Salam.
This is a clip of a rant by Sheikh Hamza Yusuf that I like. Heheh. It's pretty funny actually coz he was in the middle of this talk and suddenly he starts to go on this rant. Pretty valuable rant though. A lot of truth in it. And, really, just nice.
Salam.
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
Review of Islam and Democracy : Is the clash of civilisation inevitable?
Salam,
I was watching this talk the other day ; Islam and Democracy : Is the clash of civilisation inevitable?, a dialogue between Noah Feldman and Sheikh Hamza Yusuf. It's very very interesting actually. The dialogue was very relax, the host was a cool guy, no tension and lots of good, strong, credible knowledge from both sides. Also very very nice to see a Jew and Muslim just sitting down having a nice chat at the end there. Both on totally level ground and both showed no prejudice and just the utmost respect towards each other. Really. Like old friends. It's pretty cool. A really enjoyable and recommendable talk to watch! =)
Some more specific reasons:
1) The name Noah Feldman sounds familiar, but I've never actually known the guy, seen his face or heard any of his talks. So, on the encounter here, I thought he's a pretty smart guy. Though his name sounds Jewish and he looked Jewish, I didn't know it until towards the end of the dialogue, during the q&a. Anyways, I thought he was an amazing speaker. In his introduction by the host, his credits were quite impressive. I don't remember exactly, and you guys can check this out yourself, but there were some mention of and Oxford and Harvard in there somewhere, and he studied Islam. So, he knows the real deal and you know, you can pretty much trust his credibility. He was also criticized by the Jewish Orthodox for some of his views. And, if I'm not mistaken, he married a non-Jewish girl. So, just generally, background-wise in my head, this will be good. And I was proven right. Throughout his delivery, he was fair and gave some very fair points that I don't have to much to disagree on. One point though: you get to know for real what actually is his level of mastery of Islam when at one point he said "even the Prophet p.b.u.h asks people to go even to China to seek knowledge". 1st of all, he knows enough about Islam (ie. in his Islam knowledge curve, his starting/lowest point/coordinate), that you should say peace be upon him every time you mention the Prophet's name. 2ndly, (ie. his highest point), he knows only up to the knowlegde that there is the Qur'an and there is the Hadith, he probably does not know that there are different levels of trusting a hadith or using one for argument, and therefore he did not know that the one he just quoted was a fake/conjured up one.
So, basically you know how much he knows.
I liked the way he spoke to the crowd. He's a very much explaining kind of person. He used simple language and explained as much possible everything in simple words, that allowed the audience to follow what he is saying. He took the middle road in most of his ways, by that I mean, sets his mind on the middle part of his crowd. Like this... When you are making a speech, a talk, you always have in your head, your audience. Most of the time, you will never fully get your target audience only as your audience. Unless, of course, if it is a restricted talk. But, it a public talk like this, when it'll be recorded, made into a dvd and distributed to the public, you have to have it in your mind that you have a "middle" audience. What is the "middle"? It means there are some in the audience that knows a lot and have studied a lot about Islam&Democracy - this group is usually very very little. Then, you have those who knows nothing about what Islam&Democracy actually means - this is more than the first group. The "middle" is those who knows half-half - this is the majority. What you want to do is get to that middle group, strengthen what they already know but at the same time give them something that they can move forward with. In this particular talk, I think Noah Feldman focused more on the lower third of the middle group. 'Cause, this talk is a bit too public. So, giving just general basis is good enough. It's always a blurry line, but, I think Mr. Feldman is very good in this kinda thing : public speaking.
I actually searched a bit of what he does on youtube. So, it turns out he's part of the Carnegie Council ; the one responsible for drafting the law for Iraq. I watched several of his clips, and learned something : The Rule of Law. Which basically means that whatever happen the people will always honour the Law.
Erm, I think Mr. Feldman is a noble upholder of Law and Justice. He's one of those rare ones that believe truly that good, honesty, justice, law and equality can and will and should be advocated and protected and to be striven for, for ultimate right in this world. So, he's a noble man. And I think he planned his life and education well, so that, he can contibute to the world. Because of this, I think that's why, some say to him : You're just young and don't understand the world yet. This statement in itself is a demotivating statement. And I think more people like Mr. Feldman should disregard statements like this, believe in themselves, and make a difference in this world.
2) Logical Fallacy of Personification. Huh what? hahah. Exactly. hahah.
that's actually a term said by Sheikh Hamza Yusuf. What it means?
You know the title... Islam & Democracy : Is the Clash of Civilisation inevitable? ... well doesn't it seem like an odd statement?
Well..you know.. is Islam and Democracy two different things? Aren't they the same thing?
huh..paradigm change huh...hm....heheh...
okay okay... when you state two things and you put the word "and" in between them, aren't you indicating that they are different things? and then you add a question after, in this case, the question did not seem to play this part too much because of the the coined 'Clash of Civilisation' That coined phrase carries its own connotation, so it didn't really have that effect here. But, usually, a question after a statement with the word "and" between two words, can act to amplify whatever connotation you want people to feel.
So, anyways, when you put that word "and" in between two words, you are already indirectly asserting that those two words are different and possible opposing. So, the "pro" side has already, in a way, won or have a base already at the beginning.
This is 'Logical Fallacy of Personification'. Logically the statement is already irrelevant/falsified/lost its argumentattive value/gist by way of personifying or giving a personality to the words: in this case, the word "Islam" and "Democracy".
A question was asked at the end by the someone in the audience exactly about this - and both speakers said : Yes. Of course! By actually putting that statement out, one side is already winning and the other dutily losing. But what can you do about it right. It's a literary problem. It's a problem of any language. The only way to discuss about something is by putting it out. And yet when you are putting it out, you're indirectly saying that that something is an issue/something that needs to be seriously addressed which is then making that something worst. Its a logical vicious circle. But it really can't be avoided.
The best way is to actually to keep focused. Concentrate only on whatever's at hand.
3) My own personal opinion : The clash of civilisation will not happen. Simply, the world will not let it. The people of the world will not let it!
link
Cau! =)
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Way to go Iran! =)
Salam,
I really praise the Iranian government officials for their conduct throughout this onslaught against them. The lost opposition and the American media has been going non-stop against them stoking the fire, adding stale firewood to again and again kindle an unnecessary fire. A false one at that. But, again and again the Iranian government has managed to keep their cool. They didn't lose it. They didn't get emotional. And they've been very professional. I think the American media will jump at anything to potentially blow it up as barbaric on undemocratic. And I thank God, Iran has been really professional and I think the American journalists must be getting really frustrated that there's nothing they can truly distort. They can use tricky words and small things, but these are really non-substantial and with more people aware now, its harder to fool people with those things. People still do get easily influenced though, so, education about these matters should never stop.
Some things that really made me proud of Iran / that really show their cool:
1) Repeated support of the non-contenders for the government.
2) Statements by Khameini.
3) No emotional outbursts from Ahmadinejad.
4) Going through the judiciary system.
Example of things I like and how it is written/distorted by the West Media - Associated Press :
See Khamenei's statements:
called for national unity and urged both sides
"not to stoke the emotions of the young"
"I admonish both sides not to stoke the emotions of the young or pit the people against each other. Our people are made of one fabric."
> I thought these are very very good statements. Unity! One fabric! Come on everyone...this is what we should focus on. The good things in life. Be friends, make peace, and everyone will be happy. Really, these statements can never be too much.
