February
United Kingdom speaking tour addressing radicalization of youth and rise of hate speech on campus

• Cambridge Union
• House of Commons
• Southampton University
• Freedom in the City
• London School of Economics
• University of York
• University of Leeds

March
Los Angeles, California. Speaker on clash of civilizations

http://qudosi.com/2011/01/12/raheel-raza-on-the-clash-of-civilizations/

May
• USA speaking tour in Dallas, Houston and Westchester New York hosted by JINSA
• Ajax, ON. Organized SAMA musical performance for Community Economic Development for Immigrant Women,
June
• Ottawa, ON. Participated as a panelist on Leading Thinkers conference hosted by Federation for the Defence of Democracies
• Israel – Speaker at President’s Conference FACING TOMORROW in Jerusalem

http://www.youtube.com/user/IHEUUnitedNations?feature=mhee#p/f/12/WFmxeceu7ms

August
Toronto, ON. Speaker at TDSB rally against prayer in schools

http://blazingcatfur.blogspot.com/2011/08/tdsb-mosqueteria-protest-august-8th.html

September
• Whitby, Ontario. Four seminars on Islam for Lifelong Learning series
• Toronto, ON. Participant on CBC’s Metro Morning Shanakht Roundtable Discussion
www.cbc.ca/metromorning/episodes/2011/09/14/shn/
• Toronto, ON. Speaker on a panel hosted by The Advocates for Civil Liberties and the Canadian Jewish Civil Rights Association on Islamism’s war against women.

October
Australia speaking tour
• Keynote speaker at annual AHISA conference
• Speaker at Sydney Institute

http://www.thesydneyinstitute.com.au/podcast/sharia-in-the-west-%e2%80%93-is-this-a-reality/

• Interview on ABC TV Australia
www.abc.net.au/oneplusone
• Speaker at The Union University and Schools Club UUSC
Toronto, ON. Speaker at Canadian Federation of University Women, Toronto
November
Quebec speaking tour
• Speaker at Canadian Club of the Yamaska Valley
• Speaker at Montreal Presbytery United Church
• Speaker at Church on West Island, Montreal
Toronto, ON. Workshop at Emmanuel College, University of Toronto on Media and Muslims

http://www.southasianfocus.ca/community/article/102382

Toronto, ON. Organized SAMA concert at Trinity St. Paul for a fundraiser for Japan and Africa
Oakville, ON. Speaker at Probus Club of Oakville
December
Toronto, ON. Speaker on a panel about the niqab held at The Noor Centre.
Sep – Nov
Toronto, ON. Taught a 10-week course at George Brown College on Documentaries and Discussion

FORUM FOR LEARNING – Toronto Talks 2011 series
Hosted monthly public events at Northern District Library in Toronto. They included debates, discussion and lectures.
Jan – brainstorming with youth
Feb – Close Encounters of the Radical Kind and Sharia Math by Hasan Mahmud
Mar – Stephen Schwartz on The Two Faces of Islam
Apr – Dr. Liakatali Takim on Islam and Globalization
May – , Salim Mansur, Chantal Desloges and Julie Taub on Immigration
Summer break
Sep – Dr. Husein Khimjee and Dr. David Galston speaking about Jesus
Oct – DELECTABLE LIE – a liberal repudiation of multiculturalism by Salim Mansur
Oct – An evening with Dr. Daniel Pipes
MEDIA
Appeared various times on mainstream Canadian media in print and on radio and TV to discuss and debate issues concerning Canadians.

• Wrote three columns for Mississauga Life Magazine in Jan, Feb and March

http://mississaugalife.ca/about

Have been an occasional columnist for the following online publications:
The Mark
www.themarknews.com/authors/366-raheel-raza
The Propogandist www.propagandistmag.com/categories/raheel-raza
The Commentator
www.thecommentator.com

The speakers were a U of T student who has been wearing the niqab for the past 7 years, a lawyer and professor who represented the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as an intervener in the Supreme Court Case regarding a woman’s right to wear the niqab while testifying in court and myself as a supporter of the Hon. Minister Jason Kenney’s decision.

This community centre has been known to be frequented by largely moderate Muslims so I had invited non-Muslim friends and it’s with this expectation that I agreed to be on the panel, keeping my remarks largely focused on the “niqab and its place in Canada”. The organizers had stressed the importance of dignified dialogue so I made sure my talk was not personal or offensive although the other two panelists weren’t as sensitive. (Text of my talk is given below)

The evening started on the wrong foot when the young lady in niqab turned up 35 minutes late without so much as an apology for keeping everyone waiting.  She was the first speaker and said it’s the intention of Jason Kenney that is suspect and commented extensively on Kenney’s supposed motivation. She criticized Kenney for giving the analogy that Muslim women do not cover their faces at Haj and that niqab is not an Islamic requirement – both these points were rebutted in my talk.

The Lawyer went even further and after taking a low pot shot at the MCC, launched into a sensational litany of how this ruling is akin to Islamophobia (a CAIR favorite rant by the way), that Muslims are victims. He said that Jason Kenney’s motives are sinister and that he (Kenney) is relating the Niqab to Jihad. He said that women were being asked to give their bodies! (Give me a break – showing their face akin to giving bodies?) He essentially said that anyone supporting Kenney’s decision is being duped and has no sensitivity to women’s issues.

The Q & A was even more troubling. Upon my commenting that a face covering does not compliment Canadian values, a male member of the audience stood up in anger and questioned whether Canadian values are about their treatment of the aboriginal community and that Stephen Harper’s Canadian values are those of Israel. The facilitator did not find this offensive but one audience member pointed out that this comment was offensive and not focused on the discussion at hand. At this point I wanted to say that respecting people’s time and being punctual is a Canadian value, but I refrained.

Soon the discussion which was supposed to be about a person’s face required to be seen at Canadian Citizenship oath-taking ceremonies, was sidelined with more visceral and hostile comments about Muslim victimization in general and Kenney’s motivation as being anti-Muslim in particular. The facilitator seemed unable to bring the discussion back on track so there were interruptions and disruptions. At one point a man in the front row shouted that I should not answer a question which I wanted to, but should defer it to the lawyer.

Two members of the audience, a Christian and a Jew who had asked reasonable questions, wrote to me later with these comments and concerns.

“I was particularly shocked and disappointed when – in response to a question about what Canadians can do to help emancipate women in countries like Iran where they are deprived of the choice NOT to wear the hijab or countries like Saudi Arabia where eschewing the abaya is not an option for women – (the lawyer) said that Canada was no different from Iran because we were refusing to allow Muslim women to wear the niqab at the citizenship ceremony.  As if there is a moral comparison to be made between Canada and countries where women are fined, jailed, imprisoned, and even tortured or killed for refusing to conform to dress codes imposed in the name of religion by either the state or the local religious leaders!  I kept thinking how it would be unheard of, in a country like Iran, for instance, to contemplate a forum like last evening where men, women and children came together in a public space without need of secrecy or heightened security to hear a mixed-gender panel discuss the pros and cons of female head coverings.  I mean, really!”

