly is not news. Aren't we Muslims because our covenant is with Allah? Life drags many people through hot degrees, and some, even innocent ones can end up scared of "Islam" (Divine Revelation) because of what they "experience" (man-made discursive practice of ethics). And Allah is the Best Judge.

I have often asked myself if our personal experiences define our realities. In Tao Te Ching the first verse goes that the Way lies beyond what we experience. In The Road to Mecca, Muhammad Asad presses a shell to his ear, curious to behold a new sound. From my own life I can safely say that Islam was a choice, not a need. It became the Way the moment I understood the Qur'an, and though it made me pledge my allegiance during the first reading of the chapter 'The Prophets', it is only since early last year that I have gotten a fuller, richer understanding after some extensive research on how to internalise and converse with its ethics. I mention this because experience itself is never enough. To learn about Islam, to accept it, you must first read the Qur'an, its purpose, to make a covenant with Allah after you recognise His Voice. Even if you become a Muslim, you are not a believer until you consciously submit yourself after reading and learning, unto Allah alone. When you enter Allah's covenant, you must also be kind, gracious, for these are not merely qualities that are "good" but signify "surrender" and appreciation of His sermons. You will make mistakes, may be get a little political (though I have never understood those who support the Taliban, and there's something wrong to begin with) or make everything into right and wrong, but eventually you will come around to the realisation that it is all inconsequential before the simple and deep teachings of the Ultimate Reality, the Teacher, the One God.

Once I imagined I was on the Isle of Man, this fantastic place, and there were no believers, and I was sinking on my knees in hopelessness. Only Allah knows what I would have become or done. But if I truly believe, I would never disbelieve. And Allah knows what is true and untrue in our head, heart and hands.

It is recognising that Ultimate Reality, "His signs" as the Qur'an puts it that explain faith, not a symbolic identity of it.

There's no doubt that Muslims are in a terrible state. But along with the darkness, there's light. There are pious Muslims, wholly dedicated to the Message, who work diligently for goodness, who wish to bring Muslim life up-to-date with socio-economic conditions of the nation state. This Muslim ethical project (note: I didn't use the word "Islam"; this distinction is often not understood by Muslims who would rather deal with symbols and banners than actual meanings) is a necessity, because three or four centuries after the Prophet's death, peace be upon him, reliable theological discourse had been abandoned. It was only in the nineteenth century that a great scholar by the name of Muhammad Abduh diagnosed this amnesia. Wikipedia incorrectly calls Abduh a "liberal", a "Mutazili" and a "modernist". [A separate post is required for an exposition of these terms, and I will only say that an analysis of Abduh by a particular writer was flawed to the very centre in its assumption that "Islam" is a time-bound commodity which Abduh tried to mask with a "synthetic" reform - this perhaps has been the general loop-holing of religion by post-Darwinian, secular writers. Many modern anthropologists dispute this formulation which has its roots in the Enlightenment schematisation of progressive time and is frankly an 18th century Victorian evolutionary idea]. True to the spirit of Islam, Abduh was a, to use the diction of the secular tradition, a "liberal" on some matters and a "conservative" on others. Mark Sedgewick, his biographer explains:

None of these! I think he must have had some sympathy for the Mutazili, but he knew that they were different people from a very different age. The problems of his age were not theirs. Intellectually, he was certainly interested in some ideas of the Shia and the Sufis, but I don't think he ever identified with them, at least not after his youth, when he certainly considered himself a Sufi for a while. After that, I can't imagine him wanting to go to Tanta for the mawlid, or to Karbala! That thing was not his style at all. In the end, he was more of a regular Egyptian Sunni than anything else. Though he was never just a regular anything.

Muhammad Asad and his magnificent translation of the Qur'an were directly influenced by Abduh's scholarship. Abduh honoured all people, he did not consider the West as alien as Maududi did (whose ideas permeate contemporary Muslim polemics). Abduh respected women (for their social wellbeing and he also drew upon the Qur'an and scholarship to argue that polygamy was only permissible in certain circumstances), he outlawed slavery with the ideas of the Qur'an (a great achievement for contemporary Muslim life), he was a staunch opponent of colonialism (but did so through legitimate means, and parted ways with Al-Afghani on his "pan-Islamism" which has proved disastrous) among many other little and great things. Until his dying days he was working on the commentary of the Qur'an, with his prodigal expertise in theology and the Arabic language. He is quoted as stating that the Qur'an is "its own best commentary".

