Part of a lecture from Sheikh Saalih Al-Maghams, Imam of Masjid Quba in Medina.

Translated by youtube user “beautifulpatience”
Embedded from youtube user Allibadah2Allah

It is also under this same premise that calls of ‘religious privatization’ are taking hold. Since nothing meaningful in society is permitted religious influence, why should we permit religious displays in the public square, particularly when they appear as ostensibly medieval and oppressive as the niqab? How should we respond to a contingent whose very presence makes us feel threatened?

As Muslims, the very claim that Islam can remain a solely private affair is antithetical to the basic dictates of our beliefs and runs counter to an even casual glance at the history of our ummah. And though that may sound extreme at first glance, almost every religion has adopted public practices and symbols that embody the ethos of their belief systems, even if they aren’t hard and fast requirements. Practicing Jews often don yarmulkes, Christian monks and nuns dress distinctively, Buddhists adopting monastic lifestyles wear robes endemic to their religion, and Hindu women are commonly seen wearing tilaka’s on their foreheads, a tradition unique to their own religion. It is even arguable that non-religionists conform to some standard of dress and manifest their own beliefs publicly; people’s clothing are often reflective of their favorite music genre, sports team, or job. When people speak, their vernacular reflects the TV shows they watch, or the books they read, or the people they surround themselves with. As John Donne famously wrote, “no man is an island, entirely of itself.”

Therefore, what we are really saying is that anything and everything is allowed to inform the way a person dresses and acts publicly save religion, particularly when the religion is viewed as a foreign entity. We don’t mind religions so long as they coincide with our pre-conceived narratives of what religion is ‘supposed to be like.’ We inhibit that publicly which we decry as eccentric, while at the same time criticizing the eccentricity for its ability to inhibit public life for its adherents, even though we are the inhibiting factor. And perhaps most tragically, we refuse to acknowledge beauty, coexistence, and religion when it doesn’t look like the beauty, coexistence, and religion we wanted. And for that reason, we should be ashamed.

And Allah Knows Best.

So easy that the wonder goes out of work, so efficient that the wonder goes out of land and the working of it, and with the wonder the deep understanding and the relation. And in the tractor man there grows the contempt that comes only to a stranger who has little understanding and no relation. For nitrates are not the land, nor phosphates; and the length of fiber in the cotton is not the land. Carbon is not a man, nor salt nor water nor calcium. He is all these, but he is much more, much more; and the land is so much more than its analysis.

The man who is more than his chemistry, walking on the earth, turning his plow point for a stone, dropping his handles to slide over an outcropping, kneeling in the earth to eat his lunch; that man who is more than his elements knows the land that is more than its analysis. But the machine man, driving a dead tractor on land he does not know and love, understands only chemistry; and he is contemptuous of the land and of himself. When the corrugated iron doors are shut, he goes home, and his home is not the land.   -John Steinbeck, The Grapes of Wrath

But beyond that, I was reminded of an incident between myself and an acquaintance in the not-too-distant past. The brother, a friend, and I were discussing a lecture he had recently attended; it was one that I wanted to attend myself, but the lecture was at a university in DC, and commuting to DC during rush hour on a weekday is something I actively avoid. In the course of our discussion, the brother launched into a somewhat extensive diatribe concerning what appeared to be a fairly indistinctive point the lecturer had made during a tangent. The brother ledged the bulk of his criticism on this one tangent, using it as a foundation to undermine the speakers reliability, manhaj (ideological persuasion), and at times, even his Islam. It would be unfair for me to say that the brother made anything close to takfeer (apostasy-claims) of the speaker, but he made it quite evident that the ‘Islam’ the speaker was following was what’s wrong with the ummah.

To characterize the indignation on display as an overreaction is an understatement. But to claim it to be indicative of a larger culture, one that thrives on sanctimonious condemnation, would be, by all accounts, accurate.

The politics surrounding situations have become as central to modern news as the stories themselves. We not only care about an impending snowstorm, but why the local city legislature hasn’t invested more into snow removal services. We read articles and hone in on solitary sentences, de-contextualize them, and publicize why the said sentence is so incredibly offensive. We are, in short, a society given to impetuousness, and we demand that every article, news story, lecture, khutbah, Islamic Studies class, and youtube video satisfy our personal standards of appropriateness/correctness. When they don’t, we cry foul.