(This from another audience member)

• Moderator allowed  questions not related to the topic which opened it up hostile remarks from the audience
• The lawyer had a totally unbalanced view of the subject and while wearing his totally secular garb, stated that he truly believed that the state had no right telling women what to wear and when they can or cannot wear it
• He then asked for a vote from the audience on who supported the wearing of niqabs and received an almost unanimous standing ovation.  He also stated that the oath of citizenship is a sham and being born in Canada, he never had to take it. But when he became a lawyer he had to pledge allegiance to the Queen and it was a hateful and regretted act for him
• I seem to remember when my parents took citizenship in 1962, it was a sacred vow on a sacred day. Perhaps for these 2 speakers, who were both 3^rd generation Canadians the privilege of freedom, equality, and harmony has lost its lustre.
• A Muslim man who stood up  said that we ( the Harper government) in Canada are adopting policies against Muslims as in Israel, and the moderator did not stop the question till someone said it was off topic
• After Raheel left, the speaker began to explain how the niqab was the best decision she had ever made and how it made her feel close to Allah at every minute of the day; not like others who fulfill their 613 mitzvot (commandments) and then are “good to go”
• When I heard that comment, I said loudly that now I was good to go and got up to walk out and heard her say “good”
• For someone like me, who has truly embraced all faiths with an open mind and real acceptance for so many years, this evening was a heartbreaker.
• Upon leaving and speaking to the event organizer, I was told that I had misinterpreted the comments and taken them out of context. Sure enough an email arrived a few days later placating me with the knowledge that the questions and comments were made in good faith and no malice was meant. There were no retractions from the speakers or the organizers but there was a comment that the panel was able to “be in sync” after Raheel left.

Essentially at the end of the evening, the 2 people in favor of niqab and their supporters fumbled badly on the question of Canadian values. In my opinion Canadian values are what attracted me and millions of immigrants to this country. If we can’t maintain these, we are in a very sad state.

Text of my presentation as the second panelist.

Salaam. Some of you have just celebrated Hanukkah, others are headed into the Christmas season so peace and blessings of God be upon all of you in these festive times.

Glad to be here for this discussion which is long overdue because the niqab debate is not new to Canada. These discussions should have ideally taken place five years ago when the issue first became public.

We should not be afraid to debate and discuss this and all sorts of challenging issues within our communities because when we remain in denial, sometimes others make the decision for us.

So I’d like to thank the organisers for inviting me tonight.

Let me address the niqab issue from various perspectives for Muslims and non-Muslims alike to remove confusion and mis-information.

In my understanding, the Niqab is NOT a religious requirement under Islam. As Muslims we take guidance from our holy scripture the Quran, especially in cases where there might be man-made secondary texts that are ambiguous or contradictory.

The Quran does NOT ask us to cover our face. In fact while practicing our faith, when we go for the Haj pilgrimage, women are not allowed to cover the face as I experienced when I was there.

Secondly, since we don’t have formalized priesthood in Islam, we are asked to take counsel of credible religious scholars. One such scholar Sheikh Mohamed Tantawi, dean of al-Azhar university which is the highest seat of learning for Sunni Muslims,  has said that face veiling is a custom that has nothing to do with the Islamic faith or the Quran. He stated that this practice is widely associated with more conservative trends of Islam. In fact he asked students in Egypt to remove the niqab in educational institutions.

Added to this we are told repeatedly in the Qur’an about keeping a balance. The Quran describes the Muslim as a moderate nation, it says in 2:143 “We have made you a Umaathan wasathan, a moderate nation.” The word moderate here is a translation of the Arabic word “wastan” which means “in the middle”, but it can also mean “fair” or “balanced”. Prophet Mohammad pbuh has been quoted to have said” the best of the things is what is in the middle i.e. what is being done in moderation.”

Let me present another kind of balance that should be observed. One of the fundamental underpinning of Islamic law is the requirement that a just balance between the rights of individuals and the interest of the society as a whole be maintained.

A few years ago when the Niqab debate was at its height, I was on a radio show with Steve Rockwell who calls himself in Imam. He brought along a huge edition of the Quran and I asked him to show me where it says that the face needs to be covered. He could not, because in terms of dress the Qur’an asks both men and women to dress modestly. Later on another show after Shaykh Tantawi and some other scholars gave fatwas that the niqab is not an Islamic requirement, Mr. Rockwell backpeddled and said “well its not religious but cultural.”

Unfortunately lying is a distasteful phenomenon which has crept into our way of life.

So let’s examine the niqab issue from some cultural perspectives.

When my grandmothers migrated from India to Pakistan decades ago, they used to wear a chador as a cultural dress but they discarded it for a simple head covering over time because the chador was all enveloping, hard to manage, and impractical.

Similarly when I came to Canada 22 years ago, I was used to wearing a shalwar Qameez made of thin material, not at all suited to this harsh climate. It didn’t take me long to make the cultural change to long warm trousers to adapt to the weather. Had I insisted on my own cultural dress, I would have suffered in the end.

Therefore cultures need to evolve and change according to time and place. Those of us stuck in centuries old customs, bring excess cultural baggage with us.

Allow me to address how the niqab, a face covering and essentially a mask impact society? It’s obvious that it’s a barrier to communication because you can’t see the face of the person behind the veil.

In some ways, the niqab discriminates against me. If the person under the niqab can see me, and I can’t see her, its discrimination.

Driving with the niqab on creates a problem in peripheral vision. When a woman driving in a niqab hit a cyclist some years ago, I had to wear a burqa in a cultural sensitivity training session to show the judges there IS indeed reduced peripheral vision.

In Manchester UK where a number of women wear the niqab, it has been found that the incidence of rickets which is due to vitamin d deficiency – is the highest in the Western world.

The niqab is also a direct clash with security because in a post 9/11 world, facial identity needs to be shown at airports. Sometimes women are not available to check the id of these passengers as insisted by them.

Which BTW brings me to share an interesting piece of trivia. FYI – the embassies and Consulates of the Islamic Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Islamic Republic of Pakistan, two countries from where the ideology of the niqab has crept into Canada, have a notice that women who wish to have their photograph taken for their passports, have to show their face. For this there is no hue and cry.

How does this differ from what Jason Kenney has said about taking the Canadian citizenship oath, and allow me to quote directly “That is why starting today, my department will require that all those taking the oath do so openly. From today, all persons will be required to show their face when swearing the oath.”

Let me play the devils’ advocate for a moment and for arguments sake, let’s say that there is a sincerely held belief that that niqab is religious.

Islam is not a fossilized faith or a stagnant message stuck in the 7^th century. It’s a vibrant, progressive faith as we see and hear from scholars who are involved in ijtehad about far more challenging issues.

While we’re engaged in inane debates about the length of beards or nailpolish on our hands, there are religious scholars discussing cloning, invitro fertilization, interfaith marriages and yes even female Imamat.