Our people are made of one fabric! Subhanallah...=)
Salam. which means Peace! ;)
I really praise the Iranian government officials for their conduct throughout this onslaught against them. The lost opposition and the American media has been going non-stop against them stoking the fire, adding stale firewood to again and again kindle an unnecessary fire. A false one at that. But, again and again the Iranian government has managed to keep their cool. They didn't lose it. They didn't get emotional. And they've been very professional. I think the American media will jump at anything to potentially blow it up as barbaric on undemocratic. And I thank God, Iran has been really professional and I think the American journalists must be getting really frustrated that there's nothing they can truly distort. They can use tricky words and small things, but these are really non-substantial and with more people aware now, its harder to fool people with those things. People still do get easily influenced though, so, education about these matters should never stop.
Some things that really made me proud of Iran / that really show their cool:
1) Repeated support of the non-contenders for the government.
2) Statements by Khameini.
3) No emotional outbursts from Ahmadinejad.
4) Going through the judiciary system.
Example of things I like and how it is written/distorted by the West Media - Associated Press :
Iran's supreme ruler calls for unity
By The Associated PressIran's supreme ruler has called for national unity and urged both sides in a bitter election dispute "not to stoke the emotions of the young."
Ayatollah Ali Khamenei's appeal was broadcast Sunday on state TV.
Khamenei has rejected demands by opposition leader Mir Hossein Mousavi to hold a revote. Mousavi says he is the rightful winner, not hardline President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad.
In recent days, the government has widened a clampdown on opposition supporters who allege the presidential election was rigged.
State TV reported Khamenei met with government officials to discuss the election. In comments carried by the station he said: "I admonish both sides not to stoke the emotions of the young or pit the people against each other. Our people are made of one fabric."
> I've highlighted the choice of word that's indirectly indicating who the writer/press/American media think is in the wrong. They like to use these kinds of simple trick to slowly bit by bit without you noticing it, influence you.See Khamenei's statements:
called for national unity and urged both sides
"not to stoke the emotions of the young"
"I admonish both sides not to stoke the emotions of the young or pit the people against each other. Our people are made of one fabric."
> I thought these are very very good statements. Unity! One fabric! Come on everyone...this is what we should focus on. The good things in life. Be friends, make peace, and everyone will be happy. Really, these statements can never be too much.
Our people are made of one fabric! Subhanallah...=)
Salam. which means Peace! ;)
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Surah al-Ikhlas
Salam..
Just finished reading Surah al-Ikhlas off 'Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali 's translation and commentaries of the Holy Qur'an. This is probably the best I've heard of commentaries on this surah so I thought I'd share this with you guys. For non-Muslims, this is also probably the best description of Allah, the God that the Muslims worship.
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.
1 Say: He is God,a the one and One and Only;b 2 God, the Eternal, Absolute;c 3 He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; d 4 And there is none like unto Him. e
a. The nature of God is here indicated to us in a few words, such as we can understand. The qualities of God are described in numerous places elsewhere, e.g., in 59:22-24, 62:1 and 2:255. here we are specially taught to avoid the pitfalls into which men and nations have fallen at various times in trying to understand God.
The first thing we have to note is that His nature is so sublime, so far beyond our limited conceptions, that the best way in which we can realise Him is to feel that He is a Personality, "He", and not a mere abstract conception of philosophy. He is near to us; He cares for us; we owe our existence to Him.
Secondly, He is the One and Only God, the Only One to whom worship is due; all other things or beings that we can think of are His creatures and in no way comparable to Him.
Thirdly, He is Eternal, without beginning or end, Absolute, not limited by time or place or circumstance, the Reality before which all other things or places are mere shadows or reflections.
Fourthly, we must not think of Him as having a son or a father, for that would be to import animal qualities into our conception of Him.
Fifthly, He is not like any other person or thing that we know or can imagine: His qualities and nature are unique.
b. This is to negate the idea of polytheism, a system in which people believe in gods many and lords many. Such a system is opposed to our truest and profoundest conceptions of life. For Unity in Design, Unity in the fundamental facts of existence, proclaim the Unity of the Maker.
c. Samad is difficult to translate by one word. I (i.e 'Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali) have used two, "Eternal" and "Absolute". The latter (Absolute) implies : (1) that absolute existence can only be predicted of Him; all other existence is temporal or conditional; (2) that He is dependent on no person or things, but all persons or things are dependent on Him, thus negativing the idea of gods and goddesses who ate and drank, wrangled and plotted, depended on the gifts of the worshippers, etc.
d. This is to negate the Christian idea of the godhead, "the Father", "the only begotten Son" etc.
e. This sums up the whole argument and warns us specially against Anthropomorphism, the tendency to conceive God after our own pattern, and insidious tendency that creeps in at all times and among all peoples.
Salam.
Just finished reading Surah al-Ikhlas off 'Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali 's translation and commentaries of the Holy Qur'an. This is probably the best I've heard of commentaries on this surah so I thought I'd share this with you guys. For non-Muslims, this is also probably the best description of Allah, the God that the Muslims worship.
In the name of God, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.1 Say: He is God,a the one and One and Only;b 2 God, the Eternal, Absolute;c 3 He begetteth not, nor is He begotten; d 4 And there is none like unto Him. e
a. The nature of God is here indicated to us in a few words, such as we can understand. The qualities of God are described in numerous places elsewhere, e.g., in 59:22-24, 62:1 and 2:255. here we are specially taught to avoid the pitfalls into which men and nations have fallen at various times in trying to understand God.
The first thing we have to note is that His nature is so sublime, so far beyond our limited conceptions, that the best way in which we can realise Him is to feel that He is a Personality, "He", and not a mere abstract conception of philosophy. He is near to us; He cares for us; we owe our existence to Him.
Secondly, He is the One and Only God, the Only One to whom worship is due; all other things or beings that we can think of are His creatures and in no way comparable to Him.
Thirdly, He is Eternal, without beginning or end, Absolute, not limited by time or place or circumstance, the Reality before which all other things or places are mere shadows or reflections.
Fourthly, we must not think of Him as having a son or a father, for that would be to import animal qualities into our conception of Him.
Fifthly, He is not like any other person or thing that we know or can imagine: His qualities and nature are unique.
b. This is to negate the idea of polytheism, a system in which people believe in gods many and lords many. Such a system is opposed to our truest and profoundest conceptions of life. For Unity in Design, Unity in the fundamental facts of existence, proclaim the Unity of the Maker.
c. Samad is difficult to translate by one word. I (i.e 'Abdullah Yusuf 'Ali) have used two, "Eternal" and "Absolute". The latter (Absolute) implies : (1) that absolute existence can only be predicted of Him; all other existence is temporal or conditional; (2) that He is dependent on no person or things, but all persons or things are dependent on Him, thus negativing the idea of gods and goddesses who ate and drank, wrangled and plotted, depended on the gifts of the worshippers, etc.
d. This is to negate the Christian idea of the godhead, "the Father", "the only begotten Son" etc.
e. This sums up the whole argument and warns us specially against Anthropomorphism, the tendency to conceive God after our own pattern, and insidious tendency that creeps in at all times and among all peoples.