No scholar since Ghazali has been as influential as Abduh (for the right reasons). (For the wrong reasons) the demeaning of Islam by political ideologues like Maududi and medieval ravages by Muslim empires to consolidate worldly power in place of humility and faith have also defined thoughts and attitudes. A number of logical criticisms of Abduh can be made, if one chooses to, but casting aspersions on his belief are entirely without evidence.

As a number of intellectuals have argued, God-elected men like Muhammad and Abraham and Moses, peace be upon them, cannot make us feel as they felt. It could be elaborated that what can bind us to their ageless faith and humanity is the visibility of good ethics as taught by Allah in His Book, in allegorical and literal forms. And the example of the Prophet Muhammad, the Last Prophet, peace be upon him. But for us ethics would also mean the modernisation of social institutions in Muslim nation states, research, and dialogue. After all knowledge is the bedrock of spirituality. The pastoral, good, ethical mode of living of the prophets is absent in our age's organisation. The Qur'an (Chapter 56, Verses 10-14):

But the foremost shall be [they who in life were] the foremost [in faith and good works]: they who were [always] drawn close unto God! In gardens of bliss [will they dwell] - a good many of those of olden times, but [only] a few of later times.

Contrary to the theory of moral relativism, the Qur'an is clear that there is regression in man's faith and actions through history. Yet a little later in the same chapter, the Qur'an (Verses 27-40) provides further hope for us.

Now as for those who have attained to righteousness - what of those who have attained to righteousness? [They, too, will find themselves] amidst fruit-laden lote-trees, and acacias flower-clad, and shade extended, and waters gushing, and fruit abounding, never-failing and never out of reach.

And [with them will be their] spouses, raised high: for, behold, We shall have brought them into being in a life renewed, having resurrected them as virgins, full of love, well-matched with those who have attained to righteousness: a good many of olden times, and a good many of later times.

In the context of those who initially stumble and sin but eventually attain righteousness, there will be "many". This is a definite reality of our times. It is in contrast to the "foremost" of the first quotation, those "always drawn to God", of whom there are a "few" in times that follow the Last Revelation (Commentary by Asad, The Message of the Qur'an).

In today's environment, communication is either impersonal or absent. How do we get there? How do we bring knowledge to people that is articulate, intelligent and authentic? The well-travelled journalist Chris Hedges argues:

The debasement of language, which Shakespeare understood was a prelude to violence, is the curse of modernity. We have stopped communicating, even with ourselves. And the consequences will be as extreme as in the Shakespearean tragedy....The Arabic of the Qur'an is as poetic as the intricate theology of Islam. It is nuanced and difficult to master. But the language of the Qur'an has been debased in the slums and poor villages across the Middle East by the words and phrases of "political Islam". This process is no different from what has taken place with Christianity in the United States. Our mainstream churches have been as complacent in fighting heretics as have the mainstream mosques and religious scholars in the Middle East.

Hurdles line our path. For example, during his reign the Pakistani dictator General Zia instituted a law, in the name of Islam, according to which a woman who was raped could be charged with adultery. Imagine! On the subject of improvements, can't we introduce discursive practices that condemn racism, discriminatory attitudes, sexism, and intellectual laziness in religious scholarship? We do that in the spirit of Islam. For through history and by many Muslim power-brokers, it was never about Islam.

Our covenant is with Allah only, that's why we are Muslims. We must criticise such blatant disregard for human welfare, which is one of the very founding stones of Divine and prophetic discourse. We know that many bad things have been committed in the name of Islam and will continue to be done. Sometimes we may feel like the Companions of the Cave, afraid that we will be stoned by our own brothers. But this world was never ours forever.