I recall that when Ayaotallh Sistani was ill and taking treatment in UK, he was amazed at the efficiency of the nursing profession in Britian. Upon his return he gave a ruling that if clothing like chador or hijab are a hindrance to a noble profession, then its ok to discard them to carry out caring services for fellow human beings. Furthermore its an Islamic injunction agreed by all schools of thought that Muslims who immigrate to other lands, must abide by the rules of those lands – whether Muslim or not – as a religious duty, as long as one is not ordered to carry out a sin. (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 2796 & Sunan Tirmidhi)

Let me conclude by saying that Muslims who migrate to non Muslim lands by choice should follow the thought of eminent Hanafî jurist, Mohammad b. Hasan Al-Shaybânî who writes in [Biographies (2/6)]: One of the best approaches for a Muslim living in these countries is patience. As long as he agrees to live in a non-Muslim country, he is never to rebel against the people living in his choice of residence, even it seems too hard for him to endure.

From a Canadian perspective, we appreciate that Canada is the ultimate in personal liberty and freedoms. A person has an absolute right to wear or not wear whatever they want – in private. We as Muslims must show our public face and identity. If we hide this, we’re being dishonest to ourselves and to Canada.

Thank you.

By Raheel Raza

December is a poignant month for us as this is when my family landed in Canada 22 years ago. Christmas lights and the ambience of the season made our adjustment very cheerful, despite the challenges of the freezing weather and being new settlers.

However this is not the only reason we hold the Christmas season near and dear to us. Our association with this celebration goes far back into our childhood, when political correctness wasn’t a word we were familiar with.

My husband studied in a boarding school in Pakistan and spent his winter holidays at the home of his best friend Ahmed. Ahmed’s mother was Christian and celebrated her faith with gusto. On Dec 24 she would ask the boys to accompany her to church for midnight mass and Sohail remembers the beauty of the readings, the lilting music of the choir and of course the treats. Next day there would be visits and exchange of gifts and sometimes a tree because Christmas trees were hard to find in the boons of Rawalpindi. All this happened as naturally as celebrating Muslim festivals of Eid in the same house.

Similarly, I grew up in Pakistan studying in convent schools which were administered by Catholic nuns mostly from Ireland and UK. Some of my best friends were Catholics from Goa. Christmas was an exciting time because there were new and different traditions to learn from, different food to taste and gifts to give. At the time we were growing up in Pakistan (the 1960’s and early 70’s) there was no restriction on Christmas celebrations and churches thrived. Being a curious young person I insisted on going to church with my friends and found the experience of prayer very heart warming. It helped that we had learned the Lord’s Prayer in school and know it by heart. I still remember helping my Christian friends make a nativity display and the persona of Mary has always fascinated me, doubly confirmed when I read the chapter on Mary in the Qur’an.

We knew then as we do now, that Jesus is revered as a Prophet in the Qur’an and mentioned by name more times than our own Prophet Mohammad. What we have learnt since then is that Jesus sets an example that we all need to learn from. We are told stories in the Qur’an of the virgin birth and of the miracles Jesus performed. So if Christmas is celebrated as the birth of this great messenger of God, then it’s incumbent on us to commemorate it as well.

Both my husband and I feel we should utilize these days to study the life of Jesus in more detail as he was a role model for humanity. His humility, compassion and healing are great lessons for us in this time of warfare and violence.

In our early years in Canada when my sons were small in school, Christmas was still a celebration and I clearly recall going to their school to join in carol singing. However, it saddens me to see how the sanctity of Christmas has either become too commercialised, or sidelined from the faith perspective due to political correctness and not being able to fully call Christmas what it is.

Today Canada is home to a multitude of faiths making this the most diverse mosaic in the world. But we must be mindful not put the celebrations of the host community on the back burner so that we can celebrate our own. I find it disturbing that some schools and institutions have taken the “merry” out of Christmas.

So I would like to take this opportunity to wish Canadians a very Merry Christmas.

When a government is not politically correct and multiculturalism is allowed to mature naturally with all its ups and downs, and not thrust down people’s throats or used as a political tool, people will just learn to get along.
Raheel Raza

Written by Raheel Raza on 17 October 2011 at 1pm
1 2 3 4 5

total rating of 3.25
1 1Email1ShareThis2

Print
Australian citizens modelling an Australian-flag hijab. Australian citizens modelling an Australian-flag hijab.

As I was leaving for my first visit to Australia last week, friends told me two things: one, Aussies aren’t particularly politically correct, and two, their English is funny. I noticed both characteristics right away.

A third characteristic which I liked, in many ways linked to the first, is that they say it as-it-is and are not afraid to criticize what they see as problematic in their society; conversations were frank and scintillating.

I was invited to Adelaide by AHISA (Association of Heads of Independent Schools of Australia), to address school principals from across the country about cultural diversity in schools – its strengths and challenges.

In my workshops I drew from my experience with Canadian schools where I find teachers are rather confused about how to deal with diversity because they’re getting mixed messages.

I’ll give you an example that many Brits will be familiar with too. In Canada, some schools are not allowed to make Christmas a school wide celebration while other faith festivals are fully highlighted. Similarly, the Lord’s Prayer has been nixed in public schools while other prayers are given special accommodation.

I was pleasantly surprised to hear that although instructed from the top down, many principals in Australia take independent decisions on how to deal with multi-ethnic, multi-faith issues.

Most of the schools are Catholic or Anglican and some principals said that they inform immigrant parents, as soon as they come for admission, about what to expect so that they’re not caught off guard by co-education, religious education and chapel.

Parents have a choice to accept the rules, or find another school. In some cases special accommodation is made but it’s up to individuals and accommodation is not a school-wide policy.

Despite the diversity of students, including aboriginal and immigrant populations, there were fewer problems than I’ve encountered in schools elsewhere and educators are much more pragmatic about dealing with issues. Crucially, they draw a distinct line between reasonable and unreasonable accommodation.

From Adelaide I flew to Sydney as a guest of Ida Lichter, a psychologist who is the author of a book titled ‘Muslim Women Reformers’. She arranged for me to speak at The Sydney Institute where the topic suggested was: Sharia – is it a reality in the West?

I was a bit nervous as this was a totally new audience for me. However, the audience was very well informed and open to a discussion of issues without PC.

I had explained the difference between sharia as a moral and ethical guideline and sharia as it’s become today in most Muslim societies; that is, a man-made law, and a tool for Islamists.

There was respectful dialogue and critique of imposition of religion in the public realm, accepting a 2-tier legal system or excessive accommodation in the name of religious freedom.

My Australian audience were also open to solutions and didn’t mind me giving them a bit of a wake-up call to be better informed about the difference between Islam and Islamism, to condemn racism and hatred unequivocally, to reject racist and violent politics of any group and to stand up for their liberty and freedom with respect and dignity.

In my mind, this attitude is prevalent ‘down-under’ because multiculturalism is not yet a top-down government policy, so Aussies are well aware of its insidious appeal as an excuse to push subversive agendas or to turn a blind eye to human rights abuse in the name of pluralism and cultural relativism.