Salam.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Unrest in Iran
Salam,
In a nutshell:
Democracy was exercised in the form of elections, the crowd was not happy with the result, decided to take matters into their own hands and start a riot/unrest/protest. Then, the one who lost himself, made the situation worse by actually rallying his supporters to continue the rebellion. Unfortunately, in the course of it all, someone died and everything's blown up as a big "clash between Iran's cleric-led government and protesters."
My comments:
[1] Everyone is constantly preaching about democracy the superiority of it and how elections are the best way to be fair and justice lies with it and this is the best way to hear what the people want. So, come on people. You wanted fair elections, you got it. Suddenly when the one you want cheered for didn't lost, fair and square, you're suddenly being a brat? Comparable to a sulking sore loser.
[2] Really..I thought leaders are supposed to be mature, adult and professional, responsible and honourable. What's up with the rallying of unrest and violence? Come on, are you contending to lead, to actually help the country, or contending for power and popularity. Really, this does not show any sort of leadership skills. It's just frankly embarassing.
[3] Okay, I am truly truly sorry that someone died in all the violence. Every God-given soul is precious and I mean no disrespect in this particular comment. The demise of Neda was sad, but why is Yahoo! blowing it all out of proportions across the net? My Yahoo e-mail is set to sign out directly to YahooMalaysia. So, usually I get greeted with local Malaysian news. And one or two headlines of World news. Why oh why is the death of this poor Iranian women, again and again publicised? It was bad, but she is one soul. Just one in the huge crowd of protestors. I emphasize again, one protestor. Meaning she was part of those who were making all the violence, all the unrest. Violence against what? Against fair elections. And this news is across the net advertised as the death of a hero against an evil government. Come on..is hero now equivalent to violent protestor, and evil equivalent to fair democratical election?
I personally think, this is a just a play of the American-Israeli controlled media. And I think nowadays people are not easily fooled anymore. And people shouldn't be fooled! Always and always think about anything you get from the media. Know that for a fact, that most famous, popular, mainstream media are controlled by the US-Zionist coalition. Don't get influenced!
Iran is not a bad government. The sudden shift of the US-Israelis perverted scorn toward Iran is only because of the fact that it had scratched the surface of the US's ego, Israel's arrogance, vocal about both's crimes, state-sponsored massacres and double-standards, and of course, the fact that it has oil and that it was once the site of an uprise that shook the Western-Secular world, the Iranian Revolution and also maybe because it is at the border of Israel's delusional Eretz Israel utopia.
This is neocolonism, spearheaded by brainwashing by the media, nurtured by the seed of materialism and constant encouragement of greed by constant acquisition and piling up of wealth, promotion of widespread pornography, degrading social behaviours designed to dwindle the nation's mind to that of a birdbrain.
Wallahu'alam.
In a nutshell:
Democracy was exercised in the form of elections, the crowd was not happy with the result, decided to take matters into their own hands and start a riot/unrest/protest. Then, the one who lost himself, made the situation worse by actually rallying his supporters to continue the rebellion. Unfortunately, in the course of it all, someone died and everything's blown up as a big "clash between Iran's cleric-led government and protesters."
My comments:
[1] Everyone is constantly preaching about democracy the superiority of it and how elections are the best way to be fair and justice lies with it and this is the best way to hear what the people want. So, come on people. You wanted fair elections, you got it. Suddenly when the one you want cheered for didn't lost, fair and square, you're suddenly being a brat? Comparable to a sulking sore loser.
[2] Really..I thought leaders are supposed to be mature, adult and professional, responsible and honourable. What's up with the rallying of unrest and violence? Come on, are you contending to lead, to actually help the country, or contending for power and popularity. Really, this does not show any sort of leadership skills. It's just frankly embarassing.
[3] Okay, I am truly truly sorry that someone died in all the violence. Every God-given soul is precious and I mean no disrespect in this particular comment. The demise of Neda was sad, but why is Yahoo! blowing it all out of proportions across the net? My Yahoo e-mail is set to sign out directly to YahooMalaysia. So, usually I get greeted with local Malaysian news. And one or two headlines of World news. Why oh why is the death of this poor Iranian women, again and again publicised? It was bad, but she is one soul. Just one in the huge crowd of protestors. I emphasize again, one protestor. Meaning she was part of those who were making all the violence, all the unrest. Violence against what? Against fair elections. And this news is across the net advertised as the death of a hero against an evil government. Come on..is hero now equivalent to violent protestor, and evil equivalent to fair democratical election?
I personally think, this is a just a play of the American-Israeli controlled media. And I think nowadays people are not easily fooled anymore. And people shouldn't be fooled! Always and always think about anything you get from the media. Know that for a fact, that most famous, popular, mainstream media are controlled by the US-Zionist coalition. Don't get influenced!
Iran is not a bad government. The sudden shift of the US-Israelis perverted scorn toward Iran is only because of the fact that it had scratched the surface of the US's ego, Israel's arrogance, vocal about both's crimes, state-sponsored massacres and double-standards, and of course, the fact that it has oil and that it was once the site of an uprise that shook the Western-Secular world, the Iranian Revolution and also maybe because it is at the border of Israel's delusional Eretz Israel utopia.
This is neocolonism, spearheaded by brainwashing by the media, nurtured by the seed of materialism and constant encouragement of greed by constant acquisition and piling up of wealth, promotion of widespread pornography, degrading social behaviours designed to dwindle the nation's mind to that of a birdbrain.
Wallahu'alam.
Thursday, May 21, 2009
Final part: The Myth of Muslim Barbarism and its Aims
Salam,
Alright. This is the last and final part of my three-part review (Pt. 1, Pt. 2) on this book : The Myth of Muslim Barbarism and its Aims by S.E. Al-Djazairi. For complete details on the book, ISBN number, ratings and so on, please visit here. :D
Finally having reached the end of the book, I would say this is quite an okay book to read. I don't really recommend it per say because I think the subject of the book is almost completely focused on the past. The author reiterates various achievements of the Muslim that have been deleted from history textbooks, diverted attributions of Muslims' accomplishments or making them simply look insignificant, defaming and blatant slander against Muslims throughout the ages and of course depiction of Islam by the 'Crusades' and Pope as the ultimate anti-Christ, devil or satan.
Needless to say, I wasn't aware of a lot of these things. Being raised stagnantly in a scientific educational background, history, philosophy, art and tools of the Abbassid and Renaissance Age never really reached me. Of course, you hear fleetingly about it, but you know, it was something of the past, seemingly insignificant to me now. In that sense, yes, Al-Djazairi's book served its purpose in opening up my blind eyes. And his objective precisely was to show that the pola or pattern of history always repeats itself.
The defaming, he says, is aimed for one purpose only. To justify attacks and occupation. The Red Indians of America were massacred on the justification that they were barbaric cannibals, when evidence of such acts were never produced. Same goes for Algeria, the French colonized the region on the suppossedly honourable objective of civilising them.
Now, in the 21st Century, Iraq and Iran are being attacked by the so-called civilised, democratic people. Let's look at Iraq; first they say they want to get rid of the cruel Saddam, who in fact they gave support to before. Then, they say there was 'weapons of mass destruction' hidden in Iraq. And so they attacked. And now, after the country has been turned upside down, no weapons of mass destruction has been found. And the people are far worst under US military control than they ever were under Saddam. So, basically, the leader of US has lied to us, to the world. And yet, no action is taken against them. Because why? Simply because they have veto power in the United Nations. So, what good now is the United Nations? Now, they are saying Iran is enriching nuclear power for military purposes. Investigators have come and go. And none found illicit actions. The nuclear generator in Iran was well below 5% enrichment, no where near 95% that is required for it to suffice as a weapon. This is clearly another blatant lie. To justify what? War.