This behavior is on full display in the comments sections of any heavily visited blog, forum, or news story/article. It is also on display whenever groups of Muslims feel the need to insistently ‘convince’ people on a fairly controversial religious position as being the only acceptable position on earth. As Martin Luther King Jr. once said, we need to learn to disagree with one another without becoming violently disagreeable.

The dangers of anger are many, and indignation more often than not cultivates in the heart a sense of resentment- and that is truly a dangerous disease. I’m not arguing that we need to agree with every khutbah we hear or love every lecture we attend. To the contrary, I find even within myself the propensity to evaluate messages khateebs/lecturers deliver. I’m merely arguing that our standards of offensiveness have become far too sensitive, and that rather than constantly focusing our attention on a misplaced or ‘inartful’ statement, we need to spend more times focusing on our hearts.

As a final note, this is as much a reminder for myself as it is for anyone reading this article. As the saying goes, the ears of the speaker are the first to hear what emanates from his mouth.

And Indeed, Allah Knows best.

Beneficial Reminders

“…who repress anger, and who pardon men; verily, Allaah loves Al-Muhsinoon (the good doers).” [Aal ‘Imraan 3:134]

“And those who avoid the greater sins, and Al Fawaahish (illegal sexual intercourse), and when they are angry, they forgive.” [al-Shooraa 42:37]

Al-Bukhaari narrated in al-Saheeh (6116) from Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) that a man said to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), “Advise me.” He said: “Do not get angry.” The man repeated his request several times, and he said, “Do not get angry.”

Al-Bukhaari narrated in al-Saheeh (6114) that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “The strong man is not the one who can wrestle (fight); the strong man is the one who controls himself at the time of anger.”

Al-Haafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) made some important points in Fath al-Baari (10/520) in his commentary on the hadeeth “Do not get angry”. He said:

Al-Khattaabi said: The meaning of the phrase ‘Do not get angry’ is, Avoid the things that cause anger and do not expose yourself to that which provokes it. Anger itself could not have been forbidden, because it is something natural which cannot be removed from human nature.
Someone else said: what is meant is that which can be achieved by training oneself… It was said that it means, Do not do that which anger provokes you to do.

Ibn Battaal said: the hadeeth indicates… that striving to control oneself is more difficult than striving against the enemy, because the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) described the one who controls himself at times of anger as being the strongest of people.

Someone else said: Perhaps the person who asked this question was hot-tempered; the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) used to command each person to do that which was most appropriate for him, so he summed up his advice to this person by telling him not to get angry.

Ibn al-Teen said: in the words ‘Do not get angry’, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) brought together the good of this world and of the Hereafter, because anger results in cutting off ties and withholding kindness, and it may lead to one doing harm to the person with whom one is angry, which diminishes one’s religious commitment.

One such event that captivated most of the world not too long ago was the Haitian earthquake of 2010.  Roughly a quarter of a million people were killed, and reports are now coming out that relief efforts, equipped with literally billions of dollars flowing in from across the globe, have done little to alleviate the suffering of the Hatian people.  Today, hundreds of thousands of Haitians remain in relief encampments with little progress on the reconstruction front.  Toppled homes, buildings, and infrastructure remain as they were in the immediate aftermath of the earthquake.  Such despondency is not only tragic, but downright criminal.

I cant honestly claim to continuously spend my days contemplating about the plights being suffered by those less fortunate, and more times than not, my attention is dictated by the media coverage as well, so its difficult for me to play sanctimonious.  But I figure the least I can do is help raise awareness, and in that vein, I’ve linked two articles below as well as a link to Islamic Reliefs website for donating to Haiti.  May Allah guide us to what pleases Him and allow us to live lives in His obedience.  Ameen.

By Alice Speri Alice Speri – Tue Jan 11, 6:46 pm ET
Port-au-Prince, Haiti – For more than six weeks last fall, a brand new obstetrics hospital remained empty and closed, its Ikea furniture still wrapped in plastic, a reminder of how far Port-au-Prince had to go to recover from the Haiti earthquake.