The government also seems to be somewhat in sync with the strengths and challenges of diversity and open immigration policies. Australia faces challenges within its own indigenous aboriginal population and refugees, but they are open to suggestions and reform in their current policies.

My second presentation was the UUSC (Union, University & Schools Club of Sydney) where there was a mixed Christian-Jewish audience of lawyers, retired judges, business people and academics.

In my talk I touched upon the challenges faced by Muslim women activists especially lack of support from Western feminist groups. The Aussies actually got it!

I had hardly finished the Q & A, when a high profile businesswoman approached me and said “I`ve already enlisted other people here and we’ve decided that we are going to build you a mosque for women and you’re coming to the opening!”

No joke – this was serious stuff. Needless to say I was dumbfounded but it also showed me the tenacity of the Australians and that they mean business in wanting to bring about change.

They stayed after lunch, grouped in the club, and kept me talking till 9pm discussing issues of freedom, liberty and equality – something we are passionate about in Canada and elsewhere but often lacking the drive to do anything about it due to vested political agendas.

By end of day they had figured out which politicians to critique, who to lobby and what issues to keep on the front burner.

I also spent time there speaking with Muslims. There were some old friends who have lived in Sydney for some two decades and find it the best place on earth.

I engaged in enlightening conversation with a Muslim taxi driver from Pakistan. I prodded him to tell me tales of racism and discrimination which we hear in the media but none were forthcoming. He touched upon the Cronulla riots as a one-off incident which was hugely hyped, but said that largely Australians believe in live and let live.

He said “if we are honest and forthcoming with them and respect them, then they respect us. I’ve been here 17 years and never had a problem. But there are areas of Sydney where Muslims don’t mix and want their own set of laws, so obviously there is resistance to this kind of ghettoization and I too am against it”.

It`s thought provoking to realise that when a government is not politically correct and multiculturalism is allowed to mature naturally with all its ups and downs, and not thrust down people’s throats or used as a political tool, people will just learn to get along.

Perhaps it’s time we tried this approach in the Northern Hemisphere.

Raheel Raza is the author of ‘Their Jihad – Not My Jihad’. You can visit her website at www.raheelraza.com

A progressive Muslim is one who is firmly grounded in the Qur’anic values of truth (haq), justice (`adl), compassion (rahmah), wisdom (hikmah) and does service to others rather than being served by others. A progressive Muslim does not believe in sectarian Islam (sunni or shi’ah or Isma’ili or Deobandi or Barelvi or ahl-e-hadith or salafi Islam but rises above all these sects and gives importance to Qur’an above everything else.

A progressive Islam not only does not adopt sectarian approach but is respectful of entire humanity and human dignity as per Qur’an (17:70). He leaves mutual differences, ideological and theological to Allah alone and does not condemn anyone who differences from him/her as kafirs as often sectarian Muslims do. It only widens differences and intensifies conflict. A progressive Muslim uses, as per Qur’an, wisdom (hikmah) and goodly words (maw’izat al-Hasanah) in discussion and leaves rest to Allah. He does not try to be judgemental.

A progressive Muslim is least influenced by personal prejudices and always gives more importance to knowledge than his opinion. Qur’an condemns prejudiced opinion (zan) and promotes knowledge (`ilm). Also, openness of mind is a seminal quality and avoids arrogance born more out of ignorance than knowledge. Those who have little knowledge are more arrogant and those who have greater degree of knowledge know limitations of their own knowledge and hence tend to be humble.

A progressive Muslim first of all studies his/her own religion in depth and tries to understand, as objectively as possible, the causes of differences between different religions and shows full respect for others beliefs. It is those who do not know their own religion, much less those of others, who condemn religion of others. The Qur’an says, “And abuse not those whom they call upon besides Allah lest, exceeding the limits they abuse Allah through ignorance.” (6:109). Further in this verse Allah says, “Thus to everyone people have We made their deeds fair-seeming; then to their Lord is their return so He will inform them of what they did.” Thus ultimately it is Allah who will judge. We human beings when we judge, we judge more out of ignorance and arrogance of our ego than knowledge and selflessness.

The key words in this verse are that for every people We made their deeds fair-seeming to them. Then who are we human beings to condemn others beliefs and deeds. Let then Allah alone to judge who is right and who is wrong.

Also a progressive Muslim celebrates diversity as diversity is creation of Allah and if Allah desired He could have made entire humanity one community. (5:48). The Qur’an also says, “And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the diversity of your tongues and colours. Surely there are signs in this for the learned.” Thus a progressive Muslim will never have any prejudice against any language or colour of skin or any colour for that matter as these are all creations of Allah.

Also, both men and women are creation of Allah and both need to be treated with same degree of dignity. Allah has created all species in couples and it is necessary for survival of all species. No species will survive unless it is created in couples. Thus feminine of the couple is as important as masculine and in human beings both gender must be treated equally. Moreover gender is social and cultural construct. Whereas sex is natural gender is social and cultural.

A progressive Muslim knows this very well and treats both men and women with equal dignity and believes in giving equal rights to both. And in today’s context gender equality becomes a crucial test for a progressive Muslim. Female servitude was purely feudal cultural creation and Islam opposed it and pronounced the doctrine of gender equality in clear terms (2:228) A progressive Muslim knows that certain Shari’ah provisions establishing male superiority were in response to cultural needs of a patriarchal society than based on Qur’an and hadith.

Thus a progressive Muslim will give more importance to Qur’anic pronouncements of gender equality than feudal female servitude and would not consider these [provisions of Shari’ah laws as eternal and unalterable. A progressive Muslim, therefore, would reconstruct Shari’ah laws in this respect and accord equal rights to women who are also believers. One believer cannot be superior to another believer. Male superiority is a human construct and human construct cannot override divine injunction. Also, functional differences i.e. bearing children should not result in distinction of superior and inferior.

A progressive Muslim would accord seeking knowledge highest priority as knowledge has been equated with light (nor) and ignorance to darkness (zulmat) and Allah brings out believers from darkness to light. And the Prophet (PBUH) has said that a moment’s reflection is more important than whole nights worship (`ibadat). Thus knowledge has priority over worship.

Thus these are the characteristics of a progressive Muslim and those who imbibe these characteristics would survive all the challenges of all the times and would not face any difficulty in keeping pace with the changing times.