This is the utmost precise aim of making Muslims or any people look like barbaric, savage or uncivilised. To justify war.
This is the main premise throughout the book. I think it is a noble effort. I think it is very well-written and professional. But for me personally though, this is quite a heavy reading. I think that the author rightfully gave many examples to prove the main aim of defaming Muslims. Although I think it is necessary, I would prefer more examples to be given pertaining to this and the last decade. Maybe because I am only two decades old :). But honestly, I think too much focus is on the past. Several examples of course should be quoted from beyond two decades ago, but, it would be nice if there are more things I could relate to written.
This is an amazing book though, for fanatics of history and those who love this subject. Personally I think, what's in the past, leave it in the past.
For example, in the 2nd Chapter: The depictions of Muslims Throughout the Ages, it was repeatedly stated that a lot of Muslims' achievements have been discredited or attributed to a false non-Muslim person/entity. I think this is true. The fact that the Islamic Civilisation gave birth to Renaissance is rarely mentioned anywhere. In my course as a medical student, the contributions of Avicenna's Canon was mentioned only once which was is my Essentials of Surgery Lecture. What about his contribution in anatomy? Canon's usage as a medical textbook in Europe for 800 years? And in Biochemistry, its modern origin in the Islamic Civilisation was never mentioned once. Al-Djazairi gave many other examples. And he reiterated the many academic books and articles of the then Europeans that again and again deny Muslim Civilisation's contributions to modern philosophy and science.
I think all this is okay, but more importantly for me personally, names does not really matter. What matters is that the contributions has helped the world today. So what if those Muslim personalities are not mentioned. If people want to deny those names, never mind. Names are just names. Islam has never taught Muslims to be proud of utter names and superficial honour. If our contributions are good ones and has helped the world, then, Alhamdulillah, Praises be to Allah.
Really..., lessons need to be uncovered and excavated from the horrors of the past, and this is what Al-Djazairi is doing, but other than that, just forgive and forget. Learn the lesson, do not repeat it, and move on. Make new history.
Wallahu'alam.
Peace to all! :)
Alright. This is the last and final part of my three-part review (Pt. 1, Pt. 2) on this book : The Myth of Muslim Barbarism and its Aims by S.E. Al-Djazairi. For complete details on the book, ISBN number, ratings and so on, please visit here. :D
Finally having reached the end of the book, I would say this is quite an okay book to read. I don't really recommend it per say because I think the subject of the book is almost completely focused on the past. The author reiterates various achievements of the Muslim that have been deleted from history textbooks, diverted attributions of Muslims' accomplishments or making them simply look insignificant, defaming and blatant slander against Muslims throughout the ages and of course depiction of Islam by the 'Crusades' and Pope as the ultimate anti-Christ, devil or satan.
Needless to say, I wasn't aware of a lot of these things. Being raised stagnantly in a scientific educational background, history, philosophy, art and tools of the Abbassid and Renaissance Age never really reached me. Of course, you hear fleetingly about it, but you know, it was something of the past, seemingly insignificant to me now. In that sense, yes, Al-Djazairi's book served its purpose in opening up my blind eyes. And his objective precisely was to show that the pola or pattern of history always repeats itself.
The defaming, he says, is aimed for one purpose only. To justify attacks and occupation. The Red Indians of America were massacred on the justification that they were barbaric cannibals, when evidence of such acts were never produced. Same goes for Algeria, the French colonized the region on the suppossedly honourable objective of civilising them.
Now, in the 21st Century, Iraq and Iran are being attacked by the so-called civilised, democratic people. Let's look at Iraq; first they say they want to get rid of the cruel Saddam, who in fact they gave support to before. Then, they say there was 'weapons of mass destruction' hidden in Iraq. And so they attacked. And now, after the country has been turned upside down, no weapons of mass destruction has been found. And the people are far worst under US military control than they ever were under Saddam. So, basically, the leader of US has lied to us, to the world. And yet, no action is taken against them. Because why? Simply because they have veto power in the United Nations. So, what good now is the United Nations? Now, they are saying Iran is enriching nuclear power for military purposes. Investigators have come and go. And none found illicit actions. The nuclear generator in Iran was well below 5% enrichment, no where near 95% that is required for it to suffice as a weapon. This is clearly another blatant lie. To justify what? War.
This is the utmost precise aim of making Muslims or any people look like barbaric, savage or uncivilised. To justify war.
This is the main premise throughout the book. I think it is a noble effort. I think it is very well-written and professional. But for me personally though, this is quite a heavy reading. I think that the author rightfully gave many examples to prove the main aim of defaming Muslims. Although I think it is necessary, I would prefer more examples to be given pertaining to this and the last decade. Maybe because I am only two decades old :). But honestly, I think too much focus is on the past. Several examples of course should be quoted from beyond two decades ago, but, it would be nice if there are more things I could relate to written.
This is an amazing book though, for fanatics of history and those who love this subject. Personally I think, what's in the past, leave it in the past.
For example, in the 2nd Chapter: The depictions of Muslims Throughout the Ages, it was repeatedly stated that a lot of Muslims' achievements have been discredited or attributed to a false non-Muslim person/entity. I think this is true. The fact that the Islamic Civilisation gave birth to Renaissance is rarely mentioned anywhere. In my course as a medical student, the contributions of Avicenna's Canon was mentioned only once which was is my Essentials of Surgery Lecture. What about his contribution in anatomy? Canon's usage as a medical textbook in Europe for 800 years? And in Biochemistry, its modern origin in the Islamic Civilisation was never mentioned once. Al-Djazairi gave many other examples. And he reiterated the many academic books and articles of the then Europeans that again and again deny Muslim Civilisation's contributions to modern philosophy and science.
I think all this is okay, but more importantly for me personally, names does not really matter. What matters is that the contributions has helped the world today. So what if those Muslim personalities are not mentioned. If people want to deny those names, never mind. Names are just names. Islam has never taught Muslims to be proud of utter names and superficial honour. If our contributions are good ones and has helped the world, then, Alhamdulillah, Praises be to Allah.
Really..., lessons need to be uncovered and excavated from the horrors of the past, and this is what Al-Djazairi is doing, but other than that, just forgive and forget. Learn the lesson, do not repeat it, and move on. Make new history.
Wallahu'alam.
Peace to all! :)
Friday, May 15, 2009
Part 2 : The Myth of Muslim Barbarism and its Aims
Salam.
A continuation of my reading... :)(click)
Chapter 5 : Captives, Slaves and Racists
I particularly want to concentrate on the notion that Muslims are obsessed with slavery. The following are some things that I discovered, that's both amazing and made me feel proud to be a Muslim. ;)
Alright...an intro first..:) :
What's the first thing that comes to your mind when you hear the word 'slave'? Probably something like this, right? ; 'A black man, toiling in the plantation with many others, sweating under the sun, his back scarred with numerous traces of lashes trailing dark red lines deep into the skin...a white man on a horse in his full attire of an officer on duty looking dashingly handsome but his face sadly marred by a frown and a smirk, forever shouting for more work, faster work, a long sharp whip on his side, coiled neatly right now..but everyone knows it only takes a second for it to reach the back of a tired slave.'