Meanwhile across the street, a camp with 1,500 families had no access to medical care beyond occasional visits by the Haitian Red Cross. The hospital, commissioned by Doctors Without Borders (MSF), has since partially opened.

But questions remain about why the project in the neighborhood of Delmas 33 was delayed by the government, a symbol of the bureaucracy that has stood in the way of many of the projects run by the more than 900 NGOs that descended on Haiti after last January’s earthquake, which killed 230,000 people and left 2 million homeless.  Continue reading here….

Article 2:

One year after a devastating earthquake toppled homes and killed roughly 250,000 people in Haiti, the Western Hemisphere’s poorest country is still reeling from the devastation.

As Reuters reports, despite billions of dollars of donations and aid pledges from some of the world’s most powerful leaders, a 12,000-strong United Nations peacekeeping presence and an army of relief workers, the debris that clogs much of the city and a million homeless people living in tents are blunt testimony to the unfinished recovery task. Meanwhile, the nation’s cholera epidemic, which began this past fall, continues to run rampant. Continue reading here…. 

Islamic Relief work continues in Haiti

Though an interesting point, I believe the broader question is one of government and its responsibility to its citizenry.  Promoting the general welfare has long been a staple of governmental ambition, and the wording itself is listed as one of the chief objectives of the government within the Constitution.  But what does that mean in real terms? How does such promotion take place? And at what costs?

Last month a report was released by a team of drug experts stating that the most harmful drug- evaluated on the basis of 16 different criterion, 9 related to the harms of the drug and 7 related to the way the substance harms others- was alcohol. Yet little to no restriction has been enforced on organizations that actively market and distribute alcohol.  Regulatory bodies have long insisted that alcohol marketing was to be restricted to those mediums where over 70% of the audience is over the legal drinking age, but they have not prohibited alcohol advertising on television, branded beer cans with the same surgeon general warnings imposed on tobacco products, or created an environment where alcohol consumption is met with the same disdain as smoking tobacco.

The double standard is difficult to defend, and it sheds light on the growing dichotomy between permitting sales of harmful substances and the call for government regulations banning them.  There is a need to determine an acceptable level of regulation for substances that cause harm to society, and whether or not a cookie cutter approach should be adopted, or a flexible approach that responds to each substance differently is still subject to debate.  The fear is that government oversteps its bounds, enforcing regulations that restrict the freedom of individual choice and conscience.  The argument is that individuals should be able to choose their lifestyle, and Michelle Obama’s recent legislative proposal to stem childhood obesity by regulating school nutrition is an embodiment of what many would consider governmental overreach.

I, for one, believe that this question requires further examination and needs to explore the various creative outlets that can be utilized to make harmful substances socially unpopular- social unpopularity being driven by the collective dictates of society and not the result of legislative proscriptions.  The reason being that enforcing any legislative rule hinges on the level of concurrence society places on the rule.  The prohibition of the 1920′s didn’t fail because of poorly trained police officers.  It failed because people loved drinking too much to give it up at the insistence of the state.  Once the culture surrounding a substance is collectively changed, so too will the regulations permitting or prohibiting its use.

This behavior is even more evident when looking at societies attitude towards marijuana.  Peoples opinion of marijuana is getting progressively more accepting.  It has already been decriminalized in twelve different states when being used for medicinal purposes, and in the coming decade I wouldnt be surprised to see a resurgence of legislature intended to ease current regulations on medicinal marijuana from the other states across the US, and in the long run, perhaps a full decriminalization.

As Muslims, part of working towards creating a culture of social unpopularity is grass roots work and hoping that grass roots efforts reach the mainstream.  The other part is awareness- campaigns designed to engender an environment where the harmfulness of a substance is detested as much as tar in ones lips from smoking- an example would be a campaign to exhibit the negative effects of alcohol and to characterize drunkenness as foolhardy, immature, and destructive to one’s physical and mental well being.  Once that message begins to resonate with people, attitudes will change, and society along with it.