Centre for Study of Society and Secularism

Mumbai

My faith is reflected in a Prophetic statement by Mohammad who said “seek knowledge even if you have to go to China.” He could have said go to China and convert the Chinese or go to China and establish Friday prayer in schools. But he stressed knowledge as the essence of faith – without knowledge faith is just dogma.
Let me add that under Canada’s charter of rights, all of us are free to practice our faiths however we wish in the private sphere of lives and in our places of worship. Within the four walls of our temples, churches, synagogues and mosques, we respect and value the norms of that place of worship – hence we have freedom of religion at its best. However if our religious practices create a nuisance value and impinge on anyone else’s freedom or rights, then it’s problematic.
We stand at a crossroads today where the public and private spheres of our lives have collided. You may wonder why as a Muslim woman I’m totally opposed to the idea of prayer in public schools – any prayer in public school. There are many reasons for this: moral, social, ethical, and religious. Allow me to elaborate.
Firstly, most of us came to this country well aware that Canada is a secular country where the majority is still Christian thank you but there is separation of church and state which we should respect without forcing our religious ideologies on Canadian institutions.
However its interesting to learn that education in Ontario, both public and private, had a religious dimension from the time this country was established with its Christian roots.
As diversity and pluralism grew in Canada, religion in public schools was withdrawn. In 1988 The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled that the use of the Lord’s Prayer in opening exercises in public schools offended the Charter as it was not inclusive.
So the Lord’s prayer was taken out of public schools because it quote “actually stigmatized children and coerced them into a religious observance which was offensive to them” and Canadians upheld the decision.
There are still enough private religious schools for those who feel strongly about having faith based education. Today there are almost 700 private schools in Ontario including religious schools, but it’s extremely important to see that public schools remain dedicated to secular education and equal treatment for all which is what we came to Canada to celebrate. Hosting congregational prayers for one faith community clearly discriminates against others.
From the religious perspective of my own faith, let me share that there is a spiritual dimension of Islam that is tolerant, peaceful, inclusive and not in your face. This is the traditional, moderate, spiritual message of the faith followed by the majority including me. My family left Pakistan because religion was being thrust down our throats, when the Quran clearly says clearly 2:256 there is no compulsion in religion.
Opposed to this is the political manifestation of Islam which we call Islamism or radical Islam. Islamism is an armed political ideology similar to Fascism and engaged in a worldwide effort to subvert democracies and expand the space for the implementation of its ideology, the Shariah. Radical Islam derives from Islam but is an anti-modern, misanthropic, misogynist, anti-Christian, anti-Semitic, triumphalist, jihadist, terroristic, and aggressive.
In the past 15 years we have seen the rise of this Saudi funded global threat which aims to slowly entrench itself into the Canadian system through its institutions. Don’t just take my word for this – there is ample proof that this ideology does exist and there are organizations here in Canada who are not interested in the larger good of this country, loyalty to the land or living harmoniously with each other. Just one example is the fact that a member of the Canadian Arab Federation said FU Canada on Canada day and the head of the Canadian Islamic Congress said on public TV that Israeli women and children are justifiable to be killed. The website of MAC openly endorses the Muslim Brotherhood.
Have no doubts that these are the same people who are pushing the envelope for establishment of their ideology in Canadian institutions – first there was sharia by stealth, then the push to pass off niqab as a religious requirement and now congregational prayers in school. If religious communities are dogmatically adamant about implementing their faith in public then they should perhaps listen the advise of the Australian PM who clearly said that immigrants should consider moving to countries where religion is imposed in the public sphere and where sharia might work.
From a social perspective, if institutionalised worship is inculcated in high schools, these same students will join the MSA as soon as they reach University and MSA’s are fast becoming a hotbed for the rise of radical jihadists indulging in anti-Semitism as though it was part of the curriculum. The message is not one of inclusivity or pluralism but the opposite.
Today these Islamists are a minority but if we don’t expose them, they will become the majority and let me assure you they WILL work at diminishing the distance between church and state, between private and public while the meaning of freedom and liberty will no longer be the same.
I’m surprised that the TDSB has become party to such an agenda when it’s very clear that there should be no indoctrination in education. The policy clearly indicates that
a school may sponsor the study of religion, but may not sponsor the practice of religion.
Let’s take a minute to study the policies of the TDSB – Guidelines and procedures for the accommodation of religious requirements, practices and observances.
“The public school system acknowledges freedom of religion under the charter”
Prayer is school is already legal. Thousands of students are already praying on a voluntary basis (in a non-disruptive way) so formal school prayer is unnecessary. Both my boys went to public school in Toronto and prayed or fasted as their OWN responsibility – as a parent there was never an expectation or demand on the school should accommodate them because it would have made them stand out as a special case which they are not.
Essentially this debate is not about the prayer itself but how and where its performed and more importantly the intent of the people pushing this agenda.
The TDSB guidelines go on to say
“and protection from discrimination and harassment based on religion that is part of the Ontario human rights code.”
From a perspective of human rights and equality, when girls are being made to stand at the back of the room and more importantly their private personal female condition which is no one else’s business but their’s, is exhibited to everyone – what else do you call discrimination and harassment? As a Muslim woman its not only offensive but downright dehumanizing to treat young girls in the way they were at Valley Park. It will confuse them into thinking they are lesser human beings as they grow up, and what message does this give to the larger student body?
Furthermore let me share with you what happens when religious dogma trumps freedoms – in SA few years ago there was a fire in a girls school and some girls were not allowed to escape because their heads were not covered, so they perished in the fire. We call this gender apartheid and there is no place in Canada for such blatant inequality.

Today there is an even bigger ethical and moral dilemma. The board document under the LIMITATIONS TO RELIGIOUS ACCOMODATION says “the board will limit practices or conducts in its schools which may put public safety, health or the human rights and freedoms of others at risk”
It seems that the TDSB doesn’t see how some students are coerced into such gatherings. Coerced they are because let me remind you that there are many denominations among Muslims, some who pray in different ways than others. When a mainstream denomination dominates the prayer room, what happens to the minorities? Also what happens to those who wish to abstain? The psychological pressure, the peer pressure, fear of being ostracised will force them into the space and then be humiliated because of their gender or a different way of praying.
One of the court warnings against having prayers in public school is that School prayer may lead to intolerance. Public prayer will highlight religious differences of which students may have been unaware. Since no school prayer honours the tenets of all religions, it makes sense to keep all prayers out of public schools.
TDSb should not tow the policies of the Islamists but should follow Canadian guidelines in separating church and state and by keeping all prayers out of school. This is the only way Canada will be strong and free.

Asghar Ali Engineer

(Islam and Modern Age, August 2011)

When Islam emerged on the scene in early seventh century, Arabs were divided among different tribes but nevertheless spoke one language Arabic and more or less followed one religion (though had different traditions) i.e. worshipping different idols placed inside Ka’ba and some idols which were outside Mecca. Thus we cannot call that society a pluralist society. Of course there were Jews in Madina and Christians in some parts of Arabian Peninsula. So in that way it was a multi-religious society to an extent as Christians and Jews were in small minorities.

We do not know about any religious conflict between pagan-Arabs and Jews and Christians. Though Judaism and Christianity were organized religions and Arabs had none, pagan Arabs were wary of accepting these religions for fear of political consequences. They thought Christianity is official religion of Roman Empire and converting to it may subjugate them to Roman Empire and they may lose their independence. Also, some Arabs in the border area who embraced Christianity were far from happy and they faced persecution from Roman Empire. Later they embraced Islam as mainly religion of the Arabs.