Pretty gruesome right.
Anyways...this is the general imagination of a slave. Nowadays you would rarely see such things. Slaves are replaced with a maid or a housekeeper or a gardener that gets paid for the work and can buy and live in his own house. The word 'slave' nowadays have a negative connotation. And people cannot see slavery in a positive light.
Because of this, when slavery is associated with Islam, Islam itself is seen as a bad thing, seen as a negative thing. This is a classic case of misunderstanding and taking out-of-context a word. Slavery in Islam is not the same as slavery in the European or Anglo-Saxons' world. The same with the definition of the word 'slave'. It does not carry the same meaning. Nor the same implications.
I didn't know this myself until I came to chapter 5 of this book. Very very interesting...
(My comments below in italic)
Quotings from the book:
' The slaves (captives of war) lived in huge bagnios or courtyards under the direction of a guardian or a warden Pasha and a guard of janissaries. ' -pg. 195
' We were suffered to work upon any manner of trade or occupation wherein we were any way expert...and what we did or made, we sold to the Turks, and they gave us money for the same, wrote Edward Webbe in 1591 [1].'
' In the bagnos there was usually a chapel and a hospital, where father Dan noted that seven priests celebrated Mass at a improvised altar before dawn to 600 captives [2]. Chapels, Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox, served mainly by captured priests or visiting Redemptionist fathers were found in most bagnos, shops and medical facilities were provided and later slave hospitals were built, and there was even the possibility of relaxation [3]. Women and priests captives in the Barbary Coast were exempted from work [4]. ' - pg. 196
- Huh? Slaves living in big courtyards? Shouldn't they be kept in some small cramped dark dungeon? This was a very very interesting point for me. Slaves under Islam cannot be treated poorly. They must be treated respectfully as a human being and therefore deserve basic needs to live : shelter, food and a means to acquire money.
- Wow! Churches and Christian services in Muslim land, while under captivity? Amazing! Even under the situation of war, as a war captive turned into a slave, the slaves in Islam are not prevented from practicing their own religion. They are not forced to enter Islam and they have a right to set up their own Churches. Not only that, women and priests captives did not have to work!
' Many Christian captives did so well under Muslim captivity that they had no desire to leave. A captive who had made a success of business in 'Barbary' might well pay off his ransom and continue as a free Christian merchant [5]. One might mention the examples of the American John Cathcart who, as a captive in Algiers, became relatively wealthy by running taverns and who when freed, asked to be posted to North Africa; he thus became the USA's first consul in Tripoli in 1799 [6]. The American consul named that same year in Algiers, Richard O'Brien, had also been a slave there for ten years, whilst Simon Lucas, British consul in Tripoli, had been a captive in Morocco [7]. ' - pg. 198
- This was how it was. If you made enough money, you can free yourself and go back home. But as is stated, they don't want to go home. 'Cause evidently, it's a better life as a slave of the Muslims! -
- Even those who freed themselves, came back! They weren't traumatized or had nightmares about slavery simply because they weren't treated badly. They were not a free man under slavery, but they were treated with respect, respect that every human being deserves, that it didn't matter much not to be free.
- This amazes me very much. I didn't know such form exist! My whole picture of slavery has been so much of de-humanising and derogating a fellow human being. Just because he is considered the enemy. And this definition is what's been promoted and taught all over the world. And yet, this is never the correct definition for the word in Islam. In my own religion! My God, I didn't know this! Probably because of growing up in a secular education or probably because of what's constantly in mainstream media and probably also because of my own ignorance. MasyaAllah...Proud to be a Muslim! :)
' Thomas Smith recalled his captivity in Algiers as 'the happy time of my slavery', Francis Knight had 'an honest moral man' for a captor, and William Okeley was tempted not to escape to England, where there was civil unrest and poverty, but to stay instead with his captors who had gainfully employed him [8]. Joshua Gee recalled the generosity of one captor who share his food with him; Joseph Pitts was adopted by his last master, who treated him as his son [9]. Nash and Parker, two merchants, were captives in Sallee (Morocco) for four years, during which time they learned the language and the trade of the country, and then 'set up a House in Tetuan in the Year that the English quitted Tangier [1684], which House has continued ever since; and it is said those Gentlemen before they left Barbary got better fortunes in it, than they lost by being taken.[10] ' - pg.197
' More importantly, in Islam, the emancipated slave is actually, as well as potentially, equal to a free-born citizen. Throughout the Turkish empire, for instance, and at all periods in its history, slaves have risen repeatedly to the highest offices and have never been ashamed of their origins[11]. The Frenchman, About, notes how sultans of Constantinople and venerated chiefs of Islam are born to female slaves, and they are very proud [12]. Captain Burton mentions that Pacha of the Syrian caravan with which he travelled to Damascus had been the slave of a slave[13]. Sebuktegin, the father of Mahmud, the founder of the Ghaznavid dynasty, was a slave; so was Qutb-ud-din, the conqueror and the first king of Delhi, and the true founder, therefore of Muslim India[14]. Often, again, a great lord of Egypt raises, teaches and grooms a slave child, whom he marries later to his daughter, and gives him full rights; and we came across in Cairo stories of ministers, generals and magistrates of the highest order who were worth from a thousand to a thousand and a half franc in their youth[15]. '- pg. 213
' Under the Abbasid dynasty, only three Caliphs were born of free mothers, and all these belong to the eighth century.[16]' -pg.214
- Amazing, right! ;)
' Islam, as a faith, fought slavery (slavery in the Anglo-Saxon's definition i.e. dehumanisation of human beings) more than any faith ever did. The Prophet (peace be upon him) is reported to have said: 'The worst of men is the seller of men.'[17] Captives, if they become Muslims, were set free; and if they retained their own faith, they were, as the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) told the followers of Islam, nonetheless their brethren[18]. The master who treated them kindly would be acceptable to God; he who abused his power would be shut out of Paradise[19]. And the Muslim master who chastised his slave without cause was bound to set him free[20]. ' - pg. 211-212
' Today, the pictures of Western captives being decapitated in Iraq are indeed some of the most distressing, and most repelling, images that hurt the eyes and conscience. Whilst the terrible scenes of Muslim prisoners in Western captivity referred to above are equally repelling, the one thing to say is that the image of decapitation of Western prisoners is certainly at odds with Muslim traditions throughout history as seen above. The significant point to make in respect to these decapitations is that it seems odd that they are carried out by shadowy groups or individuals, who at once tell us who they are, and yet hide their faces.
It is equally odd that such gruesome killings by shadowy organizations are exhibited at length on web sites, which survive and thrive when other sites are instantly removed or destroyed for much less than that.
These killings also take place in a country torn by conflict, where most deaths are of decent politicians and leading figures, of imams, and of ordinary people, where the ultimate aim is to drag different religious communities to kill each other.