And Allah Knows Best.

http://muslimmatters.org/2010/11/18/riyadh-as-saliheen-series-hadith-1-reward-for-intentions/

The kingdom, where Islam first emerged around 1,400 years ago, applies a strict form of Sunni Islamic sharia law that imposes gender segregation, forces shops to close during prayer times and prohibits women from driving.

But in Mecca, the enforcement of many of these rules is relaxed during the haj, a duty for every able-bodied Muslim. And with the government investing billion of dollars in recent years to make pilgrimage safer and more comfortable, many pilgrims end up going home as goodwill ambassadors for the country.

“We have to thank Saudi Arabia for their services. It’s getting better and better every year,” said Ritha Naji, a U.S. pilgrim performing a “stoning of the devil” rite that has been the scene of numerous deadly crushes in recent years.

The Grand Mosque, home to the Kaaba shrine which Muslims around the world turn to in prayer every day, is the only place in the desert kingdom where women and men can pray together.

Western diplomats say this tolerance is part of wider efforts to improve the country’s image over the past decade after the September 11, 2001 attacks on New York and Washington in which Saudis were involved.

King Abdullah has tried hard to dispel the association between Saudi Arabia and lslamist militancy, promoting an international “interfaith dialogue” through the United Nations.

This year’s haj — which ended this week — drew a record 1.8 million foreigners from diverse regions of the world like Nigeria, Russia and Indonesia that apply a less strict form of Islam than Saudi Arabia.

The U.S. ally often comes under fire from human rights groups criticizing its public beheadings and lack of political freedoms in what is an absolute monarchy.

On Wednesday, Amnesty International called on Riyadh to improve the situation of expatriates after an Indonesian maid was reportedly mistreated by her employer.

But during haj Egyptians, Indians or Pakistanis — who make up the bulk of millions of expatriates in the country — receive markedly kinder treatment from Saudi officials who refer to pilgrims as “guests of the Merciful,” meaning God.

Polite policemen guide pilgrims around the vast Grand Mosque, while the religious police turn a blind eye to pilgrims taking the kinds of photographs that they had frowned on in previous years.

In the capital Riyadh religious police scour the streets to keep unrelated men and women apart, but in Mecca the sexes mix easily in shops and restaurants. Some eat side-by-side on the ground in front of the Grand Mosque, an impossible sight elsewhere in the kingdom.

Saudi Arabia’s minority Shi’ites often complain of discrimination and attacks by Wahhabi clerics, yet during haj Iranian, Iraqi and other Shi’ites perform the rites unhindered.

Loudspeakers give instructions to the multitude in many languages, including English and Farsi, as well as Arabic.

SAFE HAJ IS KEY TO SAUDI PRESTIGE

As pilgrim numbers shot up over the past three decades, staging a safe haj became crucial for the image of a monarchy that styles its king Custodian of the Two Holy Sites — a reference to the sacred precincts in Mecca and in Medina where the Prophet Mohammad set up the first Muslim administration.

A series of disasters have claimed hundreds of lives during haj since 1990, including fires, stampedes, hotel collapses and clashes between police and pilgrims staging political protests.

This year the government unveiled a haj train linking the holy sites in and around Mecca that cost $1.8 billion to build. It will only be used some six days a year.

“We want to give pilgrims the best possible level of services,” Interior Minister Prince Nayef bin Abdulaziz told reporters last week.

Thanks to its oil wealth, Saudi Arabia can afford to waive the fees for the services it provides, including drinking water, toilet facilities, medical and security services, as well as maintenance and expansion of the Grand Mosque itself.

Cold water is on tap at every corner and medics turn up within minutes when someone collapses. Saudi firms distribute umbrellas as protection from the sun.

The plain of Arafat, where pilgrims spend a whole day according to the rites, has a vast sprinkler system covering an area of some 1.3 sq km (0.5 square miles).

“The Saudi services for pilgrims are really good. One has to say that,” said Mohammed Idam, a Yemeni cooling under the spray in the afternoon heat at Arafat.

The efforts pay off in the positive message many pilgrims take home with them.

“Our Saudi brothers have expanded many services,” said Moroccan pilgrim Mohammed Hamdush.

“Now they’ve built a train for pilgrims, which is nice.”

(Editing by Andrew Hammond and Paul Casciato)