Despite all this Qur’an did not reject religious pluralism. It not only accepted religious but also linguistic and ethnic pluralism as well. There are verses in the Qur’an to this effect two of which I would like to quote here:

1) “For every one of you we appointed a law and a way. And if Allah had pleased He would have made you a single people, but that He might try you in what He gave you. So vie one with another in virtuous deeds. To Allah you will all return, so He will inform you of that wherein you differed…(5:48)

2) And of His signs is the creation of the heavens and the earth and the diversity of your tongues and colours (ethnic diversity). Surely there are signs in this for the learned. (30:22).

Both the verses quoted above not only accepted diversity of religions, languages and ethnicities but describe them as sign of Allah. Thus Allah has created pluralism and it must be respected. If Allah so desired He could have created all of us one people with one religion, one tongue and one colour. But Allah did not do so and instead created diversity of every kind and made it a test for us whether we can live in harmony despite these diversities and, instead of making it a source of conflict, as it often happens, we should make it a source of excelling each other in good deeds.

The Arabs were very proud of their language and ethnic origin and hence Qur’an emphasized that there is no need for taking pride in ones language and Arabness as Allah has created other languages and ethnic groups and all need to be respected as none is superior to the other and all are Allah’s creation and Allah’s signs.

Thus believers were taught to respect other faiths, languages and ethnicities what could be described as most contemporary or modern attitude. Qur’an also told believers not to abuse others gods lest they should abuse Allah without knowledge. The Qur’an went one step further and maintained that to every people their own faith appears to be fair and good and so one should see others faith in their perspective and not ones own faith perspective. (See later part of 30:22)

But in this world people don’t behave according to their scriptures, be they Muslims or people of other faiths. They behave more according to their own interests and benefits. The Arabs continued to feel superior over non-Arabs including non-Arab Muslims. It always remained a challenge to unite Arab and non-Arab Muslims. Arabs looked down upon Muslims of inferior variety and considered Arabs as better Muslims.

Islam appeared among Arabs but soon spread too many parts of the world and various local cultures and traditions of non-Arab societies began to reflect in local Muslim communities. Thus Islam did not remain monolithic as many theologians continued to assert. When local cultures became integral part of various local Muslim communities and thus now instead of Islam there were Islams with differing practices.

Theologically and legally too Islam split into several different sects and legal schools. Political splits also acquired theological hues. To begin with succession to the Prophet (PBUH) was a political question but soon it became theological and Shi’ah Islam acquired its own separate theology and Sunni Islam its own. Both became irreconcilable and ethnically too they were embraced by different ethnic groups.

Though there are several Arab countries like Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, Lebanon and Bahrain having Shi’ah population either in majority or minority, Shi’ah Islam was mainly embraced by Iranians, a non-Arab Persian speaking people who had sense of superior culture and civilization heritage. Similarly different tribes in Central Asia embraced Islam with their own customs and traditions which remain their hallmark.

Islam thus became bewilderingly diverse internally. In Africa Hausa Islam is so radically different from ‘mainstream’ Arab Islam that many Muslims would not even recognize them as Muslims. Hausa Muslims were depicted during festival of Islam celebrations in late seventies, some Pakistanis watching the Hausa Islam exhibition remarked how these people can be described as Muslims?

Ethnic and tribal prejudices come into play in all such matters. Nevertheless all of them feel they are true Muslims. Then there are among Shi’ah and Sunni Islam several different sects with substantially differing theologies. In Lebanon we have Druze Muslims and Ismaili Muslims who considerably differ from ‘mainstream’ Shi’ah Islam. Among Ismailis there are Agakhanis and Bohras who differ from each other considerably in theological issues.

In fact if we see Baghdadi’s book Al-Farq bayn al-Firaq in first century of Islam he counts more than 100 different sects all claiming to be representing ‘true Islam’. While many sects came into existence due to political differences, some came into existence due to theological differences too. If one goes by Qur’anic pluralism one must accept both internal pluralism as well as external pluralism i.e. coexistence between Islam and non-Islamic religions.

However, let alone coexistence between Islam and other religions, there have been serious conflict between different sects of Islam. Today Sunni terrorists are continuously attacking and killing Shi’ah Muslims in Pakistan, Iraq and elsewhere. Similarly there is serious conflict in Indian sub-continent between Wahabis and Barelvis. Also Ahmadiyas are denounced as non-believers. In fact each sect condemns the other as non-believer (kafir). The word kafir is used quite irresponsibly.

Perhaps a Muslim can co-exist more peacefully with non-Muslims than with Muslims of other sects. Justice Munir who inquired into anti-Qadiyani riots in Punjab in Pakistan in early fifties writes in his report that he examined all leading theologians of Muslims in Pakistan but no two of them agreed on definition of a Muslim and yet all of them agreed one who is not a Muslim should be killed.

Thus despite Quranic doctrine of religious and cultural pluralism, in practice, Muslim theologians have not accepted it in practice. In one conference in Iran on pluralism one of the leading Ayatollah said that Islam cannot accept pluralism as it means all religions are equally valid. This cannot be accepted. I stood up and said sir, this is not Qur’anic approach. And one realizes importance of pluralism only when one lives in minority. The Ayatollah then said I do not mean that pluralism should not be accepted but that equal validity of all religions cannot be accepted. I said for this Qur’an clearly says in 5:48 that it is Allah who will decide, not human beings like us. We human beings should only try to excel each other in virtuous deeds instead of judging who is right and who is wrong.

While theologians challenge each other and create conflictual situations, the Sufis, especially of wahdat al-wujud (Unity of Being) philosophy accept religious and cultural pluralism as according to their philosophy Allah is manifest in every human being and everything. Thus they have no problem with equal validity of all religions. Also, they accepted local languages and local traditions without any hesitation.
While theologians always strived for ‘Islamic purity’ Sufis gave great importance to cultural assimilation. That is why Muslim masses had great respect for Sufi saints and flocked to them and to their tombs after their death and hardly even knew much about theologians, let alone flocking to them or their tombs. Sufi Islam has tremendous popularity even today as, through cultural assimilation, they won the hearts of local masses.

It is also important to note that pluralism and diversity enriches our life and its absence makes our language and culture quite colorless. When a religion is followed by millions and peoples of various cultures, languages, customs and traditions, its understanding and interpretation cannot remain monolithic. Had Islam remained confined to Arabia, perhaps it could have remained monolithic but after it spread in different parts of the world it embraced local philosophies and different traditions. Needless to say different cultural traditions greatly influence our understanding of religion which has originated elsewhere.

Arabia had no rich philosophical and cultural traditions before Islam. There were no written traditions either. Like in tribal culture emphasis was on oral rather than written traditions. Qur’an was the first written text and its language, spirituality and philosophical depth was unique. Its simple but profound spirituality and philosophical depth was nothing short of miracle that too from someone who could not read and write.

However, Arabs due to their monolithic and simple folk traditions, could not fully appreciate philosophical and spiritual richness of Qur’an. It was understood more linguistically than philosophically and spiritually. However, when it spread to other civilizations like those of Iran and India, it began to acquire richness, complexity and profundity. But it came at a cost i.e. diversity.