These beheadings also take place in a country where death squads, including the supposedly 'Muslim' beheaders, operate with total impunity, free to roam, pick up their victims, kill them, dump them, most often in the same spots, day after day, in complete freedom, and with the help of considerable logistics, completely unbothered checkpoints, patrols, etc. ' pg. 200-201
- It is very ironic, all these events. Most television viewers don't really care to think much. Everything shown on the TV is absorbed as is believed. Suicide bombings or kidnapping or hijacking has never been part of Muslim culture. The first suicide bombing in a Muslim land occured in Iraq only after the US invaded the country. If US never went to Iraq, there will never any suicide bombing. It's just not part of Muslim culture. Same with kidnapping. The kidnappers are covered from head to toe, wear masks or hide behind shadows. Logically, you don't know who they are. But, the media easily call them Muslim extremists. Really, these kind of things have never been a part of Islam. And as you can see throughout history, it has never been a part of Muslim history. When the crusaders invade al-Andalus, Spain, and killed thousands of people, no one blamed Christianity for the murders. Muslims have never looked at the values of Christianity as bad. It promotes love. We can differentiate a murderer who is a Christian from the religion itself. And we don't blame the religion. If you want to judge a religion, look at the best of its follower. If you want to judge Christianity, look at Jesus, what he did in life, what values he lived by. If you want to judge Islam, look at our Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h), see how he lived his life, and see his characters.
Slavery is probably an old issue and is irrelevant for discussion nowadays. But, the best lessons that I can take from those paragraphs above, is:
Islam is so beautiful! :)
-> Since reading this book, I've discovered so many things that I should be proud of as a Muslims. Sometimes, being a borned-Muslim, you don't realize what you have until someone else point it out to you. I've been so used to the daily rituals of praying (solat), and fasting in Ramadhan, then, wearing the hijab and so on and so on that the joy and beauty of being a Muslim escapes me. Islam has a lot to offer to the world. Some may see it as stringent or full of harams and halals, but once you realized why it is there, it becomes so joyful and beautiful.
As I've said in the first part of this book review, I've never realized the value of community-life that Islam had before reading this book. MasyaAllah, there is a hidden beauty in why God ask for zakat to be given, for zina to be prohibited, for husbands to be the main breadwinner and mothers to be caring to their children.
This is one of the reason I like watching videos of converts/reverts. They speak so exuberantly about Islam. Like a kid who got his most desired toy for his birthday. Shining and beaming and talking non-stop about it.
I remember watching this one guy, Jeffrey Lang (a former atheist). He was talking about his first year as a Muslim. How he enjoyed so much his prayers (solat). How he felt so loved that God want to talk with him 5 times a day. And how he loved going to the mosque. Even though he understood none of Arabic, he just loved listening to the words of the Quran recited. One guy asked him : Dr. Lang, why do you come so often when you don't even understand the language? His answer was beautiful... He answered...: Sir.., why is a baby comforted when he hears his mother's voice? :)
Another guy, Sheikh Abdul Hakim Murad was asked : Sir, why did you become a Muslim? His answer was short and sweet :) : Because Allah thought I needed some help... :)
Subhanallah....
Alright...Take care everyone..! ;)
*p/s: I've added two files in the 'fileqube' box which you can freely download. One, is a classical Malay poem, another is a book by Harun Yahya : Timelessness and the Reality of Fate. I got this off the internet, so, I hope it is the real exact copy of the book. I've read the book before and I think it's an interesting viewpoint of fate and destiny. We can never truly know how God work his ways, but, this is an interesting hypothesis.
[1] E. Webbe : The Rare and Most Wonderful Things...Edited by E. Arber, (London; Alex Murray and Son; 1868);p.27
[2] C. Lloyd: English Corsairs on the Barbary Coast; op cit; p.115
[3] S. Bono: I Corsari barbaresch: op cit; p.115
[4] M. Morsy: North Africa 1800-1900; op cit; p.66
[5] P. Earle: Corsairs of Malta and Barbary; p.91
[6] M. Morsy: North Africa 1800-1900; op cit; p.66
[7] Ibid.
[8] N. Matar: Introduction; op cit; p.19
[9] Ibid. p.20
[10] Captain Braithwaite: The History of the Revolutions in the Empire of Morocco; London;1729;p.67
[11] R.B. Smith: Mohammed; op cit; p.293
[12] G. Le Bon : La Civilisation des Arabes, op cit; p.293
[13] Burton: Pilgrimage, I.p.89 in R. B. Smith: Mohammed: p.251
[14] Elphinstones's India; p.320; 363; 370; in R. B. Smith: Mohammed: p.251
[15] G. Le Bon : La Civilisation des Arabes, op cit; p.293
[16] G.E. Von Grunebaum: Medieval Islam, op cit; p.202
[17] R.B. Smith: Mohammed; op cit; p.330
[18] Ibid.; p.244
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid; p.245
A continuation of my reading... :)(click)
Chapter 5 : Captives, Slaves and Racists
I particularly want to concentrate on the notion that Muslims are obsessed with slavery. The following are some things that I discovered, that's both amazing and made me feel proud to be a Muslim. ;)
Alright...an intro first..:) :
What's the first thing that comes to your mind when you hear the word 'slave'? Probably something like this, right? ; 'A black man, toiling in the plantation with many others, sweating under the sun, his back scarred with numerous traces of lashes trailing dark red lines deep into the skin...a white man on a horse in his full attire of an officer on duty looking dashingly handsome but his face sadly marred by a frown and a smirk, forever shouting for more work, faster work, a long sharp whip on his side, coiled neatly right now..but everyone knows it only takes a second for it to reach the back of a tired slave.'
Pretty gruesome right.
Anyways...this is the general imagination of a slave. Nowadays you would rarely see such things. Slaves are replaced with a maid or a housekeeper or a gardener that gets paid for the work and can buy and live in his own house. The word 'slave' nowadays have a negative connotation. And people cannot see slavery in a positive light.
Because of this, when slavery is associated with Islam, Islam itself is seen as a bad thing, seen as a negative thing. This is a classic case of misunderstanding and taking out-of-context a word. Slavery in Islam is not the same as slavery in the European or Anglo-Saxons' world. The same with the definition of the word 'slave'. It does not carry the same meaning. Nor the same implications.
I didn't know this myself until I came to chapter 5 of this book. Very very interesting...
(My comments below in italic)
Quotings from the book:
' The slaves (captives of war) lived in huge bagnios or courtyards under the direction of a guardian or a warden Pasha and a guard of janissaries. ' -pg. 195
' We were suffered to work upon any manner of trade or occupation wherein we were any way expert...and what we did or made, we sold to the Turks, and they gave us money for the same, wrote Edward Webbe in 1591 [1].'
' In the bagnos there was usually a chapel and a hospital, where father Dan noted that seven priests celebrated Mass at a improvised altar before dawn to 600 captives [2]. Chapels, Catholic, Protestant and Orthodox, served mainly by captured priests or visiting Redemptionist fathers were found in most bagnos, shops and medical facilities were provided and later slave hospitals were built, and there was even the possibility of relaxation [3]. Women and priests captives in the Barbary Coast were exempted from work [4]. ' - pg. 196
- Huh? Slaves living in big courtyards? Shouldn't they be kept in some small cramped dark dungeon? This was a very very interesting point for me. Slaves under Islam cannot be treated poorly. They must be treated respectfully as a human being and therefore deserve basic needs to live : shelter, food and a means to acquire money.
- Wow! Churches and Christian services in Muslim land, while under captivity? Amazing! Even under the situation of war, as a war captive turned into a slave, the slaves in Islam are not prevented from practicing their own religion. They are not forced to enter Islam and they have a right to set up their own Churches. Not only that, women and priests captives did not have to work!