May we stand against injustice, against evil words spoken by those in our midst, and strive to be good. For to Allah we belong and unto Him we will return. Believers will be tested, and each time they fall they will pick themselves up again. This is faith. It's all around us, and even its fragments in other prophetic lines in lands lost as far as the tribes we have never encountered or empathised with, albeit not as clear as the Qur'an, can be found in the good ethics practised by their members. Because there is something bigger than all of us, though we all will know it - the obvious conclusion of a rational, conscious specie (man) appointed as a deputy on earth and obligated to express the virtue of righteousness toward all that lives on earth - the Ultimate Reality we call Allah, though man has sought to haplessly define the Undefinable (Chapter 21, Verses 18-22).


Photo of Muhammad Abduh

The Hypocrisy of War and Puritanism

Many journalists have acknowledged that Wikileaks has made an important contribution to journalism. It has embarrassed government officials like the US Secretary of State Hilary Clinton who was caught spying on the United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. But what of Arab leaders? Their war-mongering cannot sufficiently be put into words.

Saudi and Bahraini leaders called for a US military strike on Iran over its controversial nuclear programme, with Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah asking Washington to "cut off the serpent's head."

Wikileaks also has some other interesting information about Saudi royals.

The underground party scene is "thriving and throbbing" in Saudi Arabia thanks to the protection of Saudi royalty, the dispatch said. But it is only available behind closed doors and for the very rich.

More than 150 Saudi men and women, most in their 20s and 30s, were at the party. The patronage of royalty meant the feared religious police kept a distance. Admission was controlled through a strict guest list. "The scene resembled a nightclub anywhere outside the kingdom: plentiful alcohol, young couples dancing, a DJ at the turntables and everyone in costume."

It is amazing that it is the Saudi monarchy that articulates a puritanical system for the common man while despoiling itself in pleasures of the flesh (and then some). No doubt this hypocrisy exists in every single Arab country: one rule for the prince, one rule for the pauper. This hypocrisy is not new. It can be observed in medieval empires of the Ottomans, the Mughals, and even the Spanish Moors. And modern day tyrants like the warlords and the Taliban in Afghanistan. But Saudi Arabia has taken this to a new level. Let's not forget that the Committee for the Promotion of Virtue and the Prevention of Vice that was exported to the Taliban was engineered by Saudi bureaucrats.

The problem with puritanism is not merely that it sexualises all human impulses but it is impossible to live with. A Saudi friend explained that it is not unusual for the youth to tune into TV channels featuring Turkish dancers. If a man is spotted speaking to a woman, it is automatically assumed that they are planning a rendezvous.

It is wrong to criticise an entire culture and there is evidence that it is another form of racism. Cultures are inherently good, but also contain structures that are the product of their coercive and cooperative capacity and are in constant influx. The majority of Muslims are victims to the system, they do not theorise ethics. We must employ correct Muslim ethics to make a change. The changes that the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, made were directed at unethical structures within the culture, not the culture itself. The ethics used to make changes were dictated and inspired by the Word of God and the emotional and intelligent quotient imbibed by man.

Almighty Allah guides man to civilisation. Islamic architecture is not civilisation, good behaviour is civilisation.

Pakistan, Egypt, and Iran, followed closely by Saudi Arabia, have the highest rates of pornography access. This is mainly caused by the socio-economic conditions but we must also rethink puritanism and theological laziness in dealing with these issues.

What would the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, have said of this hypocrisy?

By Him in Whose Hand is my life, even if Fatima daughter of Muhammad were to commit theft, I would have cut off her hand.

Unfortunately, the Saudi example is worse, because how can one make rules for another and not carry on oneself? To say nothing of the impracticality and repressiveness. Why are Saudi Arabia and other Arab countries baying for war against Iran? To say nothing of the amorality and suffering.

Because Heaven is Ahead

When conversations become shorter
And roads become longer,
You must keep on walking
Because Heaven is ahead!

Worries will leave you,
Earth will swallow you,
You must forgive yourself
Because Heaven is ahead!

Until the stars shine
Misunderstandings will thrive.
Prepare for the Day they are put out
Because Heaven is ahead!

Silence will never leave you,
Let it be your friend thereon.
You will reach Home one day
Because Heaven is ahead!

Live to be free, die not aggrieved.
Live to be happy, die not unkind.
Thank the Lord for each breath
Because Heaven is ahead!

Live to smile, live to give.
Live to worship the Maker of sunrise.
Share the Grace and Love dispensed
For without, there's no Heaven ahead.


Photo by Forty Two.