Also, Islam had become universal religion for Arabs right in the first decade after the death of the Prophet (PBUH). And by the end of first century hijrah it had spread to large parts of Asia and Africa and some parts of Europe. In these countries it was not only internal diversity that it had to cope also with external diversity i.e. it had to co-exist with other religious traditions. Thus now Islam had to face challenge from within and challenge from without.

Challenge from within was no small challenge and now challenge from without made things more complex. And it was not mere coexistence but also with competition for power. And from unique historical situation in Arabia theologians developed a doctrine that in Islam religion and political power go hand in hand. In fact this doctrine cannot be supported from any Qur’anic text but it was result of total power vacuum in Arabia. When Islam became universal religion Muslims also became rulers there being no ruling monarchy or any other form of political power before Islam.

Now equipped with this theological doctrine Muslims began to aspire for political power and came into clash with the Christian rulers in several countries which were under Roman Empire or non-Christian power of Persia. This clash of political power also was seen as clash of religions. In fact Qur’anic teachings have no place for clash of religions. The two great religious traditions in the area i.e. Judaism and Christianity were accepted as religions brought by Allah’s Prophets and Muslims were allowed to marry women of the people of the book i.e. Jews and Christians. This also shows clearly that there was no clash of religions at all and Qur’an had accepted religious pluralism.

It is also well-known fact of history that Islamic regimes never persecuted Jews and Christians and many Jews and Christians held high administrative offices under Abbasid, Fatimid and other Islamic empires. But elsewhere competition for power also brought about clashes. Especially with Christians. With Jews there were no such clashes as Jews had no political empire of their own.

Jews enjoyed full religious freedom throughout the Middle East and coexisted in peace until 1948 when Israel was created in Palestine area. This itself shows clash with Jews is not religious in nature but political. Palestine issue has become a sore point in modern Islamic history. The USA-Arab relation does not have a different story. What has been called clash of civilization by US Harward scholar Prof. Huntington is not clash of civilization but it is clash of interests.

Muslims do not hate USA but resent its unqualified support to Israel and suppressing the rights of Palestinians, throwing them out of their homes and hearths and continues to do that. Thus it is not, as media projects, fight between Christianity and Islam but a fight between oppressors and oppressed. US also has selective approach towards Arabs. Wherever it has installed or supports monarchs, dictators and sheikhs, considers them friends and has best of relations with Saudis, Kuwait, Qatar and other Gulf regimes. Interestingly among dictators also it hates those who do not fall in US lines like Saddam Husain, Asad of Syria. It is also at odds with Iranian regime but until yesterday it had very friendly relations with Shah.

It is not religious pluralism which is a problem, it is clash of interests which at times, but not always, which results from religious pluralism which becomes a problem. Thus problem of religious pluralism has to be understood in its proper perspective. Also, with changing situation nature of religious pluralism changes. Today there seems to be great solidarity between Western Christians and Jews. In medieval ages Jews were hated and there were pogroms against them. And Hitler in Christian Germany killed them in millions. Today entire west stands by not Jews but Zionists in suppressing Palestinians. Thus perception of problem of plurality changes with change in situation.

There are no permanent friends and permanent enemies. Power has its own logic. Obama who had extended his hand of friendship towards world of Islam and Muslims welcomes his election to the August post of President of USA, is changing his plan of action towards Islamic world and his hand of friendship seems to be in withdrawal mode.

Religious pluralism by itself is most enriching and must be consolidated. No part of the globalized world can ever be mono-religious or mono-cultural. At one time America took pride in its melting pot model of identity as all those who came to America were protestant Christians from Europe (most of whom were victims of religious persecution at the hands of Catholic Church). This model remained valid only when migrants were Protestant Christians came from Europe.

However, it is no more so. In post World War II migrants began to come from post-colonial countries of Asia and Africa and they refused to merge their identities with those of Americans and melting pot became irrelevant and has been replaced by mosaic model and all migrants from non-European countries and non-Christians describe themselves with their original identities i.e. African American, Arab Americans, Indian Americans and so on.

Mosaic model is much closer to the spirit of pluralism. Thus problems of pluralism can be resolved only in democratic spirit and justice to all religious groups coexisting together. This in today’s world democracy, diversity and dialogue become extremely crucial for peaceful coexistence. But regrettably even in 21st century our world is bereft of these ideals and values.
————————————–

Institute of Islamic Studies

Mumbai.

e-mail: csss@mtnl.net.in

I sent out a survey to all of my Pakistani friends and family only to realise that many of them have also been recipients of this unwanted service. Most of them like us have told the callers they are not interested, already know Quran, have no children living at home but the calls come anyway. I did a bit of questioning with one of the callers only to find that they are based in Pakistan and operate under many names, most prominent being Quran academy.

Our local service suppliers can’t do anything because these calls come as unknown phone numbers and are based out of Canada. However we have tried to delist our number and are waiting to see what happens.

Usually we have learnt to ignore telemarketers regardless of what they sell. But this is different. We’re not speaking here of selling life insurance or home products but a specific faith. Many questions emerge i.e. how do they know who to call and how to they deal with it when they reach non-Muslims because after all Muslims are still only 1% of the Canadian population?

The second question was answered in a shocking manner last week when I received perhaps the 500th call of the year. The caller (usually a male) starts by saying Salaam Alaikum Aunty or Baji depending on the sound of the recipient’s voice. I had answered the telephone hearing a long distance ring and thinking it might be my family from Pakistan. When I realised it was the Quran thumpers, I said “who are you? Why are you calling here and how did you get my number?” Imagine my shock when I heard abuse and obscenities from the other side mingled with laughter. And I don’t mean mild ones. This is what you call in Pakistan maan bahen ki galian which no respectable person should use or hear. I hung up the phone in disbelief and then the anger set in.

Anger at their aggression and attitude. These are people who want to teach us and our children Quran? I found out after speaking to others that the abuse is habitual. This is an outrage to our sensibilities and our faith.

Since they are based in Pakistan, can someone or the Pakistan government for the sake of our sanity and our faith please find out who these people are and ask them to stop making a mockery and business out of the Qur’an?

You see what is happening is that they are becoming a nuisance factor. If and when a non-Muslim finds out and says something, there will be cries of “Islamophobia” and accusations about Western conspiracies. What about the muck and dirt that is coming from our own people?

I’m so ashamed that I can’t even speak to anyone outside my community about this shameful state of affairs so I am writing to you.

Please make this public and put a stop to it. Thank you.

The Islamic holy month of Ramadan has arrived – a time for religious commitment, penance, reflection, service to our communities, and joy among all Muslims. During the holy month, Qur’an was revealed to our beloved prophet, Muhammad sallallahualeyhisalaam.

During Ramadan, Muslims will fast during the daylight hours, dedicate our time to prayer, and break the fast at sundown with dates and water, the beginning of the iftar observances that include prayer and a special dinner, preferably held collectively. Iftar meals may be served in mosques, public facilities, or at home.