' Many Christian captives did so well under Muslim captivity that they had no desire to leave. A captive who had made a success of business in 'Barbary' might well pay off his ransom and continue as a free Christian merchant [5]. One might mention the examples of the American John Cathcart who, as a captive in Algiers, became relatively wealthy by running taverns and who when freed, asked to be posted to North Africa; he thus became the USA's first consul in Tripoli in 1799 [6]. The American consul named that same year in Algiers, Richard O'Brien, had also been a slave there for ten years, whilst Simon Lucas, British consul in Tripoli, had been a captive in Morocco [7]. ' - pg. 198
- This was how it was. If you made enough money, you can free yourself and go back home. But as is stated, they don't want to go home. 'Cause evidently, it's a better life as a slave of the Muslims! -
- Even those who freed themselves, came back! They weren't traumatized or had nightmares about slavery simply because they weren't treated badly. They were not a free man under slavery, but they were treated with respect, respect that every human being deserves, that it didn't matter much not to be free.
- This amazes me very much. I didn't know such form exist! My whole picture of slavery has been so much of de-humanising and derogating a fellow human being. Just because he is considered the enemy. And this definition is what's been promoted and taught all over the world. And yet, this is never the correct definition for the word in Islam. In my own religion! My God, I didn't know this! Probably because of growing up in a secular education or probably because of what's constantly in mainstream media and probably also because of my own ignorance. MasyaAllah...Proud to be a Muslim! :)
' Thomas Smith recalled his captivity in Algiers as 'the happy time of my slavery', Francis Knight had 'an honest moral man' for a captor, and William Okeley was tempted not to escape to England, where there was civil unrest and poverty, but to stay instead with his captors who had gainfully employed him [8]. Joshua Gee recalled the generosity of one captor who share his food with him; Joseph Pitts was adopted by his last master, who treated him as his son [9]. Nash and Parker, two merchants, were captives in Sallee (Morocco) for four years, during which time they learned the language and the trade of the country, and then 'set up a House in Tetuan in the Year that the English quitted Tangier [1684], which House has continued ever since; and it is said those Gentlemen before they left Barbary got better fortunes in it, than they lost by being taken.[10] ' - pg.197
' More importantly, in Islam, the emancipated slave is actually, as well as potentially, equal to a free-born citizen. Throughout the Turkish empire, for instance, and at all periods in its history, slaves have risen repeatedly to the highest offices and have never been ashamed of their origins[11]. The Frenchman, About, notes how sultans of Constantinople and venerated chiefs of Islam are born to female slaves, and they are very proud [12]. Captain Burton mentions that Pacha of the Syrian caravan with which he travelled to Damascus had been the slave of a slave[13]. Sebuktegin, the father of Mahmud, the founder of the Ghaznavid dynasty, was a slave; so was Qutb-ud-din, the conqueror and the first king of Delhi, and the true founder, therefore of Muslim India[14]. Often, again, a great lord of Egypt raises, teaches and grooms a slave child, whom he marries later to his daughter, and gives him full rights; and we came across in Cairo stories of ministers, generals and magistrates of the highest order who were worth from a thousand to a thousand and a half franc in their youth[15]. '- pg. 213
' Under the Abbasid dynasty, only three Caliphs were born of free mothers, and all these belong to the eighth century.[16]' -pg.214
- Amazing, right! ;)
' Islam, as a faith, fought slavery (slavery in the Anglo-Saxon's definition i.e. dehumanisation of human beings) more than any faith ever did. The Prophet (peace be upon him) is reported to have said: 'The worst of men is the seller of men.'[17] Captives, if they become Muslims, were set free; and if they retained their own faith, they were, as the Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h) told the followers of Islam, nonetheless their brethren[18]. The master who treated them kindly would be acceptable to God; he who abused his power would be shut out of Paradise[19]. And the Muslim master who chastised his slave without cause was bound to set him free[20]. ' - pg. 211-212
' Today, the pictures of Western captives being decapitated in Iraq are indeed some of the most distressing, and most repelling, images that hurt the eyes and conscience. Whilst the terrible scenes of Muslim prisoners in Western captivity referred to above are equally repelling, the one thing to say is that the image of decapitation of Western prisoners is certainly at odds with Muslim traditions throughout history as seen above. The significant point to make in respect to these decapitations is that it seems odd that they are carried out by shadowy groups or individuals, who at once tell us who they are, and yet hide their faces.
It is equally odd that such gruesome killings by shadowy organizations are exhibited at length on web sites, which survive and thrive when other sites are instantly removed or destroyed for much less than that.
These killings also take place in a country torn by conflict, where most deaths are of decent politicians and leading figures, of imams, and of ordinary people, where the ultimate aim is to drag different religious communities to kill each other.
These beheadings also take place in a country where death squads, including the supposedly 'Muslim' beheaders, operate with total impunity, free to roam, pick up their victims, kill them, dump them, most often in the same spots, day after day, in complete freedom, and with the help of considerable logistics, completely unbothered checkpoints, patrols, etc. ' pg. 200-201
- It is very ironic, all these events. Most television viewers don't really care to think much. Everything shown on the TV is absorbed as is believed. Suicide bombings or kidnapping or hijacking has never been part of Muslim culture. The first suicide bombing in a Muslim land occured in Iraq only after the US invaded the country. If US never went to Iraq, there will never any suicide bombing. It's just not part of Muslim culture. Same with kidnapping. The kidnappers are covered from head to toe, wear masks or hide behind shadows. Logically, you don't know who they are. But, the media easily call them Muslim extremists. Really, these kind of things have never been a part of Islam. And as you can see throughout history, it has never been a part of Muslim history. When the crusaders invade al-Andalus, Spain, and killed thousands of people, no one blamed Christianity for the murders. Muslims have never looked at the values of Christianity as bad. It promotes love. We can differentiate a murderer who is a Christian from the religion itself. And we don't blame the religion. If you want to judge a religion, look at the best of its follower. If you want to judge Christianity, look at Jesus, what he did in life, what values he lived by. If you want to judge Islam, look at our Prophet Muhammad (p.b.u.h), see how he lived his life, and see his characters.
Slavery is probably an old issue and is irrelevant for discussion nowadays. But, the best lessons that I can take from those paragraphs above, is:
Islam is so beautiful! :)
-> Since reading this book, I've discovered so many things that I should be proud of as a Muslims. Sometimes, being a borned-Muslim, you don't realize what you have until someone else point it out to you. I've been so used to the daily rituals of praying (solat), and fasting in Ramadhan, then, wearing the hijab and so on and so on that the joy and beauty of being a Muslim escapes me. Islam has a lot to offer to the world. Some may see it as stringent or full of harams and halals, but once you realized why it is there, it becomes so joyful and beautiful.
As I've said in the first part of this book review, I've never realized the value of community-life that Islam had before reading this book. MasyaAllah, there is a hidden beauty in why God ask for zakat to be given, for zina to be prohibited, for husbands to be the main breadwinner and mothers to be caring to their children.
This is one of the reason I like watching videos of converts/reverts. They speak so exuberantly about Islam. Like a kid who got his most desired toy for his birthday. Shining and beaming and talking non-stop about it.
I remember watching this one guy, Jeffrey Lang (a former atheist). He was talking about his first year as a Muslim. How he enjoyed so much his prayers (solat). How he felt so loved that God want to talk with him 5 times a day. And how he loved going to the mosque. Even though he understood none of Arabic, he just loved listening to the words of the Quran recited. One guy asked him : Dr. Lang, why do you come so often when you don't even understand the language? His answer was beautiful... He answered...: Sir.., why is a baby comforted when he hears his mother's voice? :)
Another guy, Sheikh Abdul Hakim Murad was asked : Sir, why did you become a Muslim? His answer was short and sweet :) : Because Allah thought I needed some help... :)
Subhanallah....