As Sunni Muslims, we will pray Tarawih and read a section of Qur’an each night of the holy month, while Shias will offer tahajjud as additional nocturnal prayers. The transmission of the divine message will be celebrated in particular on Laylat ul-Qadr, “the Night of Power,” commemorating the moment when it was first delivered to Muhammad.

Having become Muslim in 1997, I have fasted Ramadan 14 times. As with many Muslims, the most difficult aspect of the daytime fast for me is abstinence from drinking water. But I had fasted frequently before becoming Muslim, and have not found it to be an excessive burden.

Ramadan is more fulfilling as a pillar of Islam, in my experience, in a Muslim-majority city like Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia-Hercegovina, where I became Muslim. This should be logical; in a Muslim community, the spirit of Ramadan is felt among all residents, and mosques and restaurants offer food to the public.

During the Bosnian War of 1992-95, the Army of the Republic of Bosnia-Hercegovina (ARBH) did not employ jihadist vocabulary, because the government that commanded it and the combatants serving in it were fighting for the right to live in peace with their non-Muslim neighbors and fellow-citizens. But ARBH soldiers sang songs with a religious content, and one famous melody, the Martyr’s Ballad, included a chorus that said:

“Only let me once again

At the gates of heaven

On the wings of the call to prayer

Smell the scent of Ramadan

Coming from our marketplaces.”

It should be noted here that the Bosnian Muslim combatant did not look with excitement towards his arrival in heaven and rewards for martyrdom, but was conscious of the felicities of the life he experienced in the real world in which he was born. He was attached to life, not death.

Ramadan in this Islamic hijri year 1432 comes to us amid troubles for the whole world, and not simply the Muslims. The developed economies are undergoing a deep social and political crisis. Our ummah continues to be afflicted with the internal illnesses of radicalism, whether in the form emanating from the Iranian regime or the extremist Wahhabi doctrine originating in Saudi Arabia and continually spreading across the Muslim lands and Muslim congregations in non-Muslim countries. In Libya, Muslims inspired by their people’s history of Sufi spirituality and resistance to oppression are struggling to rid themselves of a cruel dictator. The Syrian stalemate continues, between the minority, sectarian regime of Bashar al-Assad and the majority of his subjects, who risk their lives to protest against injustice.

But our penance as Muslims is not limited to our own acts. As the Western month of July approached its end, the people of Norway learned in the most tragic and dreadful manner that Islamophobia is real, and is not simply a pretext invented by radical Muslims to avoid debate about Islam. They also learned that Muslims may not be the only victims of Islamophobic rage. In an act of unspeakable cruelty, the author of a 1,500-page polemic against Muslim immigration in Europe bombed the center of Norway’s government in Oslo and then journeyed to a summer youth camp run by the Norwegian Labor Party, where he murdered 69 young people. The total of victims surpasses, as I write these words, 77 killed.

I find to my undiluted horror and disgust that the author of the atrocity in Norway, a certain Anders Behring Breivik, had even copied a reportage of mine on exaggerated radical Islamist claims of discrimination in Europe, written in 2005, in his screed. At the same time, however, the anti-Muslim terrorist filled his diatribe with false charges against the Muslims of Bosnia-Hercegovina and the Albanian Muslims of Kosovo, based on the most disreputable elements of Serbian propaganda. Anybody who reads my books and articles knows that I defend moderate, traditional, and spiritual Islam against radical ideology, and that I was active in supporting the Bosnian Muslims and the Albanians, both Muslim and non-Muslim, against Serbian aggression, before the rest of the world was forced to pay attention to the bloodshed, rape, vandalism, and other crimes visited on these peoples by the Belgrade terrorists.

Nevertheless, I pray to Allah subhanawata’la, now and in the fasting month of Ramadan, for mercy in the face of the abuse of my writing by such a diabolical figure as the Norwegian mass-murderer. I further ask forgiveness from the martyred people of Norway, a people I know and admire, for the inclusion of my work in the hateful writings of the killer. This is not the first time that criticism of Wahhabism by me and other Muslims – the great majority of who, across the world, repudiate Islamist ideology – has been misused by Islamophobes. The abominable manipulation of our criticism of radical Islam to the detriment of all Muslims – and, as we see in Norway, to the endangerment of the security of non-Muslims as well – cannot be laid against us.

Our candid statements about the internal contradictions within the Islamic ummah do not make us Islamophobes, any more than the principled opposition by leftist oppositionists, democratic socialists and liberals to the Stalin dictatorship made the antifascist foes of Soviet imperialism allies of Hitler. We are not Islamophobes or complicit with them. We love Islam, our Prophet, and our traditions, and we seek their betterment. We will defend our religion and our fellow-Muslims, as well as our non-Muslim neighbors, against Islamophobic as well as radical Islamist violence. But we also recognize, and declare openly, that Islamist radicalism supports the evils of Islamophobia much more than a criticism of Muslim extremism from within the ummah could ever do. The Islamophobes and the Muslim radicals, whether the latter carry the banner of Ahmadinejad or of al-Qaida, of the Taliban or the Jama’at-e-Islami in South Asia, of the Muslim Brotherhood or of the hard-core Wahhabis who masquerade as “Salafis”, need one another. The Islamophobes agree with the Islamist agitators in defining “real” Islam as violent and exclusionary.

This should surprise nobody; each form of extremism mirrors and appears to justify the existence of its supposed enemy. Without Islamophobia, and the violence of Islam-haters from the Balkans in the 1990s, where many non-Muslims were killed for refusing the join the Serbian “crusade,” to Norway today, extremist Islamists would have sparse evidence for their claims that Islam is under global attack. Without Muslim radicals, Islam-haters would gain no audience for their spurious arguments that the faith of Muhammad itself, stripped of history or nuance, is a threat to humanity.

With the arrival of the holy month of fasting, we will refrain from eating, drinking, smoking, and sexual relations during the daylight hours, and we will celebrate our common faith with the commencement of iftar. Heavier responsibilities lie upon us now, as we assume an even greater burden than in the past. During the past two decades, the believers in Islam have been tested repeatedly, by our enemies – such as the Russians in Chechnya and the Serbs in the Balkans – as well as by our alleged champions – the protagonists of the false “jihad” of the fanatics. In some countries, we have shown a good example – I think specifically of the Balkan lands, India, Indonesia, and the immigrant Muslim communities of France and Germany. Elsewhere, our fellow-believers have been led astray by heedless and conscience-less agitators just as our non-Muslim neighbors have been seduced by the acolytes of fear and panic.

In fasting, we are reminded of the sacrifices of the poor and the call to all Muslims to acts of charity and penitence. In breaking our fast, and praying, we are provided with evidence of Allah’s grace and the rewards he has promised us in this life and in the hereafter. Yet as the aqida of imam Tahawi reminds us, “Certainty and despair both remove one from the religion, but the path of truth for the People of the Qibla lies between the two.”

In the holy month of Ramadan, let us all pray for our improvement, the security of ourselves and our neighbors, and for guidance on the straight path.

May all who read this experience a generous and blessed Ramadan! Ramadan karim, Ramadan mubarak!