Alright...Take care everyone..! ;)
*p/s: I've added two files in the 'fileqube' box which you can freely download. One, is a classical Malay poem, another is a book by Harun Yahya : Timelessness and the Reality of Fate. I got this off the internet, so, I hope it is the real exact copy of the book. I've read the book before and I think it's an interesting viewpoint of fate and destiny. We can never truly know how God work his ways, but, this is an interesting hypothesis.
[1] E. Webbe : The Rare and Most Wonderful Things...Edited by E. Arber, (London; Alex Murray and Son; 1868);p.27
[2] C. Lloyd: English Corsairs on the Barbary Coast; op cit; p.115
[3] S. Bono: I Corsari barbaresch: op cit; p.115
[4] M. Morsy: North Africa 1800-1900; op cit; p.66
[5] P. Earle: Corsairs of Malta and Barbary; p.91
[6] M. Morsy: North Africa 1800-1900; op cit; p.66
[7] Ibid.
[8] N. Matar: Introduction; op cit; p.19
[9] Ibid. p.20
[10] Captain Braithwaite: The History of the Revolutions in the Empire of Morocco; London;1729;p.67
[11] R.B. Smith: Mohammed; op cit; p.293
[12] G. Le Bon : La Civilisation des Arabes, op cit; p.293
[13] Burton: Pilgrimage, I.p.89 in R. B. Smith: Mohammed: p.251
[14] Elphinstones's India; p.320; 363; 370; in R. B. Smith: Mohammed: p.251
[15] G. Le Bon : La Civilisation des Arabes, op cit; p.293
[16] G.E. Von Grunebaum: Medieval Islam, op cit; p.202
[17] R.B. Smith: Mohammed; op cit; p.330
[18] Ibid.; p.244
[19] Ibid.
[20] Ibid; p.245
Wednesday, May 6, 2009
T.J. Winter
Salam.
I was browsing through Rausyanfikir (for English readers: Occidentosis is a blog by the same author) and noticed the list of Muslim Intellectuals on the side, and the picture and name Abdul Hakim Murad caught my gaze. I decided to search him on youtube and found an interesting talk, here I embed below.
Syeikh Abdul Hakim Murad boast an impressive CV. One of the leading Muslim Scholar in the West, he's a student of Oxford, a lecturer at Cambridge University and is also the Secretary of Muslim Academic Trust in London.
*Make sure you catch the answer to the last question in the Q & A session (part 7 of 8). Short and sweet! ;)
Salam.
I was browsing through Rausyanfikir (for English readers: Occidentosis is a blog by the same author) and noticed the list of Muslim Intellectuals on the side, and the picture and name Abdul Hakim Murad caught my gaze. I decided to search him on youtube and found an interesting talk, here I embed below.
Syeikh Abdul Hakim Murad boast an impressive CV. One of the leading Muslim Scholar in the West, he's a student of Oxford, a lecturer at Cambridge University and is also the Secretary of Muslim Academic Trust in London.
*Make sure you catch the answer to the last question in the Q & A session (part 7 of 8). Short and sweet! ;)
Salam.
Sunday, May 3, 2009
I have a dream..
Salam wbt,
I have a dream..*
To spend a year of my life dedicated to learning the Arabic language
To take a detour from my planned route
And hitchhike to an Arab country
Probably somewhere in West Africa
Have never thought about West Africa before
But definitely inspired by Hamza Yusuf
If the region can produce such an intelligent man like him
Maybe it can make something out of me
I say it is a 'detour' now
But I'm quite sure that nothing in life is as such
If I do get to learn Arabic...
I'll be able to read the old texts
And if I am able to do that
Will I be able to just continue my life working as a doctor?
Put aside old texts,
If I can read Arabic...
I can understand the Qur'an directly!
My Allah...how will that change me then..?
I don't know where life will take me...
But this is a dream of mine
I pray that Allah will show me the way
As He charts the best coordinates for me..
I have a dream..
And I hope it will come true
Salam. =)
*"I have a dream" = title of the famous speech given by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the African-American activist that lead the movement for equal rights for the African-American community in the US. His dream came true and I hope mine will too! =)
I have a dream..*
To spend a year of my life dedicated to learning the Arabic language
To take a detour from my planned route
And hitchhike to an Arab country
Probably somewhere in West Africa
Have never thought about West Africa before
But definitely inspired by Hamza Yusuf
If the region can produce such an intelligent man like him
Maybe it can make something out of me
I say it is a 'detour' now
But I'm quite sure that nothing in life is as such
If I do get to learn Arabic...
I'll be able to read the old texts
And if I am able to do that
Will I be able to just continue my life working as a doctor?
Put aside old texts,
If I can read Arabic...
I can understand the Qur'an directly!
My Allah...how will that change me then..?
I don't know where life will take me...
But this is a dream of mine
I pray that Allah will show me the way
As He charts the best coordinates for me..
I have a dream..
And I hope it will come true
Salam. =)
*"I have a dream" = title of the famous speech given by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the African-American activist that lead the movement for equal rights for the African-American community in the US. His dream came true and I hope mine will too! =)
Monday, April 27, 2009
Today's a good day..
Salam.
Just came back from usrah just now. Tired now...
I like this usrah a lot, though. Everytime I come back from it, I feel like writing...:) We had a pretty good session just now. I love the tadabbur...wish that I could dedicate more time to it though, to really study the Qur'an...gosh..time is of the essence...
Just now I discovered the value of "Bismillahirrahmanirrahim". The simplest way for us to remember Allah daily....:)
Then, we watched a video of sifat solat nabi..."Live" one with a mu'allim teaching...very good vid...complete with all the hadiths and references...the different ways and different opinions...really, there's actually a variety of authentic ways out there...no need for arguments, just understandings and respect....on the other hand, there's also a variety of authentic ways....so, always search for the truth...and practise what authentic ones you know... :)
Sorry, a short one tonight. Honestly, I'm so tired. Been juggling so many things lately. I've got my finals coming up. Two big ones and one minor one. Pray for me ya! :)
Jazakumullah khair all...
salam.
*happy birthday Pah n Mas! ^_*
Just came back from usrah just now. Tired now...
I like this usrah a lot, though. Everytime I come back from it, I feel like writing...:) We had a pretty good session just now. I love the tadabbur...wish that I could dedicate more time to it though, to really study the Qur'an...gosh..time is of the essence...
Just now I discovered the value of "Bismillahirrahmanirrahim". The simplest way for us to remember Allah daily....:)
Then, we watched a video of sifat solat nabi..."Live" one with a mu'allim teaching...very good vid...complete with all the hadiths and references...the different ways and different opinions...really, there's actually a variety of authentic ways out there...no need for arguments, just understandings and respect....on the other hand, there's also a variety of authentic ways....so, always search for the truth...and practise what authentic ones you know... :)
Sorry, a short one tonight. Honestly, I'm so tired. Been juggling so many things lately. I've got my finals coming up. Two big ones and one minor one. Pray for me ya! :)
Jazakumullah khair all...
salam.
*happy birthday Pah n Mas! ^_*
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
